Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Schmoe" data-source="post: 3173222" data-attributes="member: 913">There's your problem.&nbsp; You told the players that you would be emphasizing role-playing, yet you criticize them for making role-playing decisions with their characters.&nbsp; Frankly, the characters weren't bad at all, IMHO.&nbsp; Every combination there was viable.Instead of being critical and condescending about the characters' backstories, perhaps you could have provided some suggestions to come up with something that fit the campaign better.&nbsp; Not everyone is a &quot;good writer&quot;, and you shouldn't expect it. As other posters have noted, it's not surprising that a group of players would want to do the heroic thing by following the creature down into the sewers.&nbsp; I think you are absolutely correct, in that they did not do it intelligently (didn't ask for advice, ignored clues, split the party), but there are things on your end that you could have done to &quot;clue the party in&quot; without compromising the integrity of your setup.&nbsp; Another poster's idea of having the giant stalk the party with deadly hit-and-run attacks may have worked.&nbsp; After one or two of them had been slaughtered and carried off into the darkness, perhaps the others would flee.&nbsp; Maybe one of the detectives could blurt out that the most critical thing is to protect the orphanage, as the creature likes to feed on children, and a blind chase through the sewers will lose valuable time.&nbsp; This or another such diversion might have re-directed the party away from what you felt was inevitable slaughter.&nbsp; To summarize, I think you were unfair in your assessment of the characters, especially given the expectations you set at the beginning of the campaign; I think you were fair in your handling of the situation; and I think you were a little unfair in your expectations of the party's actions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Schmoe, post: 3173222, member: 913"] There's your problem. You told the players that you would be emphasizing role-playing, yet you criticize them for making role-playing decisions with their characters. Frankly, the characters weren't bad at all, IMHO. Every combination there was viable. Instead of being critical and condescending about the characters' backstories, perhaps you could have provided some suggestions to come up with something that fit the campaign better. Not everyone is a "good writer", and you shouldn't expect it. As other posters have noted, it's not surprising that a group of players would want to do the heroic thing by following the creature down into the sewers. I think you are absolutely correct, in that they did not do it intelligently (didn't ask for advice, ignored clues, split the party), but there are things on your end that you could have done to "clue the party in" without compromising the integrity of your setup. Another poster's idea of having the giant stalk the party with deadly hit-and-run attacks may have worked. After one or two of them had been slaughtered and carried off into the darkness, perhaps the others would flee. Maybe one of the detectives could blurt out that the most critical thing is to protect the orphanage, as the creature likes to feed on children, and a blind chase through the sewers will lose valuable time. This or another such diversion might have re-directed the party away from what you felt was inevitable slaughter. To summarize, I think you were unfair in your assessment of the characters, especially given the expectations you set at the beginning of the campaign; I think you were fair in your handling of the situation; and I think you were a little unfair in your expectations of the party's actions. [/QUOTE]

Verification