The Ethics of )(*#$ing with the PCs' plans

[MortalPlague]

Haven't tried it, though. I wonder if anyone here has?

I'm going to be doing something similar in an upcoming game. I have an organization the PCs are going up against, and they have their choice of three lieutenants to focus their efforts towards. One of them is the spymaster, and until she's out of the picture, I'll have it be nearly impossible to surprise any of the big villains.

 

[S'mon]

I haven't particularly tried this, but I've heard it argued that it can be fair to allow a very intelligent bad guy to act on info about the PC plans that it wouldn't ordinarily have simply because the DM doesn't have the intelligence of a 3000-year old super-genius dracolich. It, to an extent, simulates the superior intelligence and tactics of the bad guy, though it's not perfect.

Haven't tried it, though. I wonder if anyone here has?

Do these GMs tell the INT 25 Wizard PCs all about the bad guys' strategy and tactics, too?

While I can't say for sure what being 3,000 years old would do, working in academia I don't have quite the same high regard for very high INT that some people seem to. Being a genius doesn't mean you can anticipate your opponents' every move. A 3000 year old INT 30 Dracolich is IMO likely to have very little understanding of the behaviour of 20 year old INT 10 humans and will probably find them quite baffling!

 

[Rune]

What I am wondering is if it is ethical at all to listen in to the players' plans to tackle a situation, and then deliberately change the situation so as to ruin their plans. Is this railroading? Is this ever justified, or is it just plain dick-ish?

Is it ethical? What an odd concept. In my experience, if the players are concerned that you will use their planning against them, the will leave the room.

On the other hand, when the players start discussing plans and theories about NPCs' plans in front of me, I view it as a crucial opportunity to enrich the game, because, frankly, their ideas are usually better than whatever I came up with.

It's really like any other collaborative improvisational art-form. You take what you're given, embellish, and then give it back.

 

[billd91]

I've used player plans in both positive and negative ways toward PCs, though neither to any great extent. Every once in a while, knowing their plans makes it easier to manage reasonable NPC responses, including when the NPC should be well-connected or smart enough to figure out what may be going on based on early moves made by the PCs. I've also played into their plans in ways I wouldn't have if I hadn't known them, largely because doing so would be more fun than not doing so. And even if I haven't changed major elements of what my NPCs are up to, I may change some of the fine details to reinforce the good planning.

 

[Morrus]

Do these GMs tell the INT 25 Wizard PCs all about the bad guys' strategy and tactics, too?

I've no idea.

While I can't say for sure what being 3,000 years old would do, working in academia I don't have quite the same high regard for very high INT that some people seem to. Being a genius doesn't mean you can anticipate your opponents' every move. A 3000 year old INT 30 Dracolich is IMO likely to have very little understanding of the behaviour of 20 year old INT 10 humans and will probably find them quite baffling!

That's not what D&D Int and Wis mean to me. But YMMV.

 

[Kaodi]

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that if PirateCat and Sagiro mess with their players plans intentionally then messing with your players is not going to be inherently bad. I figure that running campaigns for decades and living to tell the tale makes you the gold standard for " acceptable behaviour " . And if I recall correctly they mess with their players mercilessly.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Unless I have something pre-planned (i.e, the bad guys the PCs were expecting to be arriving at dawn instead arrive late due to them meeting somebody or something else along the way), I rarely mess with player plans. I've become adept at tuning them out at the table while they discuss strategy and what to do next in game... I usually do some prep work, organize some miniatures, maybe roll some initiative dice, etc.

The only time I really messed with actual plans in game, I had kind of already set them up for it in previous sessions. One of the players had mentioned a few sessions earlier something like, "now that we've been noticed by followers of the BBEG, we should try to protect ourselves from things like scrying."

They all agreed that they needed to do something about it, both in game and out of game. However, they didn't really get around to actually acquiring the protections or casting the right spells, even though I did remind them of it at least once in passing, and the group had discussed it on the email list we have.

They went through a few more encounters with the bad guys, until they finally knew where one of the BBEG's main lieutenants was having an important meeting with some other followers. So, I let them debate how they would ambush this lieutenant and the other bad guys with him.

However, as Admiral Ackbar would say, "It's a trap!" - the BBEG was scrying on the PCs and knew of their plans, so he ambushed the ambushers, and it ended up being a very tough & memorable fight, though the players managed to eke out a victory.

Needless to say, the group then took precautions to protect themselves from scrying/spying after that.

And, I did give them the satisfaction afterwards of letting them know the protections worked, "you feel a tingling in your head and a force attempts to enter your mind. However, you then feel a warmth coursing over you from the amulet you wear, and your Will easily rejects this feeble attempt to penetrate your head..."

 

[NewJeffCT]

I haven't particularly tried this, but I've heard it argued that it can be fair to allow a very intelligent bad guy to act on info about the PC plans that it wouldn't ordinarily have simply because the DM doesn't have the intelligence of a 3000-year old super-genius dracolich. It, to an extent, simulates the superior intelligence and tactics of the bad guy, though it's not perfect.

Haven't tried it, though. I wonder if anyone here has?

I thought being the equivalent of a 3000-year old super-genius dracolich was a minimum standard for becoming a DM?

 

[the Jester]

I generally won't go out of my way to mess with players' plans. I.e. I won't change my plans once I know what the PCs are going to do.

This...

I put myself in the head of the non-player characters in the campaign and act on what they know, rather than what I as the omniscient referee know. Listening to the players' plans and then thwarting them based on that knowledge is too metagamey for me.

...and this.

I haven't particularly tried this, but I've heard it argued that it can be fair to allow a very intelligent bad guy to act on info about the PC plans that it wouldn't ordinarily have simply because the DM doesn't have the intelligence of a 3000-year old super-genius dracolich. It, to an extent, simulates the superior intelligence and tactics of the bad guy, though it's not perfect.

And once in a great while, this. And no, I don't tell the hyperintelligent pcs the npcs' plans as a general rule.

 

[korjik]

Do these GMs tell the INT 25 Wizard PCs all about the bad guys' strategy and tactics, too?

While I can't say for sure what being 3,000 years old would do, working in academia I don't have quite the same high regard for very high INT that some people seem to. Being a genius doesn't mean you can anticipate your opponents' every move. A 3000 year old INT 30 Dracolich is IMO likely to have very little understanding of the behaviour of 20 year old INT 10 humans and will probably find them quite baffling!

I have given an int 12 paladin who extensively researched the known tactics of the bad guys they were about to attack a roll to see if he had an idea of the bad guys plans. One natural 20 later, he had a pretty good idea on what the bad guys were going to do.

Likewise, I gave a blackguard who was the commander of troops at a base the heros were assaulting a roll to see if he could make sense of the reports coming in to figure out what the players were doing. He rolled pretty good, and he got his reserves in front of the players and forced them to break off the attack. He got killed in the fight, and when the players came back the defence was not anywhere near as smart.

To me, it depends on what the players are doing, and how smart/skilled the bad guys are. A clever plan against goblins usually means that the goblins get reamed, and they dont react well. A clever plan against a smart foe will get countered when he rolls well enough to figure out what is happening. I've had some BBEG immediately counter the players, and I have had some which never effectively countered the players.

It is something that I put some thought into when making more intelligent foes. What are they going to do when the PCs come for him?