The other night our group started playing under a brand new GM. Like the rest of us, he has had years of experience. He is nevertheless new to our group. He opted to host a high-level game beginning at 15th0-level and aiming to get to about 23rd-level.
Long story short: Our characters were tricked into walking through a one-way portal which dropped us on the first layer of the abyss. Our objective has since switched from "tracking down the king's assassin" to "escape the abyss and find our way back to the material plane."
Now, moments after we arrived we deduced what had happened. Not wanting to stay a moment longer than needed, my character opted to cast banishment on one of the other party members to send him back to his home plane while using his bonded item to cast it again on himself (he only had it prepared once). He was also going to mage's magnificent mansion to create a safehouse for the other party members until he could return to rescue them. However, the new GM cut the plan short with "banishment doesn't work since you aren't extraplanar."
Naturally, I disagreed, citing the rules that any creature not on their home plane gained the extraplanar subtype when not on their home plane.
He acknowledged the rule and then made a house rule on the spot to keep us from ruining his "adventure" too early.
Does this seem at all fair to you? Seems like a case of railroading to me, and the control that was taken away from our characters diminishes the fun.
DM wouldn't happen to be named "Stephen" (and hates being called "Steve"), would he? Sounds so terribly similar.
Well, technically the DM decides what is fair, but I totally agree that it was a case of railroading and the DM put his adventure above your fun and ability to think outside the box. He should not have done it.
"It enables you to force extraplanar creatures out of your home plane"
Were you on your home plane? No? Then stop questioning the GM.
What is wrong with a little railroading anyway? Even if you were right, why not sit back and enjoy an adventure rather then rules-lawyer yourself a victory (or rather avoid the whole thing entirely?
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Banishment allows you to force extraplanar creatures out of your home plane (as mentioned in the second line of the spell). Therefore, if you're on the Abyss, you can't use it on yourself. Nor can you use it on ANYTHING. You're not on your home plane.
So your GM was right in not allowing banishment to work as an escape hatch, but for the wrong reason. That said, if you have access to banishment, you probably also have access to plane shift, which WILL let you escape the Abyss easy. If your GM wants to run a specific kind of game like "Escape the Abyss" and wants to not let spells like plane shift work, he needs to tell his PCs BEFORE the campaign begins.
That said, the bait-and-switch tactic of making the players think they're going on one adventure and then taking them on another is a tricky stunt to pull as a GM. Especially if the players really WANT to play the "fake" campaign and really HATE the type of campaign the GM tricked them into playing. GMs should not really try this stunt unless they really know their players, or unless they're prepared for a LOT of resistance from the PCs.
I got swooped on.
Disregard.
"It enables you to force extraplanar creatures out of your home plane"
Were you on your home plane? No? Then stop questioning the GM.
What is wrong with a little railroading anyway? Even if you were right, why not sit back and enjoy an adventure rather then rules-lawyer yourself a victory (or rather avoid the whole thing entirely?
While that is true of Banishment, the spell is based on Dismissal which says;
This spell forces an extraplanar creature back to its proper plane if it fails a Will save. If the spell is successful, the creature is instantly whisked away, but there is a 20% chance of actually sending the subject to a plane other than its own.
That seems to imply you could send yourself back home.
My question is if he was planing on having you trapped in the Abyss....what if you had cast Plane Shift instead? It's the same level as Banishment and hands down would do what you want.
Depending on the maturity of the players, railroading is only "railroading" when the PCs dislike what's being done to them. Otherwise (hopefully) the players can roll with it. I've played and DMed in many games where the plot *needs* to advance and the players are too busy navel-gazing or getting caught up in some minutiae to do it themselves. The trick as I see it is to not get too heavy-handed over it.
I made the mistake of having the PCs in a game I run get arrested after breaking into an evil NPC's mansion. The arrest was merely a cover so the BBEG wouldn't send assassins after them, and this was explained by the friendly NPC doing the arresting. For some reason or another the players are still pissed about it and it's somewhat ruined the authority that NPC should have. Fair enough, I've just got to work around it, but it's a lesson learned nonetheless.
Zo
I do think that this would have been a good time for a little forethought and what I like to call the "GM Screen."
While your PCs are casting their spells and figuring out what's going on, instead of just shooting them down let the fluff do your work.
"As you finish your chanting and cast the spell something goes wrong. Rather then vanishing back to the Material Plane...you stand there."
If you let the PC's think that there's something ingame keeping them from what they want to do they'll say, "Hey I wonder why that didn't work, it totally should have...I wonder how we'll get out of here now and if we can fix that spell!" All without ever knowing the wiser.
Heck, at that level of power, a journey into the Abyss and fighting demons should be a relatively manageable experience. Go for the gusto!
I think the essence of the question here is, is it more important to follow the adventure the GM planned, or to let the players change the adventure through their roleplaying. I understand RavingDork's frustration, since I once played under a GM who would get visibly upset if you acted in a way that would disrupt his plans. My character was a coward, and I tried to jump off a Vampire's airship because I would rather die that way then be on his airship, but because the adventure called for it, the vampire ignored the 4 other players in his way, and just decided to somehow in 6 seconds make it 100 ft and catch me as I jumped....
Having been a GM for a long time myself, I know the worst thing I can do is make up a rule on the spot in order to railroad my players. Surprises are okay, and sometimes the players need to do a thing or two they don't want to, but the best GMs are the ones who make the players feel like they are making the decisions, but are really just making the decisions you wanted them to make in the first place. Give the players what they want enough so that they will decide to do your adventure, don't gank their decision making power.
|
I am confused. I know it is cool to be the wizard with the cool spells, but why would you want to bypass an adventure that your DM plammed which takes you through a cool evil outer plane. Did you have somehitng else to do that night beside Gaming? Trying the spell, Absolutley!! Complaining because it didn't work and you didn;t get to go back home, completley bypassing the whole thing... silly.
I am confused. I know it is cool to be the wizard with the cool spells, but why would you want to bypass an adventure that your DM plammed which takes you through a cool evil outer plane. Did you have somehitng else to do that night beside Gaming? Trying the spell, Absolutley!! Complaining because it didn't work and you didn;t get to go back home, completley bypassing the whole thing... silly.
Maybe they just thought it was part of a trap meant to inconvenience them. Rather then the leading into a whole new adventure.
I could see that as being a good reason for trying to figure out how to get home and in fact would commend them for a rather ingenious solution for getting the story back on track...except they unknowingly wanted to go back to the wrong story. Not their fault really.
...did you otherwise have fun?
Well, yeah. I suppose we did. I let the GM know that I wasn't happy with his ruling, but aside from that, I made a point of not disrupting the game further.
The only other thing that I didn't like was that it seemed to me to be much more like hell than the abyss. We found our way to a bazaar of the bizarre (so to speak) and found ourselves doing "get this/do this for me" mini-missions in order to get information. Everything leads to something else, but no roads seem to lead home. What's more, everything involves a contract that when forfeit, costs your soul.
In game and out, the GM keeps reminding us that if it was as simple as finding an item or spellcaster for hire, than every demon with coin would be using it/him to get to the material plane as well. Sadly, we weren't expecting the abyssal adventure and have no means of our own of returning.
As such, we are somewhat at a loss of what to do next. I'm thinking at this rate we are just going to have to adventure until we level up and learn plane shift.
Aren't demons supposed to try and steal your soul rather than bargain for it like devils? I always figured a romp through the abyss would simply be a long string of horrifying encounters/battles until one is able to escape the carnivorous soul-eating demons.
The odd feel of it all is the only other complaint I have. Aside from that, the GM really shows his experience well.
|
I am confused. I know it is cool to be the wizard with the cool spells, but why would you want to bypass an adventure that your DM plammed which takes you through a cool evil outer plane. Did you have somehitng else to do that night beside Gaming? Trying the spell, Absolutley!! Complaining because it didn't work and you didn;t get to go back home, completley bypassing the whole thing... silly.Maybe they just thought it was part of a trap meant to inconvenience them. Rather then the leading into a whole new adventure.
I could see that as being a good reason for trying to figure out how to get home and in fact would commend them for a rather ingenious solution for getting the story back on track...except they unknowingly wanted to go back to the wrong story. Not their fault really.
And even if the players realise that tonight’s session is intended to see them traipsing through the Abyss, the characters have pressing business back on the material plan (tracking down the king’s assassin), so would realistically make all efforts to get back.
|
|
Maybe they just thought it was part of a trap meant to inconvenience them. Rather then the leading into a whole new adventure.I could see that as being a good reason for trying to figure out how to get home and in fact would commend them for a rather ingenious solution for getting the story back on track...except they unknowingly wanted to go back to the wrong story. Not their fault really.
I caould see that, and looking for ways back home would be perfect. But complaining that the spell didn't work the way he thought it would, is kinda counter productive. I am of mixed mind on how the GM should have handled it. according to the spell he was right. If it had been a spell that should have worked, then he could have used a previous poster's idea. (Cast spell, notta). IT would probably be best too if he gave them a clue what to do now, or why leaving is so hard, so they at least know what to work for.
A trap meant to inconvenience them? Aren't plots suppossed to have setbacks?
That's one way to describe it. Let me try an example of what I mean.
Say you have a room in the middle of a dungeon, and it's filled with a magic circle. The party enters the room and starts looking around to figure out what's up. Someone triggers the trap and it sends them to the abyss. Queue the Pokemon fight music, the screen goes swirly, and they kill a bad guy. The wizard says, "Well this is annoying, plane shift." They return to the Material Plane and teleport back into that room to continue their adventure.
That would be a trap of inconvenience. It's just an encounter, not the door to a whole new story.
Edit: I'm just commenting on why it would be a valid idea to try and escape ASAP. Not about the spell not working. One could chalk that up to a bump in the road for a new group/GM.
The fact that the characters find themselves in an alien environment and their abilities are somewhat hindered is part of the scenario.
I don't think that's railroading or unfair, that's just part of the story and they should play along.
That's not more railroading than giving an artefact to a halfling or sending a farmer boy to save a galaxy.
I am not talking about the original poster specifically, but the common protesting against "railroading" is a bit annoying and juvenile...
A trap meant to inconvenience them? Aren't plots suppossed to have setbacks?That's one way to describe it. Let me try an example of what I mean.
Say you have a room in the middle of a dungeon, and it's filled with a magic circle. The party enters the room and starts looking around to figure out what's up. Someone triggers the trap and it sends them to the abyss. Queue the Pokemon fight music, the screen goes swirly, and they kill a bad guy. The wizard says, "Well this is annoying, plane shift." They return to the Material Plane and teleport back into that room to continue their adventure.
That would be a trap of inconvenience. It's just an encounter, not the door to a whole new story.
Edit: I'm just commenting on why it would be a valid idea to try and escape ASAP. Not about the spell not working. One could chalk that up to a bump in the road for a new group/GM.
I think part of it DOES have to do with what the players want to do too.
Sometimes, as a GM, especially with a new group of players, you can misjudge the kind of adventure they want to play. And if they have no incentive to go to the abyss, why force them (though let them deal with consequences, so that if they let evil go on, then things happen).
And especially as a new GM, where you do need to set up some sort of turst and level of rules discussion, ou should't pull a fast one on the players in their first adventure.
I'd never trust him again. Because this does sound a bit like a power trip. (And I've played with GMs who do get upset if you dont follow their storyline...)
But complaining that the spell didn't work the way he thought it would, is kinda counter productive.
Let me make one thing clear: I was not "complaining that the spell didn't work like I thought it would." I was informing the GM that he had the rules wrong.
In that regard, I was absolutely right. He did have the rules wrong. He then house-ruled (needlessly as it turns out) that the spell would not work on us because, as he put it, the extraplanar type was not some temporary condition.
I made a rules mistake of my own when I missed that the spell can only be cast on my home plane. That, however, has nothing to do with this thread (which is about whether or not the way the GM behaved was fair).
Now, since we aren't likely to find anyone with the power to send us home via plane shift or similar plane-hopping magic, I would have had a mind to find a native who could cast dismissal or banishment. That however, won't work due to our GM's unfair house rule--even though finding such an individual and getting them to help us would be an adventure in its own right.
I think he should have known better than to try and trap such high level characters. Unless he comes up with a house rule against gate or plane shift it will be a short campaign.
I would assume since he is an experienced DM, he will know he can't keep you there(assuming no more house rules), and this is a small part of a bigger mission.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... but the common protesting against "railroading" is a bit annoying and juvenile...
The thought that the DM shouldn't be called on it when he isn't prepared for what the party can do and didn't realize his "plot" or "story" had holes in its concept the size of which a tarresque could escape throug is annoying.
This party has several ways it could have already been home (if they knew what they were doing) and the DM wouldn't have been prepared for any of them from the sounds of it. He didn't present a situation and let the party solve it (what a DM is supposed to do) he presented a situation and then continued to force the situation despite party solutions... in effect saying "You have to play by the rules and I don't, cause this is what I want"
This goes for any situation a DM could present... if you throw a curve ball and the party hits it back be ready for it with something other than "It doesn't work."
That line is amateur hour.
Sometimes people make mistakes. And sometimes the best thing to do is accepting it and ignore it/roll with it because otherwise it breaks the flow.
The thought that the DM shouldn't be called on it when he isn't prepared for what the party can do and didn't realize his "plot" or "story" had holes in its concept the size of which a tarresque could escape throug is annoying.
Hey I'm always good with a "Hey guys, for the sake of the adventure I need to tell you I flubbed up and forgot you could do that... could you lay off of it for the time being please so we can continue with this?"
Which is completely different from,
DM: "It doesn't work."
Player points out, "Yes it does."
DM: "I house rule it doesn't work."
I would play out my frustrations with the situation in character, could lead to some interesting role-playing encounters, and it's a reminder to the GM that you do have other things in the game that you still believe to be important. Don't be immature about the role-playing, just try to make it realistic.
Maybe your character has decided he doesn't want to remember anything about this trip so he does his best to stay drunk the whole time. i could see this being quite funny if a member of my group did it. There is always a way to make even the worst in game situation fun.
Also, for all you know when you do find your way back to the material plane, your GM could decide that no time has passed while you were in the abyss.
Ultimately my suggestion is just run with it and turn the situation into something fun for you and your group.
***confused face***
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
https://sites.google.com/site/thewayofwicked/house-rules
These are my GM new house rules
are you ravingdorks DM??
Otherwise why Necro this SIX YEAR OLD thread?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or... Novel idea here... Accept that BOTH you and the DM are imperfect beings. Keep playing the game, since you OBVIOUSLY know the DM doesn't want you to escape with a PC skill you instead stop trying to fight the DM and accept that the only way out is to find one (that is likely part of the story) and have fun with the journey.But complaining that the spell didn't work the way he thought it would, is kinda counter productive.Let me make one thing clear: I was not "complaining that the spell didn't work like I thought it would." I was informing the GM that he had the rules wrong.
In that regard, I was absolutely right. He did have the rules wrong. He then house-ruled (needlessly as it turns out) that the spell would not work on us because, as he put it, the extraplanar type was not some temporary condition.
I made a rules mistake of my own when I missed that the spell can only be cast on my home plane. That, however, has nothing to do with this thread (which is about whether or not the way the GM behaved was fair).
Now, since we aren't likely to find anyone with the power to send us home via plane shift or similar plane-hopping magic, I would have had a mind to find a native who could cast dismissal or banishment. That however, won't work due to our GM's unfair house rule--even though finding such an individual and getting them to help us would be an adventure in its own right.
Or you notice the thread is a necro, that it had died over six years ago, and that before Abaraii's post the last post had been on Mar 9, 2010, at 07:47 pm? And on that note, I'm out of here. Laters
2 things...
1) Demons totally act like that...unless you are playing 4th ed. The demon types succubus and glaberzu prove my point.
2) I find you of all people complaining about a railroading GM to be ironic considering stories you have told about your campaigns.
I wasn't complaining. I was the one saying to just go with it.2 things...
1) Demons totally act like that...unless you are playing 4th ed. The demon types succubus and glaberzu prove my point.
2) I find you of all people complaining about a railroading GM to be ironic considering stories you have told about your campaigns.
Sorry both comments was directed at Ravingdork. Who did not think demons can not be more than mindless killing machines and who has started threads with him strongly railroading his PCs and when they go off script tries to punish them for it. I should have been clearer.
I'd say the GM made a mistake. It happens.
While the players shouldn't actively strive to completely bypass what the GM had in stores for the session (otherwise risking an extremely short or hollow session as he is forced to improvise), the GM should also plan in consequence of avoiding the PCs having really obvious and logical ways of avoiding it. In this case, the PCs probably shouldn't try to take the quickest and cheesiest shortcut available, but on the other hand the GM should really have reflected ahead of time on the fact that the PCs are powerful enough for interplanar travel. "Yes, you have an obvious and easy solution to my problem, but I won't allow you to use it" is frustrating and to be avoided as much as possible.
I'm having fun reading that house rules doc Abraii linked (well, didn't, here's the linkified version).
Particularly some of the multiclassing "changes".