Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kurotowa" data-source="post: 9657620" data-attributes="member: 27957">Long, long ago I ran into the concept of the Grudge Monster. Something that's entirely out of place and perfectly counters one or more of the PCs, that was put there by the DM specifically to ruin the player's day. It was probably in the collection of AD&D 1e era Dragon magazines I inherited.If high level NPCs exist in the world, that's fine. If the actions and choices of the players incite the ire of those NPCs, that too is fine. Basic "f- around and find out" principle, as long as the cards were on the table. And there's also room for the classic "Evil warlord storms through and burns down the protagonist's home village, inciting them on a journey of heroism and eventual revenge" story.So where does the previous scenario fail that test? In several places. The cards were not on the table; the PCs didn't knowingly choose to cross these high level NPCs. It serves no story purpose; it's purely a function of the DM regretting how generous they previously were. And most importantly, as others have touched on, players hate having their stuff stolen.This is something there's solid psychological research about. Humans, as a general rule, are loss adverse. When asked to balance the potential for gain against the risk of loss, most people land at a ratio of two to one. Which is to say, losing something you had is twice as painful as never getting it in the first place. Humans hate having their hard earned rewards yanked away from them. It's why tax relief is the oldest political platform known to history.So having NPCs deliberately go for the player's fancy toys is a dangerous move that risks ruining the fun of everyone else at the table, and having it come in the form of untouchably high level NPCs with no cause or warning is a pure Grudge Monster.</blockquote>

Verification