Was I a RBGM?

[squat45]

Ok, started a new campaign off last Saturday, only had 3 of the 5 players... but that was planned. Party consists (currently) of:

Male Human Cleric3/Fighter1
Male Human Monk4
Male Human Fighter2/Ranger3 (NPC)
Female 1/2 Elf Sorcerer3/Fighter1

The monk is the main player here, as I allowed him to take Vow of Poverty and Vow of Peace... he's essentially a HUGE diplomat... not worried about him powergaming the VoPov, he's not a powergamer.

Anyways, the adventure setup runs like this... nobleman and his 'posse' were attacked by goblins and a bear-like creature (an owlbear). Through investigations and the like, they find out that the nobleman (a very not-nice-guy) was out 'hunting' goblins. The party goes in to try to negotiate the return of the nobleman's body and equipment with the goblins... ok, already a different type of campaign!

They go in, make all sorts of good role-playing type means (and quite solid rolls on the diplomacy and gather info checks) and they account for 14 of the 15 people on the nobleman's hunt, including the nobleman. The man they are missing is a known criminal and 'goblin hunter'... they are negotiating with the goblin chief, the shaman and about 12 other goblins... and the owlbear (controlled by the shaman).

At this time, the adventure is probably going to end without a fight and the mission accomplished... but all sorts of other leads that I built-into the adventure (they could even get these leads by not fighting, but they were not even sniffing up the trees, so to speak) were going to be set aside... thinking, I have one real nasty guy left over... so the RBDM in me had the leftover guy show up and shoots one of the goblins during negotiations. Goblins think treachery and attack the party. Battle turns out quite well for the party, the Ftr/Ran (an archer) attacks the necklace controlling the owlbear and rolls a 20... destroys the necklace and the goblins flee. All in all, a lucky combat for the heroes.

Now, the monk's player is quite upset, saying that I threw a much too powerful situation at the party, that it was a no-win situation... the party's reputation is going to take a horrible hit by this, so forth and so forth.

Was I too much of a RBDM on this? They did capture the last bad guy and got all sorts of information out of him... There are several adventures coming out of this now and it looks good, but the player is still a little upset.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

It's on the edge. Your having the remaining bad guy attack was motivated by a desire to nudge the PCs in a direction they weren't taking, not part of a pre-planned situation. If the party had gotten wiped out (a strong possibility, depending on how many goblins there were), then you would have nudged them right into an open grave. It's ok to try to nudge, it's just better if you do it through non-combat means. For example, having the goblins insist on the bad guy being brought to justice in exchange for the return of the noble's body would have been a better way to get the party moving in the desired direction. If they were determined to follow their own path, at least they had a non-lethal opportunity to refuse.

But, your monk is being a dink. First of all, complaining about the relative difficulty of encounters is kinda meta-gamey. I don't know how you usually run campaigns, but there is nothing that says a party has to always encounters they can beat by force of arms. They could have surrendered to the goblins. They could have fled and negotiated a truce later, etc. Secondly, so the party's rep takes a hit -- all the more reason to work to clear their names. We call these 'hooks', and they are a critical part of the game.

 

[azmodean]

Now, the monk's player is quite upset, saying that I threw a much too powerful situation at the party, that it was a no-win situation... the party's reputation is going to take a horrible hit by this, so forth and so forth.

So? Did you promise your players that they would be able to resolve every situation with diplomacy? Did you tell them every situation would have a good outcome? You haven't mentioned anything happening that a player would have a valid objection to.

On the other hand...

From what you say the party had worked hard to resolve the situation peacefully, but because you didn't want them to miss some plot hook you prepared, you sabotaged the negotiations with a NPC. Doesn't seem like a very nice thing to do.

Might qualify for RBDM-like behaviour, but if I remember correctly, RBDM club membership has a TPK prerequisite, though I can't remember where I saw that...

 

[squat45]

I even told them...

As I was trying to decide what to do, I mentioned to them that I was trying to decide how much of a <not-nice guy> I wanted to be... They knew something was up...

I think that I covered it up pretty ok, there was some great role-playing as we got back and the bad guy they captured will probably evolve into the main antagonist (in my thinking now), so it should work out.

And I know I was literally 2 rolls from a TPK... if the archer had not rolled an 18-20 on the attack roll to break the chain and if the owlbear had not failed a key saving throw, it may have been all over. Luckily for the party, the goblins were all puffed up and invincible feeling because of the controlled owlbear... and when that control got wiped out, I played the goblins like the cowardly creatures that are.

Oh, and I think that the player will get oevr it, he's just really digging the character concept right now and taking the failure pretty hard...

 

[shilsen]

Nah, that's not being a RBDM. Being an RBDM involves letting the PCs do what they, how they want to do it, and letting them get themselves into a huge steaming heap of trouble doing exactly what they wanted to do. And then smile and say, "But that was your plan, right?"

 

[Saeviomagy]

Frankly, I think that your monk is probably feeling pissed off because you went out of your way to sabotage his plan. That's what you did.

If a plan fails because it didn't take something into account, that's fine.

If it fails because circumstances suddenly change in an irrational way (ie - an obviously outmatched NPC shows up at just the perfect crucial time and launches a suicide attack, at which point the other NPC's respond not by attacking the NPC, but by attacking the PCs), then the DM is being a jerk.

You're not an RBDM. You're a BDM.

 

[moritheil]

Nah, that's not being a RBDM. Being an RBDM involves letting the PCs do what they, how they want to do it, and letting them get themselves into a huge steaming heap of trouble doing exactly what they wanted to do. And then smile and say, "But that was your plan, right?"

I thought that was normal DMming .

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Frankly, I think that your monk is probably feeling pissed off because you went out of your way to sabotage his plan. That's what you did.

If a plan fails because it didn't take something into account, that's fine.

If it fails because circumstances suddenly change in an irrational way (ie - an obviously outmatched NPC shows up at just the perfect crucial time and launches a suicide attack, at which point the other NPC's respond not by attacking the NPC, but by attacking the PCs), then the DM is being a jerk.

You're not an RBDM. You're a BDM.

That's harsh... but in the austere cold light of day is most probably a precise, succinct and focused critique of the situation.
It seems like the monk's player feels that a lot of his and the parties hard work - best represented by their reputation - has been taken away from them. I suppose that they'll get over it. A harsh life is that of the adventurer.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Pbartender]

Might qualify for RBDM-like behaviour,

No, it wouldn't. I may have read it wrong, but it seemed a blantant and arbitrary way to sabotage the PC's carefully laid plans by reintroducing a plot hook that none of the PCs was the least bit interested in.

You ruined a plan that was amlost completely successful through nothing but diplomacy and roleplaying. It is hard enough to get your average player to not kill NPCs at first sight... Unless your players are extraordinary, you've just given your players good reason to never rely on parley ever again, and made the Monk fairly useless in this party.

"Wait, let's talk to them?"
"Why, he'll just have someone attack us anyway. Let's attack them first."

A more Rat Bastard way to make trouble for the PCs, would have been to have a Bad Guy quietly and subtlely sabotage the talks behind-the-scenes. Using Stilled Silent magic spells (in plain sight of the PCs) to cause the PCs to make gaffes in goblin etiquette... Grease, Ventriloquism, Silent Image and Mage Hand are great spells for this sort of thing.

As I was trying to decide what to do, I mentioned to them that I was trying to decide how much of a <not-nice guy> I wanted to be... They knew something was up...

That's the icing on the cake, so to speak. A good RBDM never tells his players that he's an RBDM, or how mean he's going to be. Your players can figure it out for themselves.

Oh, and I think that the player will get oevr it, he's just really digging the character concept right now and taking the failure pretty hard...

If I'd done this to any of my players, I doubt they would... Unless they had a string of successes before this, most of them would be asking to switch characters to a more useful Fighter or Wizard.

Imagine if you were playing a Rogue who was tricked out for massive Sneak attacking, but you nver got to use it, because your DM only set you up against Constructs, Elementals and Undead.

You NEED to let your players succeed a few times at what they are REALLY good at, before you can toss them a failure like this.

but if I remember correctly, RBDM club membership has a TPK prerequisite, though I can't remember where I saw that...

No sir, we do not. Killing player characters is easy. It doesn't take a Rat Bastard DM to do that.

Rat Bastard DMing is about making thoroughly challenging enounters for your characters in new and interesting ways. It's about making your players think that their characters are in dire danger, even though they really aren't, so they feel great when they succeed thinking that they were against the odds. It's about making trouble for the characters in such a way, that the players brag about how you screwed them over afterward.

It's about telling your player to go to Hell, and having them looking forward to the trip.

 

[gizmo33]

I think it would have been fair to allow the PCs a chance to calm the situation rather than have the goblins instantly assume that the bad guy and the party were the same. I assume that the PCs had demonstrated that they weren't goblin hunters in order to have the meeting in the first place. Swords might have been drawn and goblins would have certainly attacked the bad guy - but body language and some good diplomacy checks good have possibly kept the PCs out of the fight. But because you wanted things to go this way, I think you railroaded the PCs. I would recommend trying to be more creative with your adventure hooks so you don't have to railroad PCs. There are probably other ways you could have introduced the adventures you had planned.

It's less fun IMO to play a character when the DM demonstrates a willingness to veto your actions with arbitrary decisions (another example - they find a 100,000 gp ruby and the DM doesn't like it so some high level thief steals it)