Stop being so paranoid

[Darkthorne]

Celt,
In your games and people you play with may expect that, but regardless of what columns whoever wrote what I will not play in nor subscribe to the fact it's DM vs Players to use, abuse then kill. Not everyone subcribes to your beliefs or gaming style. It's sometimes best if people remembered that prior to tossing around the idiot remarks.

 

[Pbartender]

To use a real life example, would you expect the soldiers in Iraq to drive carelessly on lonely desert roads or simply kick in the door and charge in when checking suspected terrorist hideouts because checking for IEDs is too paranoid?

No.

But when the soldiers in Iraq start checking their boots for IEDs when they wake up in the barracks every morning, or when they start suspecting the the cook in the mess tent might have put cyanide capsules in their food because he greeted them with "What's yer poison?" as they went through the chow line, or when they start listening through the door of the latrine out back for possible assassins in hiding...

...that's too paranoid.

 

[Remathilis]

Bite me.

The obligation of the DM to do that… to constantly use, abuse and ultimately kill the PCs is not something unique to 4E or the current columns on WotC. Those were simply handy examples, not unique ones.

From the out set the relationship between the PCs and the DMs is utterly adversarial – it is designed to be a no holds barred, no compromise, winner take all, zero-sum-gain relationship. One wins only in so far as they can expressly make the other party loose. If you believe anything else, then you are an idiot.

Paranoid is just them using survival technique, and if you let them win at all, in any way, on any level, they you are failing in your job.

Read the books, Read the columns. Stay current stay alert.

"In any good arms race between the PC and DM. The DM always wins. It is only by the DM deliberately handicapping himself that the PCs have any chance of survival. Break this law and you'll see games where first level PCs get laid to waste by elder dragons in the first town they visit." - An old friend of mine, long ago.

 

[El Mahdi]

Bite me.

The obligation of the DM to do that… to constantly use, abuse and ultimately kill the PCs is not something unique to 4E or the current columns on WotC. Those were simply handy examples, not unique ones.

From the out set the relationship between the PCs and the DMs is utterly adversarial – it is designed to be a no holds barred, no compromise, winner take all, zero-sum-gain relationship. One wins only in so far as they can expressly make the other party loose. If you believe anything else, then you are an idiot.

Paranoid is just them using survival technique, and if you let them win at all, in any way, on any level, they you are failing in your job.


Read the books, Read the columns. Stay current stay alert.

I'm with you (I was just messing with you earlier).

I definitely want my players at least thinking I'm out to get them, even if in reality I'm doing my best to keep them alive. To me, that's The Grand Illusion of DM'ing.

 

[El Mahdi]

No.

But when the soldiers in Iraq start checking their boots for IEDs when they wake up in the barracks every morning, or when they start suspecting the the cook in the mess tent might have put cyanide capsules in their food because he greeted them with "What's yer poison?" as they went through the chow line, or when they start listening through the door of the latrine out back for possible assassins in hiding...

...that's too paranoid.

Actually they just check their boots in the morning for Camel Spiders and Scorpions (if they even take them off, it's a lot easier to take cover or run for a bunker with them on).

When you arrive in an area like Iraq or Afghanistan, and during your inprocessing briefing you're told that many of the "locals" working on the base are probably members of insurgent groups, and occasionally when some are caught making grid maps of your base for future rocket and mortar attacks, or when you've seen chow halls blown up from mortar attacks or suicide bombers, one could probably make a good argument that there is no such thing as too paranoid in a real world situation.

In a game however, characters aren't meant to live forever. Games are meant to be fun, not CSI:Greyhawk (as someone said earlier in the thread - that is unless a CSI themed D&D game is what you're playing). Over worrying about keeping your character alive just seems to suck all of the fun out of it (IMO of course).

When it's real bombs and real bullets, there's no such thing as too careful or too paranoid, and it's not meant to be fun. There's no such things as healing potions and resurection spells, and you definitely don't get to just make another character sheet after being FUBAR'd.


(Just my $.02, from someone who's been there.)

 

[Rechan]

Why would the characters have to react within 10 seconds unless they were spotted?

Because I don't want to sit through several minutes of the players debating the options of staying vs. going, trying to convince eachother and then trying to convince the weak guy.

Their characters don't have time for that kind of discussion. I want a decision, now. The 'ten second rule' is an out of character mechanic to force the players to declare a decision upon their action.

 

[MarkB]

What are the stats of a minotaur, when you crash through a door and are surprised to see it?
What are the stats of a minotaur, when you spend half an hour of game time listening at and searching the same door?

They're exactly the same!

Sure - but that's looking at only half of the equation.

What are the stats of the PCs in those two situations?

In the first, they're poorly-postioned, unprepared, and one of them's just lost a chunk of hit points to a Gore attack.

In the second, they're ready for action, they've got a co-ordinated plan of attack, and if it's a pre-4e game, they're probably freshly-buffed too.


A little paranoia is a healthy thing when your job involves throwing yourself into the midst of mad plots and schemes, or exploring actively hostile environments. If the players have it in excess, it is most likely because it's been fostered by a current or previous DM.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Because I don't want to sit through several minutes of the players debating the options of staying vs. going, trying to convince eachother and then trying to convince the weak guy.

Their characters don't have time for that kind of discussion. I want a decision, now. The 'ten second rule' is an out of character mechanic to force the players to declare a decision upon their action.

Thats fair enough. Nothing trumps real life boredom. Of course its even more fun when the PC's dither about while the ritual completes, innocents die, and the cultists suddenly morph into nasties much more powerful than the PC's then proceed to come after them.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

With my group, Paranoia is a setting/atmosphere tool, nothing more, nothing less. I edge up certain feelings and describe certain things to make the players "feel" more paranoid.

But when it comes to actual gameplay they play through in a pretty regular time-span. Why? Since that paranoia is simply just a feeling/atmosphere of the game and they know in reality I as a DM am not going to screw them over or try to kill them, yes there will be challenges and yes they may die or be ambushed, etc. but it is always something they have the potential to succed in doing. Since a epic fantasy story doesn't end with, "our great hero swallowed a grape while in a dungeon and died. The End."

 

[Pbartender]

Actually they just check their boots in the morning for Camel Spiders and Scorpions (if they even take them off, it's a lot easier to take cover or run for a bunker with them on).

Right, but that's appropriately paranoid.

I understand what you're saying, though... I've got one brother who's been in Army Intelligence/Counterintelligence for the last twenty years, and another who just shipped over there with the Navy. I've heard plenty of those sorts of stories.

By the same respect, I think that we'd all agree that while that sort paranoid behavior is entirely appropriate and conducive to surival in a hostile combat zone, it would be decidedly less so in your typical friendly midwest American town.

My point was that there's nothing wrong with paranoia (in game or out of game ) given the right situation for it.