Typical Player Behavior, or Bad Roleplaying?

[ptolemy18]

Save the "do we rescue our friend" scenario for a time once you have established a character they care about.

Well, heck, this is a former PC! You'd think they'd care about them if anyone. :/

Jason

 

[swrushing]

Well, heck, this is a former PC! You'd think they'd care about them if anyone. :/

Jason

OF course they SHOULD but once you moved that character into "we dont treat her like a real person anymore" by allowing the "give away", you de facto APPROVED the lack of concern.

Chalk that error up to "a learning curve" and move on but don't let your "i shouldn't have" turn into a problem.

 

[ptolemy18]

Anyway, I've already decided what's gonna happen. There's two choices.

(1) They try to rescue the old NPC and things play out as they will (big combat, etc.)

(2) They don't try to rescue the old NPC. Off-camera, some high-level cleric rescues the old NPC. Then, a Planar Ally sent by the cleric comes & takes the old NPC's magic items back from the party (fighting them & knocking them all out if necessary, although they won't attack unless the party is a jerk about it).

Yes, this *is* a retroactive takeback of me allowing them to get the magic items in the first place, but I think it makes sense role-playing-wise, and that's the important thing, to me. ("Those items are the property of the temple of Isis!" BLAM!) I just want to resolve this subplot, and I don't feel that the player deserves the old PC's magic items if he doesn't take the obvious bait of attempting to rescue the old PC.

So -- yes, it's a retroactive fix. But I can't let him get away with it!! And I'd rather fix it in-character than by going up to him OOC and chiding him.

Jason

 

[Jubilee]

One thing to consider is that your players might be hesitant to rescue the old PC because they know, out of character, that the old PC is not to be adventuring with them (because there's a new character for that player) and they might be assuming that they "aren't supposed to" rescue the former PC. From a player perspective, it's awkward to deal with an old PC once the player has chosen to play a new one.

Perhaps you need to clear this issue up with them, or at least bring it up. Like, let them know that it's okay to still associate with the former PC and that it isn't going to force the player to give up his new PC and play that one instead. They'll also feel awkward about who to address when talking to the PC - the GM or the former Player? You probably shouldn't have allowed "intermittent" play by the other player during the game, because it probably added to this confusion. You'll need to make clear WHO is playing that character from now on.

 

[ptolemy18]

One thing to consider is that your players might be hesitant to rescue the old PC because they know, out of character, that the old PC is not to be adventuring with them (because there's a new character for that player) and they might be assuming that they "aren't supposed to" rescue the former PC. From a player perspective, it's awkward to deal with an old PC once the player has chosen to play a new one.

That's a very good point.

I don't want the old PC to rejoin the party -- I'd kind of like to keep them around as an infrequently-appearing NPC, though (hence me jumping through all these hoops to have them rescued, either by PCs or NPCs).

Jason

 

[SweeneyTodd]

If you don't want to deal with certain possible actions out of your players, then you should restrict those actions up front. If you don't, then you have to accept that while you don't agree with what they're doing, it's their call.

But personally, I don't see anything wrong with it -- it sounds like a pretty good way for the player to "move on" to their new PC, to me.

 

[Hammerhead]

(2) They don't try to rescue the old NPC. Off-camera, some high-level cleric rescues the old NPC. Then, a Planar Ally sent by the cleric comes & takes the old NPC's magic items back from the party (fighting them & knocking them all out if necessary, although they won't attack unless the party is a jerk about it).

Yes, this *is* a retroactive takeback of me allowing them to get the magic items in the first place, but I think it makes sense role-playing-wise, and that's the important thing, to me. ("Those items are the property of the temple of Isis!" BLAM!) I just want to resolve this subplot, and I don't feel that the player deserves the old PC's magic items if he doesn't take the obvious bait of attempting to rescue the old PC.

So -- yes, it's a retroactive fix. But I can't let him get away with it!! And I'd rather fix it in-character than by going up to him OOC and chiding him.

Jason

Dude, whatever you do, don't follow that second option. First of all, by having a high level NPC rescue the ex-PC whenever he's in trouble, you create a precedent for the party to expect rescue as well. Second, summoning the Planar Ally is probably more costly than the guy's items. Third, using a high-level NPC to essentially bully the party is immature and will breed resentment. I would be angry at any DM who sends in angels to take away "my" property.

The point of this game is to have fun, right? You're gaming with friends, right? Don't try to "teach your players a lesson." I'd approach them, explain that you screwed up by allowing the old PC to transfer items to new PC, and tell them that kind of thing won't fly in the future. The player might be convinced to give the old items back, or he might not. But it's just a couple of magic items and shouldn't cause you this much trouble.

 

[Oryan77]

I've never liked situations where some more powerful NPC's show up and seem to know everything about the PC's and then "punish" the PC's for whatever it is the NPC's know about. It's always come across to me as a weak way for the DM to "fix" something he doesn't like about my PC. All of a sudden some new NPC shows up, takes my magic items, and then leaves because I can't do anything about it? Bad idea.

If these guys are pacifists that can't handle business themselves, they wouldn't hire the PC's to do it for them or they'd not really be pacifists...they'd just be yellow bellies. If they don't want to personally help their friend, being pacifits, they would understand it if the new PC also wouldn't want to personally help their friend. I don't think they'd hold a grudge and demand magic items back that didn't belong to them in the first place. It just seems to obvious that you want to punish the player by taking back your gifts.

Instead, "kill" the old PC so you don't have to deal with this anymore (the player obviously doesn't want to deal with it). Don't just kill him either, have him tortured to "death" for not giving the info the guys wanted from him. Let the PC's witness the torturing so they feel guilty. But throw a twist on it. Maybe the old PC doesn't actually die by his torturers hands like the PC's thought. Maybe he's driven mad by the pain and suffering he dealt with for so long. Turn him into a new NPC villain who escapes or is let go and his only focus is to track down the PC and get revenge for him doing nothing and running off with his "gifts".

I'd let your beef with his actions slide for now and deal with it slowly over time.

 

[ptolemy18]

The point of this game is to have fun, right? You're gaming with friends, right? Don't try to "teach your players a lesson." I'd approach them, explain that you screwed up by allowing the old PC to transfer items to new PC, and tell them that kind of thing won't fly in the future. The player might be convinced to give the old items back, or he might not. But it's just a couple of magic items and shouldn't cause you this much trouble.

I'm not annoyed at the group as a whole, just at the one guy, since I think he's not playing his pseudo-Lawful-Good-Cleric appropriately.

Hmm... actually, maybe I'll just have the PC cleric start having dreams suggesting that he donate the magic items to the former PC's temple. :/ That way maybe he'll get the hint, but it's not as obnoxious as having a Planar show up and tongue-lash him.

Jason

 

[ptolemy18]

If these guys are pacifists that can't handle business themselves, they wouldn't hire the PC's to do it for them or they'd not really be pacifists...they'd just be yellow bellies. If they don't want to personally help their friend, being pacifits, they would understand it if the new PC also wouldn't want to personally help their friend. I don't think they'd hold a grudge and demand magic items back that didn't belong to them in the first place. It just seems to obvious that you want to punish the player by taking back your gifts.

They're not yellow bellies. The idea is, they're also secretly plotting to save the ex-PC priestess. But they don't want to tell the PCs what they're planning because they're not sure the PCs are trustworthy. The PCs didn't walk up to the NPC clerics and volunteer to save the priestess, they just said "Hey, she's imprisoned, maybe you guys should do something about this."

If NPCs *tell* the party "Oh please help us save our priestess" then it's just a job; if the party spontaneously decides to save the priestess out of the goodness of their hearts then THAT'S HEROISM!!! Whoo hoo!

Basically, I want the decision to be up to the PCs -- I don't want any NPCs to lead them by the nose.

Jason