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

[swrushing]

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~

but, speaking as a GM, if i am not willing to adjust to her playstyle, i ought to tell her "find another game" instead of locking us both into a perpetual cycle of player and Gm dissatisfaction.

as i said, two possibilities... admit its incompatable and let her go OR keep her and accept your responsibility to HER ENJOYMENT just as much as everyone elses.

the failure is, IMO, deciding to keep her but to also keep the incompatability.

 

[swrushing]

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.

again a question... why was it there?
What purpose did it serve in your scenario?
What could come of it that was interesting other than a potential "gilligan steps into it" kind of thing?
if you had no intention of the PCs exploring it and finding anything of interest, why include it?

if you put it in there as "not a trap" as you say, what did you put it in there for?

really starting to sound like the galaxy quest chompers...

 

[Frater]

Did she geta Reflex save vs the trap? Even if she "jumped on it" as you said she should still get a save.

Anyway - some very good posts and discussion. Sounds like you are perhaps learning the age old truth that as obvious as things might seem to you you can never be so sure that it is as obvious as you think

I would take the player aside and give her an option - she can start anew if she so desires or you can reintroduce her into the story line but her character is changed by X, Y or Z due to her actions. But the talking with her is key - let her decide what she wants and then find a way to make it happen and bring her back in.

And - do not understimate the benefit of having these discussions with your players present. Explain to them your surprise, learn how they would have handled it, get their feedbakc on how they saw things - this way everyone learns and most importantly you learn more about each other.

 

[freebfrost]

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

The difference is that "you are dead" is an in-game status that can be fixed by a 9th level cleric.

"We wont play any more scenes with your character" is outside of the bounds of the gameplay itself.

That's an important distinction.

 

[DonTadow]

Yea.

In fact, NOT doing so just really sounds like bad grapes to me.

If you're going to walk in with this Deus Ex situation where ultra-powerful things are everywhere and all of the PCs are but pawns in the games of extra-super-mega-over-Gods and everything can blast them to splinders or make them Gods or just give them really bad gas with the merest touch, and yet they have to make it through without touching the WRONG super-mega-godhood item...

Why on earth NOT? Getting yanked out of Nowhereville 90210 and slapped into The Matrix is just as unbelievable as getting yanked out of All The Magic Exploded Because We Opened The Box and slapped into The Matrix ... when you're THAT FAR OUT THERE ...

I have to say, man, that if this sort of plotline is indicative of what your games are like, then NO WONDER somebody has problems figuring things out. I'd have probably run screaming into the night after a few sessions. It sounds like you have some meta-conscious super-plot based around a reality entirely of your own imagining and you can use it as you wish and everybody else has to figure out what you're thinking. Gods and super-items and Time Lords and entire dimensions created for the sole purpose of dumping the kitchen leavings. Boot up the TARDIS and have Dr. Who rumble on by and save her.

--fje

Explaining the plot and details again: I'm obviously skipping details of the plot here because they have nothing to do with this thread. But in my defense (uber superplot dm???) let me explain this subplot a bit.

I agree, if the pcs are just pawns that sucks. Which is why the time lords are so upset. They manage the timeline. Some things are meant to happen and some arent. The timelords have encountered the party before, when they changed the time line by going into the past to (euthinize an entire civilization -yaun-ti) and change it so that one of them was super rich and famous and so that his daughter would have a cure for her rare illness. In response, teh time lords (think wormhole aliens from deepspace 9) warned the party that they would be punished if another occurance happened , and one of them (a pc whom was retiring his character) was taken and impisoned by them for eternity.

So fast forward (that happened early this year). The pcs once again can change history, this time the future. They are trapped in the farplane. They know of 2 ways to get out. They opt to instead, save the continent (the farplane was corrupting the continent). so they decide to venture into the center of the corruption (the fotress their inn) and unleash a powerful dispel artifact, which would wipe out magic on the continent. The farplane is a realm where time doesnt obey the normal laws, and thsu the time lords can not control.

Waht the pcs decided to do during session was work the dispel artifact with no knowledge of how to work it (and failed their rolls to figure it out). As they operated the artifact, they all made will saves. Albight high. They then woke up in the matrix. Waht the players don't know is the will save was to resist being succumb to the disenchant. It had nothing to do with the time lords. The pcs were sent into a coma and the fotress was forced back onto the material plane, where the time lords saw the ripple in time and traced the disturbance. They only found the pcs living and they took them after realizing they were the same people whom changed time once before.

Now as a dm ... i wanted the party to exit the far plane once they found the two portals. Everytown they go to, the npcs warn them that no one ever returns from that fotress.. at least not right. I don't want to tell the pcs what to do, but i try to make the npcs advice them of the danger This has NOTHING to do with the overall plot. I don't force my pcs to do anything they dont want, but the overall plot is still going on (which obviously changes now because of the pcs actions).

But the pcs wanted to be heroes and i'm just the dm, so they opted to figure out a way to destroy the corruption of the continent (to which only one of them is from). Even after a pc died, they opted to continue on. The PCs sealed themselves in the fotress on purpose. The pcs stayed in control. Now, I like my games to have what i like to call fantasy realism. All their enemies arent going to have equivalent crs. Especially sidequests. The PCs knew they'd be changing things, and thats what they wanted to do and did. But they also knew there could be consequences.

There are no ultra powerful things everywhere. The gods of the world ahve been sealed in their celestial dimension for 600 years, and they no longer mess with mortal matters (they can't becuase their sealed). The timelords are invevitables whom manage time. The pcs know they exist. The pcs got one over on the powerful beings before... this makes twice and now they are upset. What the time lords are doing to the pcs is their way of a trial. This time they have no proof the pcs did anything, but they suspect that they had something to do with it. And now the time lords can't find the pcs on the time line. Because of their actions, they have erased themselves from the time line. Which means they are wild cards.

I"m sorry if my plots don't center around... find the lich, kill the lich get the treasure. But the other 6 pcs whom play seem to be having fun with it.

 

[tonym]

...If i did bring her back, what type of penalties shoudl her character have?

I'd probably go with a permanent -1 to Constitution, for the prolonged shock to her system, and give her a Fear of Falling quirk for the rest of her life (not too debilitating; mostly a reminder to look before leaping).

Tony M

 

[radferth]

Given what I can piece together from your descriptions, it sounds like the rogue is stuck in the nothing dimension, and no one else in the party particularly cares. If you feel the need to be consistent with the trap as you first had it, and if no one tries to figure out a way to pull her out afterward, then tell the player that her character's ultimate fate is still undecided, but she needs to make a new character for this party. Now you've got to put up with her making a character, but if you let that stop you from killing her you'll alway have these kinds of problem. If you would prefer her to keep the character, and it works OK with group dynamics, then come up with some way they can rescue her. It need not be game-sesson-time consuming; they might just have to fork over big bucks to some NPC caster who can do plane shift/find the path/retrive lost character. I figure if I jump on some red symbol that I think is evil, I'm pretty much putting myself at the DMs whim, so don't coddle her, but don't kill her character just to make a point.

 

[DonTadow]

again a question... why was it there?
What purpose did it serve in your scenario?
What could come of it that was interesting other than a potential "gilligan steps into it" kind of thing?
if you had no intention of the PCs exploring it and finding anything of interest, why include it?

if you put it in there as "not a trap" as you say, what did you put it in there for?

really starting to sound like the galaxy quest chompers...

I thought I said, to dispose of magic. I don't put stuff in places to serve the pcs fancies. Its there because it makes sense for the fotress's original use. The elves whom ran it did lots of experiments and some things they screwed up. After some time it was easier to create this portal and dump things in that had endless magical effects.

sort of like canada.

Now, the pcs could have used it for a number of things, in particular two objects that had dangerious magical effects that were not disposed of properly that were still in the fotress and that the pcs could have mishandled . They could have also opted not to dispel the magic, and toss the sarcophgus in there, thus preventing anyone else from posessing such powerful items (the pcs were fearful that the drow, whom built an enclave in the far plane) woudl eventually find it.

It seems to me Swrushing taht you want me to havei nthe campaign that whenever this character does something that would have been dangerious for any other pc that with her instead hilliatarity shall insue?

I admit, the character gets on my nerves sometimes and i wish i could boot her from the campaign. And everytime i'm on here i'm complaining about her. but she does add worth to the campaign. She's great at puzzles and mysteries and then theres her husband factor. Plus she irks me greatly but the party only mildly. In business you weight the pluses and minuses. Honestly, her husbands rpging (for the time being)balances her annoyances (she also bakes cookies and brownies). The players whom find her greatly annoying have told me that they'd rather put up with her than loose her husband. In the end its about the players.

 

[BSF]

To some degree, swrushing has a point. Look at the cirumstances.

• You dread making a new character with the player
• The character has initiated an action that you believe will lead to an untimely death, or in the least to an unplayable character
• None of the other PCs/Players cares enough to even try to save the character
• You have a designation of what this place is in your notes and you are not willing to change that to give you another option out
• You profess annoyance with the player, as do some of the other players, but you won't exlude the player from the game

The impression you are leaving is that you are digging a hole and climbing in.

What would I do? Assuming that I don't want to say goodbye to the player? I would let the player make a mistake and leave it at that. If I felt it was uncharacterisic for the player, I would discuss the decision process after the fact. In this case, if the player was otherwise distracted (like worrying about a sick child) I would modify my game to make the whole thing work out somehow.

Now that could be cheesy - Somebody uber-cool saves the PC.
It could be internally driven - The rogue manages to find an item with plane shift and gets 'lucky' with Use Magical Device.
It could be externally driven - The party finds out the missing PC has *something* they need and they need to save her. This is even better if I can tie it into an item previously thought to be of little value.

The point is that I am the only one that really knows what is in the pit and how it works. I can do anything I want.

In your case, you have moved the story along. Go cheesy to save the character. The timelords have 'punished' the group with a matrix-like reality? Fine. The PC shows up near the group at the next session. How did the PC get there? The timelords are tying up loose ends. They snatched her from the bottomless pit. If they leave her, there is always the chance she will get free and create more troubles for them. So they snatched her, fed her some false memories (UMD to PS back 'home' and that just happens to be near the PCs), and sent her to the same place the PCs are at. If you want to 'punish' the PC so there are consequences to actions, then a few things didn't make it to the false reality.

Now the PC is one of the clues to the false reality, but the group can blow it off as just fantastic coincidence.

No new PC, nobody in the group needs to save the PC, you sidestep the permanent death, etc.

Your best option is to lose the player, but you refuse to do that. Barring that, you need to accomodate the player's play style into your game. SWRushing might be a little aggressive with his tone, but he does have a point.

 

[tonym]

...she also bakes cookies and brownies...

Cookies and brownies! And she bakes them?

Wow.

Tell her you made a mistake. What you meant to say was the evil pentagram filled her pockets with candy.

Tony M