Machiavelli's page

So, a character in my game is dominated (by its usage of dominate person) by a succubus now. I'm wondering, can dominate person be used to force them to accept a profane gift, what about forcing them to make a pact with the demon? Is there anything in the rules to prevent either of these cases?

oooh, really like spell-blights too, never have used them. They seem like excellent curses to have a deity of curse magic levy against someone, and they all have spells, or at least spell-like abilities. Yeah, I think I'm going to have some fun coming up with a curse based on the mechanics for those, though one that can't be removed like a spell-blight ordinarily can of course.

Yeah, the Odyssey could be great inspiration, that is true. I love mythology in general, so.

They are still on the same plane, they are trapped there for the time being (and trying to find a path to escape), actually because someone else they irked before decided that it would be a good place to send them to get them out of his way (it is a really long long story, but they haven't figured this out yet, at least I don't think so). So, them being here in the first place was due to someone else seeing them as a potential problem.

Petty Alchemy, they have had the Deck of Many Things, a few times actually... they loved it (even though a few characters have ended up utterly screwed by it), but managed to lose it and were sad.

I do actually like the idea of the worshiper failing to deal with such a less potent group of non-believers suffering for their failure too, that could make things interesting in its own way.

gods... the more I see what I type about them, the more I realize I have a group of ruffians whom enjoy being burned in new and terrible ways. I really should indulge them I suppose.

I would usually agree that deities wouldn't/shouldn't directly intervene... but, they are in its realm (well, one of its realms), and, I actually had a player say "I really think gods should interfere with us more". They really must be masochists, I swear. That or this will be a be careful what you wish for deal. Maybe it also means they do these things because they want to see just how mean I'll be back... hmmmm.

A party of NPCs including a antipaladin could be fun for them to deal with though. Aside from that, I see most of those whom would confront them being wizards, sorcerers and witches.

I'm going to go with this without details on the player (class, sex, natural tendencies, player comfort level with things) all I can really suggest is since they hung out go with the old WOW standby in the future every time they just hang out they turn into a sheep until they make an effort to speak up.

They are all male, though they often play opposite sex characters if that makes any difference. Class, religion and age wise the group is kinda all over the place.

Very tempted to mess with their magic in some way, very very tempted. That makes sense. Don't know if I want it to outright fail them so much as have some other affects, embarrassing or otherwise.

Well, it is a house game, so I've actually not been using alignments (been using an alternative for player characters to replace it). I would say neutral with evil leanings is the best bet.

They did not kill the favored person, they got away and if they hadn't managed to probably things would have gone... very badly for them as this was a really tough foe.

I wouldn't normally have deities themselves get involved in things but, since this is one of its realms, well.

My players managed to attack a favored worshiper of a deity of magic, while on a realm said deity created and continues to maintain influence on.

The players attempted to break and enter into an area owned by said worshiper, they got caught, some of them resorted to violence, but ended up through a sequence of events, getting away. But still, on a plane, created by this individual's deity, that deity should be irked and retaliate no? I even had a player say that they were actually really annoyed at the lack of hard consequences for their actions (though I don't know that they are all on the same page about this).

Now, the thing is I don't want to have the deity outright TPK the party, as that seems a very cheap shot, and makes less sense then it just having fun making their lives more difficult. However, this is a deity strongly associated with curses.

I'm coming up with ones that are all appropriate for what they did in this specific situation, including cursing the one whom attacked with not being able to harm anyone whom doesn't attack them first, making some of those whom broke in unable to enter anywhere without first getting permission (maybe I'll make really nasty or embarrassing things happen to them if they try).

There's one I'm stumped on, one whom would be viewed as guilty via association, but didn't really do anything on their own, they kinda just, well, hung out. They too the deity would want to punish however, but, I'm not sure how.

I have a guide for players with houserules, character creation stuff, and that kinda thing... I actually never thought of putting things like that 24 hour rule (or a variation there of) in it. But that's a great idea!

OK, I'm going to do that.

Sounds like a good way to explain things... though I'm sorely tempted to make it more than 24 hours for things that aren't emergencies, or serious work or family related commitments (I'm OK with being pretty lenient with those specific sorts of situations).

I think part of the problem is that I'm just getting really impatient about these sorts of things, and also that there's quite a few players in the area and not enough GMs. This means I'm having to sort through the folks like I described above when there's a multiple other people waiting for a chance to join a group.

Maybe I need to vet people better too? Has anyone tried to set up some sort of player questionnaire to help out with this?

"I'd make it known we expect to meet and gaming isn't plan B for whatever else is going on."

I like that Pan... I'm going to have to use it.

This is something of a rant I guess but I also am really wondering how others deal with these situations.

so... DMing (and playing really as well), means setting aside your day to game, and especially if you DM then also some planning ahead of time as well. If players don't show up, it means that you could have made other plans, and have been doing something else instead, or that you could have given the spot to another player whom maybe would be more reliable. Because of that, I get frustrated when people don't show up.

I'm not talking about people whom can't make game due to an emergency, or have planned a vacation and give me notice ahead of time (though, depending on the specifics, either of those might mean you should drop out of gaming, at least for a while).
What I'm referring to are folks whom just have something else that they'd prefer to do come up on the same day they said they'd game, and possibly with little (or even no) prior notice, so they go and do that instead. Now, they may come back, and game again the next week, but as soon as something else comes up, they are gone again.

I have group of what are very reliable players currently, but as we've tried to find an additional person to join the group... I'm finding a lot of folks whom fit the issue I described above.

I'm debating just how much of a chance I should give newbies to the group. Is it fair to tell someone to not come back if they flake out for just one game unless it's something work related or an emergency? Or is slightly more of a chance than that only fair?