(Update) DM Decision: Player mistake- what would you do

[werk]

What would you do? I am really dreading rolling up a character with her. This is one of many dumb decisions I've seen this character make (she's been the subject of previous rants).

Also, side question, What do you do with players whom continue to make character destroying stupid decisions?

Personally, I tend to play the character's conscience. Unless this character is chaotic evil, her conscience would have pointed out that she shouldn't desert her friends in need (evil) and would not jump onto an unknown trap thing (chaotic). If the character is chaotic evil, give them an xp bonus

It sounds to me like this player is too smart for their own good...trying to cheat on char gen and taking off on their own during high danger scenarios.

I'd let this character fall for a while. No new character. Put that player in time-out until her character starves to death or figures out a way to save themself. I'd maybe even have a BBEG save the falling character and spar with them a little in a contest of wits or maybe make them sign a contract.

If the char doesn't return for whatever reason (starves to death, or dies of thirst, won't sign the contract, can't answer the riddle) then invite the player to make a new character, but the character must be either good or lawful, and cannot be played CN/CE like the other chars. As for the dubious character gen stuff, give them enough rope to hang...don't correct it at all.

 

[Shining Dragon]

I would have changed the nature of the trap from one of "bottomless pit" to "large magical cage" and have the Rogue stew in her own juices waiting until the other party members came to let her out. I don't believe in instant death traps, expecially at high levels.

 

[swrushing]

[/QUOTE]

The point of the thread was to get advice on waht to do next (the rant was extra .

really?

And you're right, it would be an exciting scenerio to explore all the odd items that were down there. But then again,

yeah too much to hope for.

that whole lower level was full of artifact magic. The PCs, though were sent to retrieve one item, and were told through conversations that the place had been death of many adventurers, some of which had achieved power of near gods. I also hinted to the pcs that there would be challenges down here they would not be able to overcome, simply because the place is a high level magical fotress. However, the pcs didn't fall into the pentagram. That one pc did, and it seems far fetched to have as solo adventure for one player because they didn't look before they leaped.

again with the "she was so stupid and deserves what she got cuz i played right..." stuff.

thats not relevent.

it might have been relevent with rant one, or maybe rant two, but by rant three or rant seven the OBVIOUS disconnect between playing styles repeating the same thing "PC make stupid blunder" moves this away from "how stupid is she" to "why hasn't the GM addressed this problem."

you asked "what to do about this problem?" and the "problem" isn't HER any more. its the Gm keeping a player around as a de facto punching bag and letting the style mismatch keep her in a "gonna die stupidly" reapeat cycle followed by internet rants about how stupid she is.

Now as for the dimensional. Its not my idea.

sowhat? it was your idea to put it into the campaign. What purpose was it to serve? How was it to be "interesting?"

just because you read something in a book doesn't mean it has to appear in your next adventure without thought as to how it adds to the story. It really looks like a one way trap for a gilligan, in a game where you know you have a gilligan and without any notion of "what next."

It's been one concept of hell for thousands of centuries and is dated as far back as hell being a burning pitt. As a matter of fact some believe hell is a burning endless pit.

but not empty.
endless...sure
burning...sure
nothing... nope.

but hey, what if it was on the cover of USA TODAY.
What did it add to the adventure?

I'm also misspeaking. I"m saying the pc is dead. You are right. The pc is not dead. The Pc coudl have found away out and could be alive. But for the most part, the pc is no longer with the party and is out of the campaign. It would take a heck of a lot of explaining to explain how the leaping PC
A. escaped the dimension (though you're right, i can magic that away)
B. found out where the pcs were (there is no knowledge of any timelords in any text)
C. traveled to the pcs location (they don't even know where they are)
D. rejoined the party (the party is currently in a fictional dimension of their imagination. )

or with a little less bluster you could have had something be there and make "falling into the not-a-trap" seem like a clever thing the Gm stuck in for fun and cool sake.

maybe i should spell it out like this...

pentagram = PC gone = hassle coming up with new PC and integrating it into story and makes player look stupid yet again (or to some, makes Gm look less than skilled at having this occur again.)

pentagram = PC in wierd land of new stuff = more fun with interesting story bits and perhaps clues or oddities recovered enabling PCs to do something heroic others could not which makes Gm look clever at adapting to player style to benefit campaign.

Now, I did do some thinking and this scenerio could happen.

... This is cool. For her.

or maybe with some more effort you could work this in a little more interestingly. make it look like part of a plan by a clever GM.

But when i asked a couple other players after explaining to them how bad i felt about the situation (with her mind being distracted). I was given some good advice.

That advice, when coupled with "and even tho i know her style is different and its bound to keep these stup[di things coming" leads to lather-rinse-repeat of the Gm sets stage - gilligan blunders - Gm rants online about woe is he...

its the perfect recipe for "fairly" keeping the player around as punching bag rant fodder .

Certainly, everyone has their own playstyle, but for me as a Gm, if I invite a player into my game who I know has such a style, to me its now my obligation to run a game appropriate to her and her character. if i don't think i can do that or wont do that whether out of a lack of ability on my part or out of a sense of "fairness" to others (assuming something guarantted to cause problems, to make it not as fun for her or even for you, is "fair" in any sense) then i have the guts to say "sorry, this game isn't for you."

But you seem reluctant to choose any suggestion which will actually interrupt the blunder-rant-reload cycle.

 

[freebfrost]

I would have changed the nature of the trap from one of "bottomless pit" to "large magical cage" and have the Rogue stew in her own juices waiting until the other party members came to let her out. I don't believe in instant death traps, expecially at high levels.

It's not an instant death trap - she's just imprisoned elsewhere. It's not fundamentally different from the party getting Donjon or The Void from a Deck of Many Things really...

 

[DonTadow]

Don't bring her character back. That will only cause you future frustration. She wanted to see what the trap did without taking precautions, so she got what she deserved. She already wasn't worried about dying, and if you bring her PC back, she will never worry about dying because she'll think she can get away with any action she takes.

I wouldn't have used an insta-kill trap like that anyway without some way to allow clever ideas to save the PC's. You could have done this, but you already declared her dead. I would stick with your original outcome and keep her dead. Penalize her with your normal rules for creating new PC's after old PC's die, and if she still doesn't care about keeping her PC alive, keep killing her off but make new harsher penalties for creating new PC's...maybe start out 2 lvls lower. Either way you win...she gets tired of always playing low lvl pc's and she performs better in game, or she gets annoyed with your absurd rules and she quits.

The level is picked from the Chamber of Antiques level in the Maure's dungeon. I looked at the trap, and I didnt think it was that dangerious. It seemed unlikely that a pc would be alone on the thing and if anyone stepped onit theres a reflex save that can be made by her, or the person next to her. If all else fails, most of the party have fly spells and the trap is designed so that if someone flew down there, they could fly back up if they return within a minute.

In the very next round, everyone decided to leave her there, even though they could still hear her screams as she fell.

Quick question. She said she was "going by it, searching it," trying to learn more.

Why did you not give her a search check to find the trap?

This was never designed to be a save or die trap. There were two moderate reflex saves attached to it, plus, a search check would have revealed a script written on the opposite end wall that A. warns of the trap and tells what it does and B. tells how to disarm the trap

She never searched it. Round 1, she approaches within 15 ft of it. Round 2, she says she wants to run and jump into it. Round 3. she was still falling but the party decided to activate the sarcopghus and hope that she cast her off as lost.

When I asked one of the players after the session why didnt they go back, theri respone was," she chose to jump in it and my character is not going to risk her life for what she deemed as an unprofessional maneuver " (her character is a mercenary who values a code of mercenary conduct.

Thats why im hesitant about bringing her back without penalities. Also, asp reviously stated I don't mind rolling up new pcs with players, but this player has been difficult. The PCs often surprive me with things and I always end up making up 30 peercent of the adventure each session. My thing is, that my notes say this is an endless pit ofa hell dimension where they tossed unusable magical objects. I admit, I had NO idea a pc woudl get caught up by what i thought was an easily avoidable trap. In previous instances, the pcs have flown over wierd objects on the floor.

 

[swrushing]

[deleted

 

[Shining Dragon]

It's not an instant death trap - she's just imprisoned elsewhere. It's not fundamentally different from the party getting Donjon or The Void from a Deck of Many Things really...

The original poster said "and now the character's dead". So - instant death trap is an accurate description.

 

[Qualidar]

But when i asked a couple other players after explaining to them how bad i felt about the situation (with her mind being distracted). I was given some good advice...

I think that this is the most important advice you have been given. You don't want to alienate your other players just to enable her play style. While it's laudable to try to accommodate everyone at the table, it's a two way street. You are not beholden to throw logic out the window to accommodate bad decisions, no matter how much some may harp on you. It's fairly clear when the rest of your group is looking at her like she's making an idiotic decision that the fault is in neither your descriptions nor your DMing technique.

~Qualidar~

 

[freebfrost]

The original poster said "and now the character's dead". So - instant death trap is an accurate description.

Did you read the post and the rest of Don's posts afterward? It's an endless pit and the character in question is not instantly dead.

 

[swrushing]

Did you read the post and the rest of Don's posts afterward? It's an endless pit and the character in question is not instantly dead.

if the Gm is willing to run scenes in the pit after the fall, then its not an instant death.

if the Gm isn't interested in pursuing such, and it seems he isn't out of "fairness" to the other PCs, then its functionally the same. he seems perfectly able to scoff at the very notion of following up in the pit.

Whats the diff between "and you are dead" and "and we wont play any more scenes with your character" in practice?