D&D General Two sessions in a row without combat...

[tommybahama]

The next time they go to ask the NPC for advice, throw in a random encounter of a bunch of assassins trying to take them out. Have the last assassin say right before he dies, "We spent days planning this attack, going back and forth, trying to make it perfect. Now I realize there is no perfect plan. Sometimes it's better to strike quickly with a rough plan than to drag it out..."

 

[R_J_K75]

The next time they go to ask the NPC for advice, throw in a random encounter of a bunch of assassins trying to take them out. Have the last assassin say right before he dies, "We spent days planning this attack, going back and forth, trying to make it perfect. Now I realize there is no perfect plan. Sometimes it's better to strike quickly with a rough plan than to drag it out..."

Can the leader be Hannibal who says..."I love it when a plan comes together"?

 

[Guest 6801328]

Can the leader be Hannibal who says..."I love it when a plan comes together"?

I pity da foo.

 

[Prakriti]

Why did they need to come up with a Plan B? Plan A obviously couldn't have been unworkable, otherwise it should have been discarded (and thus not had its merits compared with Plan C's).

Some players want to go the Intrigue route, while some players want to go the Kill Stuff route. So it's a group dynamic thing. The Intrigue players favor Plan A, while the Kill Stuff players favor Plan B. But even when the players start to agree on an approach, they can't seem to agree on who to kill or who to ally with.

And no, this isn't that sort of adventure. It's a straightforward dungeon-crawl. At least, it's supposed to be. But when the players tried to defuse a combat situation with some clever roleplay and diplomacy, I went along with it. Now some of the players want to side with the Bad Guys, and the intrigue elements are starting to take over the game.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Clearly the only solution is to have the sun rise and turn them all to stone.

 

[R_J_K75]

Some players want to go the Intrigue route, while some players want to go the Kill Stuff route. So it's a group dynamic thing. The Intrigue players favor Plan A, while the Kill Stuff players favor Plan B. But even when the players start to agree on an approach, they can't seem to agree on who to kill or who to ally with.

And no, this isn't that sort of adventure. It's a straightforward dungeon-crawl. At least, it's supposed to be. But when the players tried to defuse a combat situation with some clever roleplay and diplomacy, I went along with it. Now some of the players want to side with the Bad Guys, and the intrigue elements are starting to take over the game.

Is it possible that either of the parties the players are plotting against are aware that they are a threat and might strike first?

 

[Todd Roybark]

So it's a group dynamic thing.

That explains your palpable frustration, in your originating post. This is a difficult spot to be in, as a DM. Whichever way you place your thumb to tip the scales, you will be disappointing half the group.

My group of 20+ years, has had this divided group dynamic for all of 5e, but never in copious number of prior games, we have played together.

I have asked the group to ‘talk it out’, everyone is still lifelong friends, but they just have very differing character goals.

I’ve offered to start a new campaign, nope....the group likes the game, and their characters.
I’ve suggested they make a group charter....rejected for role-play reasons.
I’ve suggested the group, each session rotates a “Party Leader”, who can break ties....nope....

I, personally, do not feel as a DM, that it is my game....the game belongs to the players.

My friends, seem content, nay...happy to role-play a group with, divided goals.

Since in the real world, this decision has made zero impact to our friendships, our involvement in the game and each other’s lives. I’m just rolling with it.

I’m also having their intelligent enemies, exploit the hell out of it.

If real world emotions are not being ruffled, Prakriti, you can probably let it go.
This is the game, the players are choosing to create.

If it still bothers you, just devote some time to talk it out, during your next session.

I would set a timer on that talk though...

 

[Prakriti]

Is it possible that either of the parties the players are plotting against are aware that they are a threat and might strike first?

The party was being trailed by a spy, but they caught him and disposed of him. Then the bard used disguise self to report to the spy's superior and convince him that the party wasn't a threat (which the bard did through good preparation, good roleplay, and good Deception checks).

The party has played the intrigue game very well, eliminating all possible threats and covering their trail, which is why I'm hesitant to toss all that aside and just drop an ambush on them. They've done everything they could to prevent a battle, and I haven't exactly been treating them with kid gloves.

Anyway, the party is returning to the adventure site next session, so there should be more action next week. I'm just not sure how it will all play out, with the group divided as it is. Two of the players want to talk their way into another meeting with Bad Guy Leader so they can capture him (presumably without a fight). But one player, who has already said he doesn't want to kill any Bad Guys, is clearly put out by this plan and wants to side with the Bad Guys. So group tensions could come to a head next week. I hope not, but that seems to be the way things are headed.

 

[Todd Roybark]

Honestly, Prak, the situation as a whole, sounds quite cool!
I love those moments, when I don’t know what will happen.

As long as real world friendships are not in danger....having Civil War, Marvel style, in your game can be quite invigorating....though a pain to plan for as a DM.

 

[R_J_K75]

...I'm just not sure how it will all play out...

Seems the players have 1 or 2 options they'll pursue so I'd let them lead the way and DM the next session from the standpoint of running the NPC as more of a reaction to what they do. Sessions like these tend to write themselves sometimes. Probably the only thing I would do is at the start of the next session is ask the players what they want to do and what they hope to accomplish by doing so, this way you can all expect to proceed in one direction.