I have an issue. I ran BO. and beefed it up with Joey Virtues ideas for 6 players along with a few of my own. If I hadn't they would have walked through it no prob. It was Beta at the time. They had no problems with the goblins or Tsuto. They thought that the little flying lady was too hard even though I was only able to drop one of them below 0, before they made her flee with 3 hit points after the second try.
I couldn't get them to do anything in town, so it was hard to give them the impression that they were hero's. I could have forced it on them but I don't think you should force them to be town hero's. So any NPC interaction was minor and unfulfilling to me. I would have had to march them into the Rusty Dragon. Or post them outside the Feathered Serpent the only places that they wanted to go.
the second level of Thissletop almost ended them when they marched right into the howling doggies room and brought everyone running. So I did have to fudge some damage roles but not to hit rolls.
The only death was at the hands of Melfeshnekor(DM_Blakes paladin) who then intimated that I did it on purpose.
Anyway, Two of my players decided that because we were done with B.O. It would be OK to read it. Then discuss how they thought I should have ran it, talk about how they didn't feel like hero's. How the changes were too hard.
I even asked them to stay away from the ROTRL posts. But found out that if it didn't say spoiler it was fair game.
Now they know too much of the story. There is no mystery. Even who the villain is in #2. I feel like I was bad talked on the posts and it was disrespectful to read the AP. So I ask, would any of you keep Running the AP
I have an issue. I ran BO. and beefed it up with Joey Virtues ideas for 6 players along with a few of my own. If I hadn't they would have walked through it no prob. It was Beta at the time. They had no problems with the goblins or Tsuto. They thought that the little flying lady was too hard even though I was only able to drop one of them below 0, before they made her flee with 3 hit points after the second try.I couldn't get them to do anything in town, so it was hard to give them the impression that they were hero's. I could have forced it on them but I don't think you should force them to be town hero's. So any NPC interaction was minor and unfulfilling to me. I would have had to march them into the Rusty Dragon. Or post them outside the Feathered Serpent the only places that they wanted to go.
the second level of Thissletop almost ended them when they marched right into the howling doggies room and brought everyone running. So I did have to fudge some damage roles but not to hit rolls.
The only death was at the hands of Melfeshnekor(DM_Blakes paladin) who then intimated that I did it on purpose.
Anyway, Two of my players decided that because we were done with B.O. It would be OK to read it. Then discuss how they thought I should have ran it, talk about how they didn't feel like hero's. How the changes were too hard.
I even asked them to stay away from the ROTRL posts. But found out that if it didn't say spoiler it was fair game.
Now they know too much of the story. There is no mystery. Even who the villain is in #2. I feel like I was bad talked on the posts and it was disrespectful to read the AP. So I ask, would any of you keep Running the AP
I would drop it, and clearly explain to them why! :(
Then, you would want to decide if you want to keep gaming with these players, or not.
If you do, I would suggest having one of them DM. :)
No..
It was disrespectful. Bad attitudes all around.
Granted, if they've already started posting about you on these forums, they're going to read this and immediately want to defend themselves by telling their side of the story. None of us, here on the boards, are going to be able to tell whose story is more accurate, other than to take someone's word for it.
Still.. If I caught one of my players reading the AP after I asked them specifically not to.. and they came to the boards and read spoiler posts, I would not definitely not continue to run for them. And I would tell them why.
No..
It was disrespectful. Bad attitudes all around.
Granted, if they've already started posting about you on these forums, they're going to read this and immediately want to defend themselves by telling their side of the story. None of us, here on the boards, are going to be able to tell whose story is more accurate, other than to take someone's word for it.
Still.. If I caught one of my players reading the AP after I asked them specifically not to.. and they came to the boards and read spoiler posts, I would not definitely not continue to run for them. And I would tell them why.
What Watcher said. Game over, as far as I'm concerned.
They critiqued the adventure you ran for them? They actually tried to tell you how to GM an adventure for them? What a pack of ingrates. You have every right to feel insulted and angry. And those players should be (not very politely) told game is indefinitely cancelled.
|
There is a summary of the entire AP in the back of Burnt Offerings. There is no mystery left, especially for issue #2. It's over. They choose to go behind your back to read the adventure, they have no respect for the entire concept of a DM controlling the world for the best effect for the players.
Not only would I not run this AP for them, I don't think I'd run anything for them in the future.
Anyway, Two of my players decided that because we were done with B.O. It would be OK to read it. Then discuss how they thought I should have ran it, talk about how they didn't feel like hero's. How the changes were too hard.
I even asked them to stay away from the ROTRL posts. But found out that if it didn't say spoiler it was fair game.
Now they know too much of the story. There is no mystery. Even who the villain is in #2. I feel like I was bad talked on the posts and it was disrespectful to read the AP. So I ask, would any of you keep Running the AP
Sounds like an impedance mismatch on your expectations. You think the adventure should be a mystery, and they think it's okay to read ahead. Both styles of play (Players in the dark vs. Players with full knowledge) are legitimate, but you need to talk to your players about your common expectations for the game.
Remember: Use "I" language, not "You" language. You are speaking of your expectations, and *listening* for others' expectations.
Not: "You read the next adventure path, so now the game is ruined."
Rather: "I find it difficult to pace the game properly when the players already know the material."
Not: "You talked crap about me on the forums."
Rather: "After the game, if everybody could send me an e-mail with your feedback; I'd like to improve the game for everybody and my skills as a GM."
Depending on expectations, you may find that running printed adventures won't work with this group, and only run things you create. Or, if they only want to play adventures they can read; then you know that you shouldn't GM for this group. It's better to have fun as a player than to be frustrated as a GM.
After talking about expectations, it should be clear what to do with the AP. Just remember, you are looking for a win/win solution to have fun gaming with your friends. Don't lose a war to win a battle.
|
May I ask: what will you do if you drop the campaign?
I suggest continuing... but perhaps its time to deviate from the AP as written. Don't let them know what is coming and what isn't. Remember, disinformation can correct their reading the AP. ~Your~ copy doesn't have to have the same information that ~theirs~ has.
I have an issue. I ran BO. and beefed it up with Joey Virtues ideas for 6 players along with a few of my own. If I hadn't they would have walked through it no prob. It was Beta at the time. They had no problems with the goblins or Tsuto. They thought that the little flying lady was too hard even though I was only able to drop one of them below 0, before they made her flee with 3 hit points after the second try.I couldn't get them to do anything in town, so it was hard to give them the impression that they were hero's. I could have forced it on them but I don't think you should force them to be town hero's. So any NPC interaction was minor and unfulfilling to me. I would have had to march them into the Rusty Dragon. Or post them outside the Feathered Serpent the only places that they wanted to go.
the second level of Thissletop almost ended them when they marched right into the howling doggies room and brought everyone running. So I did have to fudge some damage roles but not to hit rolls.
The only death was at the hands of Melfeshnekor(DM_Blakes paladin) who then intimated that I did it on purpose.
Anyway, Two of my players decided that because we were done with B.O. It would be OK to read it. Then discuss how they thought I should have ran it, talk about how they didn't feel like hero's. How the changes were too hard.
I even asked them to stay away from the ROTRL posts. But found out that if it didn't say spoiler it was fair game.
Now they know too much of the story. There is no mystery. Even who the villain is in #2. I feel like I was bad talked on the posts and it was disrespectful to read the AP. So I ask, would any of you keep Running the AP
If they ignored my request to avoid reading the adventure path, I'd stop running the game, and tell them exactly why. If they want to know how it was listed in the original module, they can ask me. Going behind my back to read it, and reading about it online? It's enough for me to tell them that I'm going to stop running the module. But that's me.
|
Heh, ask them for a chance to do better with the rest of the AP, then run an adventure that makes the Tomb of Horrors look like
"introduction to fantasy RPG for new players". If they survive, have the mayor give them a badge that says hero on it.
Seriously, I don't know the cicumstances that led up to that happening, so maybe background stories feed into this. However, I will tell you taht the relationship between a DM and his players has to be one where there is trust and respect or its not a game you want to play. If you can't trust the players not to cheat, and they can't trust you not to twist events around to deliberately punish them, no matter how clever they are, then why bother playing? If they don't respect your wishes in not reading something, and they don't respect the time and energy you spent trying to run the game in a way that was fun and challenging for them, stop DMing these guys. Let one of them see how it feels when the shoes on the other foot, and make them DM. Or save yourself the pain of playing with these sort of players and go somewhere people respect the work you put into something, regardless of their personal critique of your abilities. If your game was really that lacking to in their minds, they should not mind you leaving them behind one bit.
1) You could always switch them to a different AP...Korvosa and Riddlesport are pretty close by...
2) I would sit all of the players down and explain to them exactly how you feel and how disrespectful it is of them to do this sort of thing. Tell them that you see it for what it is: CHEATING! Tell them that if it happens again, you'll either stop GMing or kick the offending players out of the group. I have no tolerance for Cheaters.
Be firm. Tell them that this sort of juvenile behavior is not how adults act, especially not adults who are friends. (This might be especially good if the players are in the 15-19 range).
3)Personally, that's why I like Pathfinder. The Rulebook makes a wonderful noise when you whack someone in the head for being a dumb@$$.
4)Seriously, though, you need to tell them how you feel. This isn't a case of power tripping, its making it more fun. If they want to spoil the endings, let them play somewhere else. And the critiquing thing...see #3 above...
Anyway, Two of my players decided that because we were done with B.O. It would be OK to read it. Then discuss how they thought I should have ran it, talk about how they didn't feel like hero's. How the changes were too hard.
I would sit down with all the players and discuss the issue(s) with them. Layout your expectations, including that fact that it is never OK to read any part of an AP while they are still playing in it. Perhaps let the players know/remind them/ that the AP is one of heros, not one for "more firepower only" types.
If the players are not willing to let you GM (including modifying an adventure to keep it challenging because there are 6 instead of 4 characters), then either one of them should step up to the plate and be GM or perhaps the group should shrink by a couple of players.
I even asked them to stay away from the ROTRL posts. But found out that if it didn't say spoiler it was fair game.
I have a real problem with this. To me it is a lack of respect. You didn't ask them to stay away from the Paizo forums, just the one on RotRL. Spoilers are not always used and even when they are, quite often the subject of the thread reveals a lot.
Now they know too much of the story. There is no mystery. Even who the villain is in #2. I feel like I was bad talked on the posts and it was disrespectful to read the AP. So I ask, would any of you keep Running the AP
Depending on how the above conversation(s) went, there would be a good chance that I would continue with the AP. It may be minus a couple of players. If it was still with the same 6 players, there would be a very, very, very good chance that I would modify a few things, perhaps like who the real villain in #2 is.
|
|
Anyway, Two of my players decided that because we were done with B.O. It would be OK to read it. Then discuss how they thought I should have ran it, talk about how they didn't feel like hero's. How the changes were too hard.
There is no such thing as the perfect DM. Every DMs performance is open to criticism, especially when they try to customise a pre-written source for their players (good-DMing but it makes you more of a target).
But to do so is patently unfair.
I would suggest that, as the plot has been blown open, you should go for the full co-operative experience and rotate the DMing. You could take a book each (six different DMs) or even rotate across sessions.
You can either swap characters around or have one character take a back-seat (as the DM-PC) each time.
I am a good DM, I feel confident that I can say that, but I have had players leave my table unhappy and, more than that, I leave every session knowing that there were one or two things I could have done better.
Anyway, Two of my players decided that because we were done with B.O. It would be OK to read it. Then discuss how they thought I should have ran it, talk about how they didn't feel like hero's. How the changes were too hard.There is no such thing as the perfect DM. Every DMs performance is open to criticism, especially when they try to customise a pre-written source for their players (good-DMing but it makes you more of a target).
But to do so is patently unfair.
I would suggest that, as the plot has been blown open, you should go for the full co-operative experience and rotate the DMing. You could take a book each (six different DMs) or even rotate across sessions.
You can either swap characters around or have one character take a back-seat (as the DM-PC) each time.
I am a good DM, I feel confident that I can say that, but I have had players leave my table unhappy and, more than that, I leave every session knowing that there were one or two things I could have done better.
This set off alarm bells with me too. I have to wonder if this is not the bigger issue at stake.
Probably the players could still reasonably run through the AP. The BBEG in RotRLs is does not really need to be much of a secret - the plot would run fine if the PCs knew who the bad guy was right from the beginning.
However its one thing to recover from some kind of slight crash in terms of the campaign and quite another to be dealing with a situation where players criticize the DMs style. Especially if, as one of the players handles would seem to indicate, we have what amounts to a player who is also an experienced DM telling another DM 'your doing it wrong'. Whoever hatched the plan of 'lets read the adventure and then criticize the DM' needs a good talking to - that is just unacceptable behavior. This is not putting player issues on the table for discussion, which is reasonable, but instead a blatant attack on the DM with an attempt to use the adventure itself as ammo.
This is indeed very strange behaviour. I once bought an adventure I was involved in as a player, but that was when I was a teenager and wanted to "win" the game. This is not a behaviour I could accept from mature players. What were they thinking? What´s more, if I explicitly asked my players not to do this, and they did anyway, I would stop DMing for them. But I think I would talk to them, ask what they were thinking, and really consider not DMing for them, at least not this AP. If you as DM set some rules, and they disregard those, chances are they disregard other rules as well. I would not be keen on DMing for people that don´t respect me. I think it has to do with respecting each other, and they clearly didn´t respect you as DM.
Stefan
I have an issue. I ran BO. and beefed it up with Joey Virtues ideas for 6 players along with a few of my own. If I hadn't they would have walked through it no prob. It was Beta at the time. They had no problems with the goblins or Tsuto. They thought that the little flying lady was too hard even though I was only able to drop one of them below 0, before they made her flee with 3 hit points after the second try.I couldn't get them to do anything in town, so it was hard to give them the impression that they were hero's. I could have forced it on them but I don't think you should force them to be town hero's. So any NPC interaction was minor and unfulfilling to me. I would have had to march them into the Rusty Dragon. Or post them outside the Feathered Serpent the only places that they wanted to go.
the second level of Thissletop almost ended them when they marched right into the howling doggies room and brought everyone running. So I did have to fudge some damage roles but not to hit rolls.
The only death was at the hands of Melfeshnekor(DM_Blakes paladin) who then intimated that I did it on purpose.
Anyway, Two of my players decided that because we were done with B.O. It would be OK to read it. Then discuss how they thought I should have ran it, talk about how they didn't feel like hero's. How the changes were too hard.
I even asked them to stay away from the ROTRL posts. But found out that if it didn't say spoiler it was fair game.
Now they know too much of the story. There is no mystery. Even who the villain is in #2. I feel like I was bad talked on the posts and it was disrespectful to read the AP. So I ask, would any of you keep Running the AP
I would drop it, and clearly explain to them why! :(
Then, you would want to decide if you want to keep gaming with these players, or not.
If you do, I would suggest having one of them DM. :)
One of the other players is DMing COT right now. We have a few people who will DM. I didn't say anything to the group because I didn't want to create a uncomfortable situation. One that I did say something too said he didn't realize it was such a big deal. I realize I am just uncomfortable with talking about it.
But it would be better if I got it off my chest. I know It took about 10 weekends to get through Burnt Offerings, It felt longer because of breaks,(I had to take off a few weeks) But it did drag on a bit. I know I am not the best DM. but I was willing to do it. It isn't my first rodeo, but I was never an eager DM. We just got the beta and it seemed like every other miniute we had to stop and pull out the rule book to figure out a machanic. I need more practice keeping the game moving forward too. I was leaving much of it up too them to go after the adventure, and not keeping a good progression.
I would be ok with going on but everyone is right, it does need to be addressed.
Anyway, Two of my players decided that because we were done with B.O. It would be OK to read it. Then discuss how they thought I should have ran it, talk about how they didn't feel like hero's. How the changes were too hard.There is no such thing as the perfect DM. Every DMs performance is open to criticism, especially when they try to customise a pre-written source for their players (good-DMing but it makes you more of a target).
But to do so is patently unfair.
I would suggest that, as the plot has been blown open, you should go for the full co-operative experience and rotate the DMing. You could take a book each (six different DMs) or even rotate across sessions.
You can either swap characters around or have one character take a back-seat (as the DM-PC) each time
I am a good DM, I feel confident that I can say that, but I have had players leave my table unhappy and, more than that, I leave every session knowing that there were one or two things I could have done better.
I know, I hate it when I am sitting there thinking, darnit I could have done that, why didn't I think of it at the time!
I was considering doing this, when I read the Spires I realized it might be out of my league. I have never done Higher that 12th level. My old group didn't get into high level play. But one of the players in my new group loves High levels.
May I ask: what will you do if you drop the campaign?
I suggest continuing... but perhaps its time to deviate from the AP as written. Don't let them know what is coming and what isn't. Remember, disinformation can correct their reading the AP. ~Your~ copy doesn't have to have the same information that ~theirs~ has.
I was planing to at least change names of key figures. Even I saw names of BBEG in other posts that just referred to ROTRL. Not to mention the official figures. It has been a few weeks sense I DM'd so others are doing thier adventure. We do this to keep from burning out.
Maybe the root of the problem is assuming their fun is coming from experiencing the story as it unfolds. In that case, they are only cheating themselves by reading ahead.
If instead their fun is coming from "beating the game" then reading ahead is cheating against the dm, who they perceive as their opponent.
I only game with people of the first type, and that's why these kind of situations are so hard for me to understand.
|
To me it is not the issue of the players knowing about it. They might enjoy that kind of thing as stated. To me the problem is the GM specifically asked them NOT to do it and they went behind his back and did it anyways. For me that would be the real issue. Complete lack of ability to trust the players now. I mean if they would do something you asked them not to once, no reason to think they won't keep doing it. And when you have a lack of trust between the GM and player things just don't work out.
Still.. If I caught one of my players reading the AP after I asked them specifically not to..
Actual quote from our group:
GM *talks about something about the campaign/world*
Player "Yeah, those are really badass, and their secret watchamacallit is just evil"
GM "I TOLD YOU NOT TO READ THAT STUFF!"
Player "I was bored!"
GM *not saying nothing on account of his face falling off his head*
Cut them off and let them see how fun the game is without a GM.
Seek out some new players who actually want to have fun.
Well, whether you have asked for my wisdom or not, I'm going to spray it in here:
First: Nobody starts perfect. I had one GM that came pretty close, but even he had a learning curve. Thing is, you WILL screw things up.
Sometimes it's small stuff, like overlooking combat reflexes in a BBEG's stat block, so he could have hit that second guy trying to go pas thim. Sometimes, it's bigger stuff, like overlooking the fact that some critter can do a powerful ability only once every X rounds or so. Sometimes, it will be big stuff, like fighting a vampire in broad daylight.
You learn from your mistakes.
But only if you know them. While you might spot a lot of stuff, you will not spot everything. Especially since some things come down to taste.
What I'm aiming for is this: Critique is good. But only constructive critique. "You blow big baby chunks" doesn't help anyone. Putting on a whiny or accusatory tone doesn't help anyone.
As for reading adventures beforehand: I don't like that. I prefer my players not knowing that stuff. But it can work. For example, I ran Rise of the Runelords, and now I'm playing in a Runelords campaign. The GM knew from the start that I knew the adventure. We were all OK with it. I try my best to not let my knowledge get in the way.
But the big thing is that you asked something of them and they just ignored it. That's bad. It shows a lack of respect, and I wouldn't waste my time running a game for people who didn't respect me. I don't know the whole story, only your version, but from what I know I'd stop running games for them, maybe even play in that group altogether, unless they convinced me that they were really sorry.
And one more thing: I might be wrong, but my "deeper issue" radar went off when I read this thread. You don't have to tell me whether there is something more wrong between you people, but you might think about it and see if it's true.
Anyway, talking about it - with the people this is about - is often a very good thing. Maybe they're oblivious to your anger at them (or however you want to call it). Get things out in the open. Don't hide them where they can fester.
Oh, and if you continue with the campaign: Definitely change some key stuff so that if they use their meta-game knowledge, they'll run to their doom!
And concerning the barghest fight: It's an optional part that is supposed to be really hard. That's something not everyone is familiar with (some people just assume that they can win everything), so you might want to drop some big clues. Obvious hints. Maybe break the 4th wall and flat-out tell them that this is a fight that might well be their doom if they don't back off. Tell them that stuff like that can happen: Optional encounters that are really, really powerful.
When my group found that thing, they got in, took a severe beating, and fled after one round.
But they thought that after a good night's sleep, with full resources and a decent plan, they'd fare better.
I did not pull any punches, and they got away with their lives out of sheer luck (the thing never hit with every attack - if he had, he'd have dropped a character). They stayed a couple of rounds, round that they had no chance, and decided to table this fight for several levels.
I would not have had any problem with killing a PC in that encounter, and I did not fudge the dice in the least (I sometimes do fudge dice when luck really turns against someone).
|
|
It all depends. Are they noobs, or are they jerks?
If they did it because they didn't know better, then ask yourself if they are able to learn something, and if they'll repeat thier mistake. Then consider if these are really the people you are best up playing with. Are they good friends?
If they're just jerks, then kill them all on the cornfields of Sandpoint, tear their character sheets to shreads, burn their miniatures, throw thier dices out the window and tell them that is how the scenario is meant to be run, and that they are welcome to read the book.
Oh, and if you continue with the campaign: Definitely change some key stuff so that if they use their meta-game knowledge, they'll run to their doom!
And concerning the barghest fight: It's an optional part that is supposed to be really hard. That's something not everyone is familiar with (some people just assume that they can win everything), so you might want to drop some big clues. Obvious hints. Maybe break the 4th wall and flat-out tell them that this is a fight that might well be their doom if they don't back off. Tell them that stuff like that can happen: Optional encounters that are really, really powerful.
When my group found that thing, they got in, took a severe beating, and fled after one round.
But they thought that after a good night's sleep, with full resources and a decent plan, they'd fare better.
I did not pull any punches, and they got away with their lives out of sheer luck (the thing never hit with every attack - if he had, he'd have dropped a character). They stayed a couple of rounds, round that they had no chance, and decided to table this fight for several levels.
I would not have had any problem with killing a PC in that encounter, and I did not fudge the dice in the least (I sometimes do fudge dice when luck really turns against someone).
I didn't fudge the roles with the barghest, and they did finnaly bring him down, the problem was the paladin was down, healed, got up, AoO, down again. I offered the option of a reincarnate, but wasn't taken up on it. I could have offered some advice, but was hoping they would flee.
I still play with these guys and am playing with them now as a player, and I do enjoy it for the most part, we are all happy with the pathfinder rules. I was just having a hard time figuring out how I felt. Getting over the fealings and so forth.
I just wanted to know if other people would feel the same way I did. I thought maybe I am making a big deal of nothing. I never said "don't read BO", never thought I needed too. I did say stay off the ROTRL posts.
Still.. If I caught one of my players reading the AP after I asked them specifically not to..Actual quote from our group:
GM *talks about something about the campaign/world*
Player "Yeah, those are really badass, and their secret watchamacallit is just evil"
GM "I TOLD YOU NOT TO READ THAT STUFF!"
Player "I was bored!"
GM *not saying nothing on account of his face falling off his head*
Wow, were you watching from behind the bushes, that was a great Stealth role you made. I never saw you!
That was almost exactly how I found out.
Well, whether you have asked for my wisdom or not, I'm going to spray it in here:
First: Nobody starts perfect. I had one GM that came pretty close, but even he had a learning curve. Thing is, you WILL screw things up.
Sometimes it's small stuff, like overlooking combat reflexes in a BBEG's stat block, so he could have hit that second guy trying to go pas thim. Sometimes, it's bigger stuff, like overlooking the fact that some critter can do a powerful ability only once every X rounds or so. Sometimes, it will be big stuff, like fighting a vampire in broad daylight.
You learn from your mistakes.
But only if you know them. While you might spot a lot of stuff, you will not spot everything. Especially since some things come down to taste.
What I'm aiming for is this: Critique is good. But only constructive critique. "You blow big baby chunks" doesn't help anyone. Putting on a whiny or accusatory tone doesn't help anyone.
As for reading adventures beforehand: I don't like that. I prefer my players not knowing that stuff. But it can work. For example, I ran Rise of the Runelords, and now I'm playing in a Runelords campaign. The GM knew from the start that I knew the adventure. We were all OK with it. I try my best to not let my knowledge get in the way.
But the big thing is that you asked something of them and they just ignored it. That's bad. It shows a lack of respect, and I wouldn't waste my time running a game for people who didn't respect me. I don't know the whole story, only your version, but from what I know I'd stop running games for them, maybe even play in that group altogether, unless they convinced me that they were really sorry.
And one more thing: I might be wrong, but my "deeper issue" radar went off when I read this thread. You don't have to tell me whether there is something more wrong between you people, but you might think about it and see if it's true.
Anyway, talking about it - with the people this is about - is often a very good thing. Maybe they're oblivious...
My deeper issue is I started reading some non-ROTRL posts where I was reading things concerning my game that wern't very pleasing, and not altogether true. There were complaints that I needed to hear maybe, but reading them on these posts wasn't the ideal way. I just didn't want to start a slam fest on the posts(so what do I do? Start a whole thread).
Still.. If I caught one of my players reading the AP after I asked them specifically not to..Actual quote from our group:
GM *talks about something about the campaign/world*
Player "Yeah, those are really badass, and their secret watchamacallit is just evil"
GM "I TOLD YOU NOT TO READ THAT STUFF!"
Player "I was bored!"
GM *not saying nothing on account of his face falling off his head*Wow, were you watching from behind the bushes, that was a great Stealth role you made. I never saw you!
That was almost exactly how I found out.
I fade into the foreground.
I still play with these guys and am playing with them now as a player, and I do enjoy it for the most part, we are all happy with the pathfinder rules. I was just having a hard time figuring out how I felt. Getting over the fealings and so forth.
So you're mostly okay now? Except the part where you sneak in and put hair remover into their shampoo, of course.
I just wanted to know if other people would feel the same way I did. I thought maybe I am making a big deal of nothing.
Well, they read up on stuff they should not have, and they were criticising you. I think it was okay to be pissed.
My deeper issue is I started reading some non-ROTRL posts where I was reading things concerning my game that wern't very pleasing, and not altogether true.
That can ruin one's day. Did you talk to them about this?
1) You could always switch them to a different AP...Korvosa and Riddlesport are pretty close by...
2) I would sit all of the players down and explain to them exactly how you feel and how disrespectful it is of them to do this sort of thing. Tell them that you see it for what it is: CHEATING! Tell them that if it happens again, you'll either stop GMing or kick the offending players out of the group. I have no tolerance for Cheaters.
Be firm. Tell them that this sort of juvenile behavior is not how adults act, especially not adults who are friends. (This might be especially good if the players are in the 15-19 range).
So, instead of viewing this as a case of differing playstyles (one where keeping the plot a secret is important, and the other where simply playing the game is important), you've chosen to view this as a case of cheating?
Their behavior wasn't necessarily cheating or juvenile. Granted, it sounds like they were told to stay away from certain posts, but I'm sure they felt that there was little harm in reading through the previous adventure after they'd already been through it.
Cheating is when you roll the die and call a 1 a 20.
To quote a pretty solid piece of wisdom from Mike Mearls: "If knowledge of a game's plot would spoil its experience, it isn't a game." Your players may be coming at it from this angle. The story is great and all, but underneath the plot and the villains' motivations and the behind-the-scenes scheming, you're playing a game. If they're still capable of having fun, then it's simply a matter of differing expectations - NOT cheating.
Cut them off and let them see how fun the game is without a GM.
Seek out some new players who actually want to have fun.
Same goes for this post. You're not in any position to declare that a group of players isn't having fun.
To quote a pretty solid piece of wisdom from Mike Mearls: "If knowledge of a game's plot would spoil its experience, it isn't a game." Your players may be coming at it from this angle. The story is great and all, but underneath the plot and the villains' motivations and the behind-the-scenes scheming, you're playing a game. If they're still capable of having fun, then it's simply a matter of differing expectations - NOT cheating.
You and Mike must be great fun at murder mystery parties.
This part:
I couldn't get them to do anything in town, so it was hard to give them the impression that they were hero's. I could have forced it on them but I don't think you should force them to be town hero's. So any NPC interaction was minor and unfulfilling to me...
So I ask, would any of you keep Running the AP?
No. The rest is DM-Player issues, but if none of them got into it, it's not worth it, in my opinion.
However... you could rerun it perhaps, now that they know. It'd be a challenge on all sides.
|
|
@Scott
Its evident that the GM intended this game to not be the kind of game where the players were supposed to read the plot ahead of time. While its not necessarily cheating, they did purposefully ignore the wishes of the GM in a gaming matter that very well could've ruined their game. I would still say that is not cool in any way shape or form.
Even if they have the best of intentions.
Dumbledore gets deadededed, Snape isn't really a bad guy! The phone call is coming from inside the house!
You and Mike must be great fun at murder mystery parties.
Have you ever been to a murder mystery party where the basics of the plot weren't known? Someone gets murdered! One of the guests did it! Accusations will fly!
If knowledge of an RPG's plot automatically ruined the experience, no one would ever DM.
I run games, and I know the plot in advance (and in full detail!). The fun in the game is seeing how others react. Likewise, even if I'm playing in a game where some of the details of the plot are known, the real fun in the game is in the playing - seeing what others do, what you're capable of doing, and how the DM reacts to your decisions.
If you need more examples, take a look at some of FFG's games. The Arkham Horror is a good one. You know the plot from the get-go. An elder god (you even get to know which elder god!) is shaking things up and trying to enter the world. You have to stop it. That's the plot of the game. Everything else is in the details of playing it.
@Scott
Its evident that the GM intended this game to not be the kind of game where the players were supposed to read the plot ahead of time. While its not necessarily cheating, they did purposefully ignore the wishes of the GM in a gaming matter that very well could've ruined their game. I would still say that is not cool in any way shape or form.
Even if they have the best of intentions.
I'd really like to hear one of the players give their side of the story on this. I really doubt they figured that they would seriously spoil the campaign by reading an adventure they already played through.
** spoiler omitted **
Movies and books are non-interactive. The plot is all there is.
This is different from games. Games have a premise, sure, but that's only a small part of the experience. The meat of any game is its play, and a well-designed game is different every time it's played through. The suspense of the game's premise might be nice for some, but it's certainly not crucial to having a good time playing the game.
Heck, even in non-interactive contexts movies and books are often enjoyable with their plots spoiled. I'd read the Lord of the Rings books all the way through before seeing the movies. That didn't prevent me from enjoying the hell out of them.
|
|
@Scott
Its evident that the GM intended this game to not be the kind of game where the players were supposed to read the plot ahead of time. While its not necessarily cheating, they did purposefully ignore the wishes of the GM in a gaming matter that very well could've ruined their game. I would still say that is not cool in any way shape or form.
Even if they have the best of intentions.
I'd really like to hear one of the players give their side of the story on this. I really doubt they figured that they would seriously spoil the campaign by reading an adventure they already played through.
As would I but it occurs to me if that they agreed not to read threads due to possible spoilers then they are not likely to post in this one either because they promised not to read it or they did read it and them posting would essentially be them confessing they had read the threads.
As would I but it occurs to me if that they agreed not to read threads due to possible spoilers then they are not likely to post in this one either because they promised not to read it or they did read it and them posting would essentially be them confessing they had read the threads.@Scott
Its evident that the GM intended this game to not be the kind of game where the players were supposed to read the plot ahead of time. While its not necessarily cheating, they did purposefully ignore the wishes of the GM in a gaming matter that very well could've ruined their game. I would still say that is not cool in any way shape or form.
Even if they have the best of intentions.
I'd really like to hear one of the players give their side of the story on this. I really doubt they figured that they would seriously spoil the campaign by reading an adventure they already played through.
How ironic. The best opportunity for them to clear their names would actually incriminate them.
Anyway, Two of my players decided that because we were done with B.O. It would be OK to read it. Then discuss how they thought I should have ran it, talk about how they didn't feel like hero's. How the changes were too hard.
I even asked them to stay away from the ROTRL posts. But found out that if it didn't say spoiler it was fair game.
Now they know too much of the story. There is no mystery. Even who the villain is in #2. I feel like I was bad talked on the posts and it was disrespectful to read the AP. So I ask, would any of you keep Running the AP
A couple of questions:
Did they go a head and read the adventure THEN tell you that they read it? Or did you ask them not to read it and they went ahead and read it anyway?
Because if it's the first they were still being DB's but they didnt get an express warning from you that reading the adventure would spoil stuff that was coming later on.
Their critiquing I would just take in stride, then tell them that you'll take their concerns under advisement.
If you dont feel like it's worth running the adventure anymore because there's not mystery then dont run it. I know, for me, a big part of running and playing in an adventure is the unveiling of what comes next.
You asked so I'll tell you: I wouldnt run the rest of the Path for those players. I agree that it was kind of disrespectful. In fact I'd take a break from running anything for that group.
To quote a pretty solid piece of wisdom from Mike Mearls: "If knowledge of a game's plot would spoil its experience, it isn't a game." Your players may be coming at it from this angle. The story is great and all, but underneath the plot and the villains' motivations and the behind-the-scenes scheming, you're playing a game. If they're still capable of having fun, then it's simply a matter of differing expectations - NOT cheating.
That's . . . interesting, especially given the fact that the Dungeon editorial staff has said that releasing an outline for the entire Scales of War AP would ruin the fun for players and GMs.
@Scott
Its evident that the GM intended this game to not be the kind of game where the players were supposed to read the plot ahead of time. While its not necessarily cheating, they did purposefully ignore the wishes of the GM in a gaming matter that very well could've ruined their game. I would still say that is not cool in any way shape or form.
Even if they have the best of intentions.
I'd really like to hear one of the players give their side of the story on this. I really doubt they figured that they would seriously spoil the campaign by reading an adventure they already played through.
I agree that they probably thought it wasn't a big deal. One even said exactly that.
I am playing in a Path DM'd by the other. We have finnished the first part, I don't think I need to be told not to read it. I would also agree that when the path is finnished if they were interested I would loan it to them to read. But, at least wait till it is finnished
OK, so here I am incriminating myself.
Super long, so I'm tucking it into a spoiler. Read at your own risk.
So first things first. I did not read Burnt Offerings cover to cover at all. Not even close. I skipped all the plot summary and avoided anything at the end that might have even looked like it discussed upcoming plot. Truth is, I don't even know if there is anything at the end that does that or not, since I didn't even skim the headers on those pages.
What did I read? The encounter areas we had already visited and my dead PC was never going back to. Nothing else.
Why? Curiosity. I love reading adventures. Gives me ideas for my own. I espcially love reading adventures I've experienced so I can see them from two angles. And I didn't want to wait two years to read it - best when fresh in my mind.
Also, I did feel like that final encounter might have been a deliberate attempt to kill my character. I truly wanted to see how that encounter should have gone, and whether the author really put a monster in a level 4 dungeon that did 137 points of damage to me alone, and almost total 200 HP to the group - that's a ton of damage to inflict on 4th level characters.
I knew I had said some things on a forum the previous week that had bothered the DM, and in our very first encounter after saying those things I have a dead character that took what seemed like an impossible amount of damage for the level this AP was written to challenge. I thought it might have been payback for what I said.
Also, the DM had admitted he felt a little overwhelmed, or a little out of his depth at times, and had asked for our thoughts on how he was doing.
What did I learn from reading the AP? Not much. The encounters we had fought had felt a little flat, and it turns out that a few of them were written to be more dynamic, so I offered advice on how to inject that dynamic atmosphere into the encounters.
Other than that, it was an ordinary adventure with mostly ordinary stuff in it.
The final encounter was a bit ridiculous for the PCs who were expected to face it. And having read the baddie's stats, I still feel it was awfully single-minded and surprisingly deadly. But, now that I've seen it on paper, I realize that the way the fight went, it might have inflicted 137 HP of damage on me without any extra help from the DM.
Why did I critique my DM? Frankly, he'd asked for it. He'd admitted that he there might have been room for improvement. Some of the other players and I agreed that we thought so too, and all of us are DMs, so it seemed like the right thing to do - DMs sharing knowlege and technique and learning from each other, especially since it was invited by this DM.
Should I have read the AP? I still don't know. I didn't think then that the parts I read were a big deal. I still don't. The rest of it, summaries, outlines, continuations, that stuff was off-limits to me and I didn't read it, didn't want to read it.
In fact, now that we've concluded Bastards of Erebus, I'll gladly share the same material (encounters) with the players and they're welcome to read it. No, it's not a "fair is fair" offer of conciliation. Really, I don't care if they read those sections. And I welcome any critique or suggestions they want to offer. I would feel somewhat betrayed if they read the summaries or plot outlines or continuation material, just like I'm sure joecoolives would feel betrayed if I would have read that stuff for Burnt Offerings.
The DM said he asked us not to read the material. I remember it a little differently. He asked us not to read the material specifically so we wouldn't know what was going to happen. I followed that to the letter, and I didn't think reading parts of it that were over and done with broke his rule or violated his trust.
The fact that he created this thread proves that my assumption on that issue was wrong, and for that I'm sorry.
There have been some comments on this thread, even by the DM, that now we know what's going to happen.
I sure don't. Not a bit. Someone said we know who the bad guy in book 2 is, but again, I sure don't. And I don't want to.
In any case, my character is dead. He was a paladin on a mission and he fulfilled it. He saved the town of Sandpoint. He had absolutely zero reason to believe anything else was amiss - every bad guy we knew about was dead, every threat to Sandpoint we had heard of or imagined was eliminated. Metagaming, I know there were 5 more books, but my character didn't know that. He thought his service on Golarion was done and he was happy to spend eternity in Iomedae's loving grace, so he declined to be raised from the dead at the cost of two levels.
Frankly, almost every encounter we had faced was life-of-death in that AP. I don't think we finished more than 20% of our fights with everyone still conscious and on their feet. The thought of going back to level 2 and being the only front-line tank in the next book was purely insane - there was almost no way I could take Burnt Offerings encounters when I was the same level as the rest of the party, I was sure I couldn't do it in Skinsaw when I was two levels behind. And for whatever reason, at the time, nobody at the table had a clue that those levels could be restored (3.5 rules said the one level lost could not be restored, I guess we just carried that assumption into Pathfinder).
So I had the RP reason and the Metagame reason to decline the Raise Dead, though I suppose if I had a do-over on that moment the cleric cast Speak With Dead to ask me to come back, knowing (now) that the levels lost could be restored, I probably would bring him back. Or just if he had a reason, like if we had found out any leads or hints to take us to the Skinsaw chapter, any reason to believe his work wasn't yet done - I would have accepted the Raise for that reason, too.
I don't like having him dead. Especially since he is a Pathfinder incarnation of the novel I am about to have published (I like that character in my novel, and certainly don't want him dead, and it saddens me that he's dead in this other incarnation).
So there, I hope that answers any questions.
Not noobs, not jerks, just players trying to share a shared experience.