Any more you care to add?
At the end of an adventure you just say, "And you wake up realizing it was all a dream. No experience or loot for anyone!"
Any more you care to add?At the end of an adventure you just say, "And you wake up realizing it was all a dream. No experience or loot for anyone!"
That would be a dead dm.
Mal, just to be clear,
1) your posts do indeed read as if you are opposed to GMs restricting player's option with their characters' activities.
This is interesting. Please quote me where I do say that, just so I know you're not just making things up.
Anyway, only to make it clear..again: I'm against DMs taking away control of player characters from the player.
2) your tone has escalated so that you are now insulting people who play with a different style than yours.
If you're trying to be insulting, then, hey, it's the internet, go make yourself some enemies. If that's not what you're trying for, then I'd recommend you (a) back up and apologize, and then (b) re-engage with a more polite attitude.
I didn't insult anyone, so please stop with your condescending attitude and focus on the topic.
It would be a threadjack to ask, but I'm wondering: was there a particular bad experience you had with enchantment spells, or is this a general opinion you have formed based on your group's play style?
No, its something I learned from playing and DMing in various groups with different kinds of players.
On topic: restricting characters' stuff. "No, you're going to the opera; you can't go armed or armored."
Reading comprehension fail. This whole discussion was clearly focused ... again... on DMs taking away control of player characters from the player with charm or domination spells.
|
At the end of an adventure you just say, "And you wake up realizing it was all a dream. No experience or loot for anyone!"
We had that happen to our group once. It was some kind of "dream tree" and it was a good thing too, otherwise we would have been looking at a TPK.
I'm also partial to all the suggestions of requiring random rolls and writing down the results. Frankly, random perception checks is the only way to make the party get nervous sometimes.
Back to basics of how to be a bastage and a DM at the same time:
- Everytime a player talks with ANY NPC, make him roll both Sense Motive and Bluff. Then put on your best poker face while the metagamer of the group tries to convince the other players that the town's baker may be the villain they are looking for.
- The final encounter is going to end. When they are going to get the treasure chest an invisible devil that was readying Plane Shift makes himself visible while he goes away with all the gold and items for that character level. "It is an adventure hook" you say.
If it's at all possible for an object that a character is hiding in to be stolen (e.g. chest, wagon, ship, dinosaur stomach...) then make sure it is.
Of course, the extreme of this happened to a friend of mine when a halfling master thief once stole the barrel he was hiding in... without it's contents
|
|
On on occasion I had a lot of fun with a pair of brothers, a bunch of alchemical items, some chains, cloaks, and lots of moaning. They played the role of high-level undead.
They had most of the group convinced for the first half of the fight, and my brother who was playing had to be convinced (in real life) they weren't undead once they had been defeated. Sometimes playing on the party's expectations works really well.
I think my best screw with the players moment.
The players were around level 10. On of the players was playing a druid, when they came across a church of fellow believers who were being killed one by one by a pair of twin sister assassins.
Every time the players came up with a plan to better protect the followers, one or another of the followers would argue against them.
"Who put you in charge?"
"How do we know you're not the ones responsible?"
and so on.
It all came to a head when the assassins finally went after the PC to get them out of the way. At that moment, it all clicked. The assassins had been hiding amid the followers and were the ones working against the PC plans by working to make everyone mistrust the players.
So after the battle, one PC lay dead by a poison that prevented resurection, and so did one of the assassins. The remaining assassin parlayed with the PCs offering the antidote for the body of her sister. The players eventually refused, but not after a lot of hand wringing.
I know a good one :D Invented it with my GM and it messed up the whole group:
We tought it would be fun to introduce my character (a healer) trough another one, female dwarfen barbarian.
What the group didn't know, was that the healer was the slave (mental control) of the barbarian, and after 1-2 sessions I ambushed them, because I had to kill them.
The healer was supposed to be freed afterwards, and come to the group.
However, my barbarian killed over half of the group, and the game was ruined. The players never trusted a PC again. ...
another DM was a hell of a lot worse. Our party consisted mainly of casters, so he decided that he liked the times of trouble campaign. And so for over a year, cleric-spells over lvl 0 weren't available, because the gods were gone, and arcane spells had a 99% of failing, transforming us into women, wolves, or just exploding in our faces. This % most likely varied as the GM liked our spells. When I fooled around, they always failed, when my fellow caster, casted a fireball at the goblins, it always worked ...
and for these ideas, you could specify if you want screw the players in a bad or good way. My two examples are the worst.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I didn't insult anyone, so please stop with your condescending attitude and focus on the topic.
Calling someone "a bad GM" is insulting, Mal. I'm not trying to be condescending; I'm trying to be friendly.
Reading comprehension fail.
What you mean to say is "I didn't read it the same way."
This whole discussion was clearly focused ... again... on DMs taking away control of player characters from the player with charm or domination spells.
I didn't read it the same way. So far as I can tell, the thread is about tools DMs can use, to keep a level of wariness, excitement, and paranoia in their games. In the original post, a couple of the examples were about enchantment spells cast on the PCs, but the topic began more broadly than that, and continues in that wider vein.
On topic: Role-playing merchants who might not have the party's best intentions at heart. This is tricky, since the advice in the 1st Edition DMG can be read to use virtually every NPC interaction to mess with the PCs.
But used judiciously, and with fair warning to the players, setting the "magic shop merchant" or "general store clerk" against the party can incite a good level of panic. Rot-grub-infested saddles.
Heh. Personally, aside from many of the options listed above, to occasionally throw in an item that seems WAY above what the party should get at that level. In fact, I was playing an AP last night where the party found a cache that had items that were very useful but made them balk in fear for the upcoming encounters.
"Why are we getting that scroll of heal at fifth level? Oh crap!"
Potions or scrolls of restoration are AWESOME for this level of paranoia. Even though by their nature they can counter the danger. Heh.
Try to do something nice...
Then, on a sheer tactics level, separate the party (a wall of ice can do the trick nicely).
As for the charm/suggestion 'debate' as long as the player is still playing the character, then he still has choices. One of my first gaming experiences as a ten year old ended when my cousins probably got tired of me playing with them so they had my character possessed by a cloak. That was un-fun.
Some of the most fun was when a character was encouraged by a charm or suggestion spell to do something, and then I had to figure out how to do it. I've found that sometimes shy roleplayers can be brought out of their shell because they have some idea what to do at that point.
To quote/paraphrase a good movie: "He doesn't need help. He needs obstacles so that maybe he can trip over it and land on his goal."
If you think that taking control away from the player is bad DMing, then I hope you never paralyze or knock them unconscious because that's worlds worse than charm or suggestion.
On an aside, sometimes in my game when a PC gets knocked down or out, they get to control an NPC. It works well.
Calling someone "a bad GM" is insulting, Mal. I'm not trying to be condescending; I'm trying to be friendly.
But I didn't. There's a difference between stating my opinion on what constitutes good or bad DMing and saying 'you're a bad DM'.
What you mean to say is "I didn't read it the same way."
No, not at all. I wrote what I wanted to say. If you have trouble understanding my posts, I can try to explain it more clearly and verbosely for you. Just tell me which post you need help with.
This whole discussion was clearly focused ... again... on DMs taking away control of player characters from the player with charm or domination spells.I didn't read it the same way. So far as I can tell, the thread is about tools DMs can use, to keep a level of wariness, excitement, and paranoia in their games.
While you are right about the whole thread, it's pretty obvious that my own as well as some other comments were a discussion of ...again... 'DM's taking control of player characters'. Rereading the thread with this in mind might help you clear up some of the confusion.
As for the charm/suggestion 'debate' as long as the player is still playing the character, then he still has choices. One of my first gaming experiences as a ten year old ended when my cousins probably got tired of me playing with them so they had my character possessed by a cloak. That was un-fun.
I can imagine.
Some of the most fun was when a character was encouraged by a charm or suggestion spell to do something, and then I had to figure out how to do it. I've found that sometimes shy roleplayers can be brought out of their shell because they have some idea what to do at that point.
But it encourages meta-gaming, since the character would see everything with the charm glasses on, since:
The spell does not enable you to control the charmed person as if it were an automaton, but it perceives your words and actions in the most favorable way. You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do. (Retries are not allowed.) An affected creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders, but it might be convinced that something very dangerous is worth doing. Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the charmed person breaks the spell. You must speak the person's language to communicate your commands, or else be good at pantomiming.
A character who can understand and subvert the charmer's influence would have made the will save or the later charisma check, and if he didn't, he won't subvert. And anything stronger would break the spell immediately.
If you think that taking control away from the player is bad DMing, then I hope you never paralyze or knock them unconscious because that's worlds worse than charm or suggestion.
You obviously didn't read the whole thread, so...yeah.
Some rules quotes and some mildly condescending statements.
You are also seeming to miss the very beginning of the d20 quote: "The spell does not enable you to control the charmed person as if it were an automaton."
I have a feeling I'm 'arguing' with someone for the sake of arguing, but you don't have to 'subvert' to roleplay being charmed. Being charmed can be just as much and as little a roleplaying strait jacket as being a dwarf, elf, tall, short, male, female, good, evil, rich, poor or any other character trait any more than dungeon walls keep people from moving in any direction they want to go. In fact, it can be a lot of fun to be conflicted vs. helping your new found friend and your other friends. In real life we often have to appease conflicting interests (work and family, the law and fun, the DM and the players), and in a roleplaying context this can be a ton of fun for charmer and charmee to figure out. A good DM/villain/enchanter will try to word his charmee so that the statements don't mess around with his beliefs.
It can be fun as a player (not a character) to mess around with the party, to negotiate with the DM what is and isn't against the character's beliefs, to try to hide your new affections (if that's the way it's played). I've seen charmed characters, stop fights entirely by making the party not attack the bad guy, and then the other players use the time to prepare for the final confrontation, even when they realize what's going on with the player.
It can be played for fun (i.e. when a character drinks a philter of love thinking it's a healing or buff potion, and then falls in love with another party member) or it can be deadly serious.
As for suggestions, those can have much the same effect. The player can try to figure out how to 'subvert' the suggestion (by following the letter and not the spirit), but even if you say they can't, it creates a choice, if not for that player then for the other ones. Do they help/hinder the character? What do they do to prevent his actions?
In both cases, combat scenarios are immediately created that force players to work out different tactics than 'hack away until everything's dead.'
If a party member is fighting against you, then you will probably attempt to use non-lethal tactics. Often times, clerics will have a hold person spell set up for just such a problem. The party member may or may not work the same way (non-lethally protecting the bad guy).
As far as I can see, yes, it 'restricts' player options, but no more than any usual encounter, ability, trait or function, and less than some (i.e. paralysis, unconsciousness, ability damage, save or die, etc.)
On the contrary, it opens up NEW options for player actions and choices for players to act. Charmed characters aren't mindlessly following orders, they're just forced to consider the wise counsel of their new friend as reasonable and a good idea. They get to think. And often times in new ways, which usually means variety, laughs and enjoyment all around.
As for encouraging metagaming, it doesn't 'have' to. Yes, the player might know the character is charmed, but the player doesn't have to act like he knows. But then again, maybe he does! Character choices either way! In fact, they have options that other players might not have!
In the end is the old caveat that you may not enjoy them, so don't use them. There's a lot of things that I didn't like at first that ended up being really fun when used in the game. Try looking at it in a different way. As I said, and which you seem to neglect reading, is that there are far more thorough ways to take away player control that are used far more often (paralysis, unconsciousness, death, etc.) and those seem to be 'OK'.
Ahem, and yes, I read the thread, it was about how to mess with players, not about how charm and suggestion takes control away from the characters. Especially since in many cases they explicitly do not, again, per your quote above from d20pfsrd.
Some rules quotes and some mildly condescending statements.I have a feeling I'm 'arguing' with someone for the sake of arguing
Thanks for calling me condescending and a troll. Please forgive me if I just ignore the insults and stay on topic.
It can be fun as a player (not a character) to mess around with the party, to negotiate with the DM what is and isn't against the character's beliefs
As for encouraging metagaming, it doesn't 'have' to. Yes, the player might know the character is charmed, but the player doesn't have to act like he knows.
Yeah, great fun for everyone when the DM and the charmed player negotiate about the character's belief system. This also doesn't destroy immersion, at all.
Are you serious?
As I said, and which you seem to neglect reading, is that there are far more thorough ways to take away player control that are used far more often (paralysis, unconsciousness, death, etc.) and those seem to be 'OK'.
I stated my opinion on this in posts 4, 11, 22, 26 and 27 of this thread.
As I said, and which you seem to neglect reading, is that options that take away control of the character from a player are unfun. Daze, paralysis and such much more than enchantments, even. You would know that already had you actually read the thread...
Mal/Mak - would you like to stop the blatant threadjack now? Pretty please? The original thread topic was much more fun.
Mal/Mak - would you like to stop the blatant threadjack now? Pretty please? The original thread topic was much more fun.
How could I resist a request from a satyr with a mug of beer. I'll shut up :)
Since we're back to the topic, give your players resources to build a stronghold/keep, and then run a party of evil adventurers through it with them defending.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
Or have them generate some evil adventurers and run them through "a keep" ... which is populated with hirelings and rumoured to hold the treasure of "some goody-two-shoes priest or wizard or something."
Then back to the normal PCs who come back home from a hard day's adventuring to find...
Or have them generate some evil adventurers and run them through "a keep" ... which is populated with hirelings and rumoured to hold the treasure of "some goody-two-shoes priest or wizard or something."
Then back to the normal PCs who come back home from a hard day's adventuring to find...
That's too delicious... especially since now the PCs have to likely go up against the lovingly min/maxed-- excuse me... "optimized" characters the players have created. It's beautiful when it all works out like that.
give the greedy girl PC who made her character "perfect" cursed items that cause gender reversal and body hair to grow an inch every half hour, that one was fun : )
ask a random player in a stage whisper "Now you were the one that was going to turn on the party right?" when they feverishly disagree say "oh then it must have been...(mumble and look around the group)....oh yeah!"
|
-Introduce technology from an era that the PC's have no chance of getting to work, like a VCR or a Blender. The trick is not to describe the item as what it is but by its qualities.
"On top of the altar you see a black rectangular box, upon closer inspection you can tell that it has a thin sheet of metal surrounding some heavy internal components. There is a hole with another metal flap that is ingeniously articulated with a spring to close when no pressure is applied. When you shake it you hear a slight plinking noise on the inside and you can see some gears, cogs, and more metal on the inside. Coming out of the back of it is a metal wire that is pulled taut and disappears into the floor."
This one is a role-playing challenge, but a great one to mess with your pcs that have high sense motive checks and/or detect lie...An NPC who *always* tells a lie with every statement, using just enough truth and lie mixed together to make it impossible to tell either way.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
-Introduce technology from an era that the PC's have no chance of getting to work, like a VCR or a Blender. The trick is not to describe the item as what it is but by its qualities.
"On top of the altar you see a black rectangular box, upon closer inspection you can tell that it has a thin sheet of metal surrounding some heavy internal components. There is a hole with another metal flap that is ingeniously articulated with a spring to close when no pressure is applied. When you shake it you hear a slight plinking noise on the inside and you can see some gears, cogs, and more metal on the inside. Coming out of the back of it is a metal wire that is pulled taut and disappears into the floor."
Storytime!
Me: They see you charging and calmly point staves of iron and wood, with strange inlays at you.
Him: I keep charging.
Me: *Rolls dice* There's a crack of thunder and a cloud of blueish grey smoke. You take 24 points of damage.
Him: Oh $#!% they have guns!
Later in the same game, they're raiding the church, killing the Pope's Swiss guard, by using silence to cover their screams. The knight's one shot attempt to kill one of the guards fails.
Me: He fumbles back, blood pouring from the wound, flailing about he grabs a metal and wood wand from the nightstand, pointing it at you.
Him: We're in a silence spell. No command words.
Me: There's a puff of smoke and you feel like a hammer hit you in the chest. Take 8 points of damage.
Him: I hate you.
- When a player states what his character is going to do, look at the player with a slightly worried face and ask: "Are you sure?"
- Pick up one of the character sheets, look at it intently, roll a random die, give the character sheet back to the player and comment: "You notice nothing in particular".
- This one works well when PCs have one particular NPC to whom they always go for advice, or whom they trust and tell a lot of secrets to: introduce a new NPC and present him/her as an authority of some sorts (at higher levels avatars of gods work well for this) and them let him comment that NPC soandso is not really a trustworthy source, or has an agenda of his own, or cannot be trusted at all. Then enjoy the panic on the PCs' faces.
- I once gave a sorcerer a chihuahua as familiar. Because players are not used to a familiar which is not in the rulebooks, I got them guessing for about 9 levels until they grasped what was going on. They soon deducted that the chihuahua was not a pet, but what was he? Speculations ran from the polymorphed leader of the local thieves' guild to a creepy puppet master monster which was dominating and manipulating the sorcerer. Such fun!
- Introduce an enemy NPC whom they can capture and question (with discern lies, zone of truth, etc.). However, this NPC has been told lies too, and believes them to be the truth.
- I once kept a recurring enemy alive for 20 levels, because the PCs "knew" that he was meant to play an important role in fulfilling a prophecy. Of course he was a nuisance. However, the PCs outwitted me in the end by putting a lot of effort in converting this person from CE to N. They made this so convincing that they succeeded.
29. enervation
30. Sunder their stuff
It's very funny, because with some small exceptions, most PCs would -never- use Sunder on the bad guys. They want to harvest and sell the bad guys' stuff, after all.
* When the party is composed of good aligned characters and some jackass takes the Chaotic Evil Wizard or Rogue: Helm of Opposite Alignment (or such) ASAP.
* The party founds a cursed artifact, the inteligent item tells 'em that it will unveil his true power when they reach Level X or they travel to place Y in the plane Z. All is a lie, after a few levels the party realize that the only thing they have is a Cursed Item.
give the greedy girl PC who made her character "perfect" cursed items that cause gender reversal and body hair to grow an inch every half hour, that one was fun : )
ask a random player in a stage whisper "Now you were the one that was going to turn on the party right?" when they feverishly disagree say "oh then it must have been...(mumble and look around the group)....oh yeah!"
This one I didn't do on purpose, but by luck in Ravenloft the one character who actually cared a lot about their looks was the one that contracted mummy rot.
Your post made me think that something similar might have to happen to my daughter's 20 Charisma sorceress. :)
1. Actual roleplaying
2. Swim checks
3. Encumbrance
4. Believable illusions
5. Random magic item generation for towns and cities
6. Random encounter tables
7. Red Herring plotlines
8. Acrobatics checks
9. Exhaustion
10. Suggestion & Charm spells
Any more you care to add?
Anyone want to make Belzig's journal part of a low-level treasure find and send the characters in their mid-levels off to Belkzen?
After the party defeats the three vampires, they track them to their hidden crypt. In there, they find three coffins. They raise one of the lids and see a vampire and get ready to stake it when ...
Yeah, I did that and the party was pretty surprised.
After the party defeats the three vampires, they track them to their hidden crypt. In there, they find three coffins. They raise one of the lids and see a vampire and get ready to stake it when ...
** spoiler omitted **
Yeah, I did that and the party was pretty surprised.
Ooh, that's a cool one.
In an Epic Game my party went to Sigil, they went down into a dwelling made in the ground (in the ruined part of the city). But all was made by mimics, the walls, the tables, the roof, it was a surprise but unfortunatelly the epic druid used some shapeable spell against the horde of epic mimics.
After the party defeats the three vampires, they track them to their hidden crypt. In there, they find three coffins. They raise one of the lids and see a vampire and get ready to stake it when ...
** spoiler omitted **
Yeah, I did that and the party was pretty surprised.
Ohh I Like This one may I borrow it
Though try this on, Worlds largest (waste of Time {the adventure not the encounter}) Dungeon encounter a Mimic inside a Gelatinous Cube:) the rest of the adventure Not so much :p
Yeah, great fun for everyone when the DM and the charmed player negotiate about the character's belief system. This also doesn't destroy immersion, at all.
Are you serious?
Well, if the DM and the player sit at the table and start a long debate about the intricasies of a character's belief system in regards to a spell, then you are both in need of some improvement at the table.
First, if the DM allows the debate to carry on, then they are responsible for pretty much ruining the fun of the rest of the players at the table. The player also needs to be responsible enough to realize that it is a part of the encounter's challenge and that he/ she should not over react. Make a ruling, be fair and take the character's personality and beliefs that they have demonstrated up to that point into consideration. Then throw that crap out the window. It's called a "will save" and they obviously failed it. The game mechanics may allow them to ignore the effects of the spell. Plus, if you have them do something out of the realm of what they would perceive as acceptable behavior for that character, they usually get an additional bonus to the save. It is a game of challenges that should be overcome. Good players welcome the challenge and good DMs do not abuse the rules or mechanics within the game.
Secondly, eliminating anything that causes a loss of control is using kid gloves to the extreme. Yes, you are correct in that the DM is far more powerful, but the players should not ever have a "get out of jail free" card in regards to a specific range of abilities that can be used against them. They would not memorize spells that can be beneficial in those situations. Since they don't need to do that, you are making their choices easier in the end and in the long run failing to challenge them appropriately.
Third, these spells are easy to overcome. Pro from evil anyone? Break enchantment? Remove curse? Freedom of movement? Dispel/ Greater dispel magic? Really, there are ways to counter the controlling spells of Pathfinder. It is not that hard.
Fourth, you are limiting the capabilities of the monsters by taking this course of action. A vampires dominate ability should be used whenever possible. These creatures are hard to combat, even to a seasoned player. Nerfing your bad guys and having players not worry about their full range of powers because they are aware of your gaming style imbalances encounters in favor of the players to a ridiculous level of gaming. Players have plenty of power, spells, magic items and skills at their disposal to handle it so let them.
Trust is a very important factor at any game table. The DM should always strive to have their players trust that they will advocate a game in a fair and entertaining manner while not abusing the rules and mechanics and the DM should trust that the players will not cheat or disrupt the fun at the table in any way. Everyone is present to have fun and I don't think that eliminating "control" abilities is fun. But if your players think it is then more power to them. In the end that is what gaming is all about, is fun.
I love a good double cross, but it's difficult to pull off without being cheesy or obvious. I managed to do it once, and the results were amazing. You can only really do it once in a campaign, otherwise the player's will distrust every single npc they come across for the remainder of your games.
In a campaign I ran once, the Duelist player in the party had an arch-nemesis who was a fencer/notorious criminal. This villain had a Tiefling Rogue cohort.
In the player's first encounter with this villain, they easily overwhelm her and she escapes, leaving the rogue to be dealt with by the pc's. The rogue cries out in disbelief at her bosses betrayal, and surrenders to the pc's, defeated.
As they take her prisoner, she is overcome with grief and anger at having been abandoned by the villain. During their trek to the next village, she confides in the pc's about how she's been abandoned by everyone she ever cared about, and would love to get revenge on the villain for her betrayal. The player's took interest in this, and she lends them her services as a skilled rogue(the party was without one). Soon, the tiefling rogue is accepted as full-fledged party member, and assists them in gathering intel, hooking them up with contacts, and general rogue-ery.
Fast forward to many game sessions later, the players track down the villain, and they are giddy with excitement as they are ready to close the chapter, and turn their rogue ally loose on her former leader. The rogue spends three rounds "getting into position", moves in to flank, and just as the main Duelist pc is about to take down the villain, the rogue delivers a Death Attack on the pc! She was an assassin the whole time!
She had spent all those weeks getting close to the pc's, and leading them to the villain, just to strike them down in a show of loyalty to the villain. The pc survived the Death Attack, but needless to say, everyone were pretty pissed(in game)...
One of the players later even said; "Dude, she was a tiefling rogue... How did we not see this coming?"
Everyone had a good time, but this is one of those "cheap shots" you can really only pull very rarely in a campaign. Once is good fun, but more than that is just ass-hattery.
After the party defeats the three vampires, they track them to their hidden crypt. In there, they find three coffins. They raise one of the lids and see a vampire and get ready to stake it when ...
** spoiler omitted **
Yeah, I did that and the party was pretty surprised.
Wow! That's pretty awesome!
|
-Give your PCs meaningless stimuli after crossing some threshold. A player might just as well be suffering from some incurable disease or curse as they are to suffer a headache for apparently no reason they will think. Panic should soon arrive when the barbarians skill starts to peel off in large sections leaving raw tender patches. Should have used sunscreen or put on a shirt.
In my own games, there's never a villain, but always just people with different goals, with loose or strong affiliations to some factions. Lawful good NPCs might be idealists with good intentions, but to rule a city, a neutral evil necromancer might be the better choice. He might not care for other people, but it is in his self-interest to see that the city he governs does well. And control over undead might be a factor should the neighbors decide to invade or raid...
In the first game I ever ran, when I was 13 or 14, the main town was a strict theocracy, and every now and then, there were public human sacrifice rituals 'to keep the demons at bay'. There were also rebels who wanted to remove the priests from power and insisted that the whole demons story was just a trick. And some paladins or so wanted to stop the killing. Well.. the players decided to ignore many of the hints and clues and decided to stop the sacrifices, but didn't follow up on the quests what would have allowed them to banish or otherwise deal with the demons. At the end, the priest cult was destroyed, but the town was ravaged by demons and everyone was worse off than before.
While this is not exactly messing with the players, it keeps them on their toes. I really like these ambiguous situations where there's never a 'absolute' right choice. All decisions should have both positive and negative effects, in varying proportions, and good choices are good because the (expected) outcome aligns with the party's values and goals.
Yeah, great fun for everyone when the DM and the charmed player negotiate about the character's belief system. This also doesn't destroy immersion, at all.
Are you serious?
Well, if the DM and the player sit at the table and start a long debate about the intricasies of a character's belief system in regards to a spell, then you are both in need of some improvement at the table.
First, if the DM allows the debate to carry on, then they are responsible for pretty much ruining the fun of the rest of the players at the table. The player also needs to be responsible enough to realize that it is a part of the encounter's challenge and that he/ she should not over react. Make a ruling, be fair and take the character's personality and beliefs that they have demonstrated up to that point into consideration. Then throw that crap out the window. It's called a "will save" and they obviously failed it. The game mechanics may allow them to ignore the effects of the spell. Plus, if you have them do something out of the realm of what they would perceive as acceptable behavior for that character, they usually get an additional bonus to the save. It is a game of challenges that should be overcome. Good players welcome the challenge and good DMs do not abuse the rules or mechanics within the game.
Secondly, eliminating anything that causes a loss of control is using kid gloves to the extreme. Yes, you are correct in that the DM is far more powerful, but the players should not ever have a "get out of jail free" card in regards to a specific range of abilities that can be used against them. They would not memorize spells that can be beneficial in those situations. Since they don't need to do that, you are making their choices easier in the end and in the long run failing to challenge them appropriately.
Third, these spells are easy to overcome. Pro from evil anyone? Break enchantment? Remove curse? Freedom of movement? Dispel/ Greater dispel magic? Really, there are...
I've had players get mad at me for stopping a debate in the middle of the game.
Course I've also had players break a table and two laptops over what to do with a +1 longsword.
|
|
- Make an illusionist enemy. The PC's fight illusory monsters, get illusory treasure and magic items (which function just fine against the illusory monsters) and maybe even illusory XP. Then, for the fight against the illusionist, they have to fight a level below what they're used to, with few of their magic items, gear, etc. Just make sure they level back up (for real) for defeating the illusionist, and that they get a lot of loot at the end of the fight.
- Disguise some familiar enemies. A red dragon is a tough fight. A red dragon who casts "disguise self" to look like a white dragon can be a far tougher one. A flesh golem disguised as an iron golem? Also way cool.
- Introduce them to fights they can't possibly win. It's not your job to make sure everything in the world is their level, it's their job to realize that a half-dozen first-level characters can't possibly take on a hill giant and his ogre pals.
I've also had players break a table and two laptops over what to do with a +1 longsword.
Good god...
give the greedy girl PC who made her character "perfect" cursed items that cause gender reversal and body hair to grow an inch every half hour, that one was fun : )
ask a random player in a stage whisper "Now you were the one that was going to turn on the party right?" when they feverishly disagree say "oh then it must have been...(mumble and look around the group)....oh yeah!"
This one I didn't do on purpose, but by luck in Ravenloft the one character who actually cared a lot about their looks was the one that contracted mummy rot.
Your post made me think that something similar might have to happen to my daughter's 20 Charisma sorceress. :)
I totally agree muahahahaha : )
A) Let the Paladin of Bahamut find a Cursed Ebon Full Plate Armor of Tiamat's Dracolich which looks like Golden Full Plate of Bahamut instead.
B) Take the player aside who always does anything that's chaotic, and have a 6" pixie offer him the answer to their latest puzzle for a 'favor' to be determined in the future. Have the pixie appear in random encounters to mock the players about the favor they owe her for the next year, but never actually call in the favor.
C) Put the team into a position where they have to help defend a village of neutral Orcs (who aren't attacking anyone) from a tribe of blink dogs that won't accept the concept of Nuetral Orcs and are attacking the village unceasingly.
B) Take the player aside who always does anything that's chaotic, and have a 6" pixie offer him the answer to their latest puzzle for a 'favor' to be determined in the future. Have the pixie appear in random encounters to mock the players about the favor they owe her for the next year, but never actually call in the favor.
Oh I -LOVE- the idea of 6" Pixies! :-D
I've always hated the idea of 3 foot tall Pixies, personally. Gimme the "Tinkerbell" variety anyday.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I think it's ridiculously idiotic to roll atk and dmg separate, when you can roll them all at once and save the table 30-45 minutes of lost time over the session from having to dig out the dice you could have rolled already. But I'm never going to call anyone out on it and request they do it my way.
I do require that from my players in my home game table rules, although I can't when GMing PFS games.