|
A Fighter/Sorcerer fought a Wererat and took its Pipes of the Sewers.
The PC, Judging that the Pipes were EVIL, burnt the Pipes in his forge while working on his sword. (double checked w/ the player that he didn't just burn them, but burnt them while he was actively working on his weapon). I Thought this was dumb, and that, at some point, there would be an effect of this.
A bit later, the PC acquired a function to throw their sword and do damage to all creatures in a line (like a ray). Well, at that point, just for grins, I decided that since he'd burned the pipes of the sewers while working on the sword, 25% of the time when he threw the sword like this, it would whistle and attract local mice and rats to the area, ie a bit of the summoning power of the pipes got stuck in the sword sitting in the forge.
The Player decided he didn't like this, and the PC started asking around trying to figure out how to get this latent magic of of this blade. He was told there was an anvil that could be used to get the magic out (which I'd read about in the RPG Superstar and really liked).
But the PC became impatient and decided not to run off to where the anvil was. Being a sorcerer with a fire and lightning fetish, he decided that one morning, while doing his pushups and meditation readying for the day, he would BURN all his spell slots of the day as lightning and fire spells, and channel them thru his blade, burning the magic out.
You know, I might have just allowed this to have the intended effect, except the day he decided to do this, the party was standing in a clearing in a mountain range known for magic being disrupted, or having the "wild magic" trait, ie Spells Don't Work Right.
I triple checked. Yes, he was doing this, in this place, now.
What would you do, as a DM?
|
Time to learn the consequences of his actions a second time. I would have the lightning and fire exit the sword in random directions. Possibly hitting fellow PC's, their horses if they have any, gear etc. Also, the accompanying light show from all of this should attract the attention of whatever bad guys/creatures are in the area.
Also, FWIW, I really liked the mice and rat attraction affect.
There comes a time when a PC really deserves to die for his stupidity.
|
|
Time to learn the consequences of his actions a second time. I would have the lightning and fire exit the sword in random directions. Possibly hitting fellow PC's, their horses if they have any, gear etc. Also, the accompanying light show from all of this should attract the attention of whatever bad guys/creatures are in the area.
Also, FWIW, I really liked the mice and rat attraction affect.
And, just to add insult to injury, I would also just have it be additive afterwards. So instead of rats, it summons diminutive fire elementals.
That look like rats.
And act like rats.
A town or two burnt to the ground should bring the message home.
Nice Touch!
Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
|
Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
I can't tell if you're joking or not.
|
|
I can't tell if you're joking or not.Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
He probably isn't.
I can't tell if you're joking or not.Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
I'm really not. If a GM did this to me I would be royally pissed. It's nothing short of turning my own item creation feats against me.
The GM's only saving grace is IF the player botched his magic item creation skill check and produced a cursed item. If that's not the case, then this is absolutely a case of a GM treating a player unfairly for the sake of his "story hour."
And then starting a thread asking for advice on how to further screw the player once he understandably tries to desperately fix his sword as as soon as possible?
Bad frikkin' form I say!
SHAME!
I`m all over the idea of the elemental magic fusing with what`s already there...
Let`s say now it summons rat swarms with the advanced template AND elemantal template.
Why not say they are even a fusion of both fire and air (electricity) elementals,
gaining bonus damage and abilities and immunities of BOTH types.
But it needn`t be ALL bad... wild magic swings both way, right...
So sometimes when the sword effect goes off
(this now happens whenever he casts fire/air elemental magic of course)
INSTEAD of summoning the advanced fire + air elemental rat swarms,
it TRANSFORMS the caster himself into a fire + air elemental rat.
I don`t know why anybody could be opposed to this sort of thing...
Why shouldn`t amazingly dumb PC actions have plot line relevant effects?
If I was the player, I might be pissed for a short bit, but if it makes the game more interesting, I would thank you later.
If I am an expert baker, who can craft the finest souffles and cakes of every sort,
I`m not going to expect that cooking them in an oven filled with the noxious fumes of a nuclear reactor meltdown or poison gas is going to result in the same result as my normal cakes. The player willingly and purposefully combined his magic item crafting with an item he personally recognized as `evil`. What`s next, the best way to craft a Holy Avenger is with the magic artifact hammer of the evil dwarf gods? This is all the meat of how adventures are crafted, and passing it up would be a diservice to your players.
He probably isn't.
I can't tell if you're joking or not.
I don't think he is either, because I had to read the first paragraph of the OP a few times before I believed it. What level is this player? He is forging his own sword (so, I assume he is Creating Magic Weapon) and infusing it with the magical jibber-jabber from another magical item?
Hmmm.
|
|
I can't tell if you're joking or not.Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
I'm really not. If a GM did this to me I would be royally pissed. It's nothign short of turning my own item creation feats against me.
The GM's only saving grace is IF the player botched his magic item creation skill check and produced a cursed item. If that's not the case, than this is absolutely a case of a GM treating a player unfairly for the sake of his "story hour."
And then starting a thread asking ho to further screw the player when he tries desperately to fix his sword as as soon as possible?
Bad frikkin' form.
The player isn't using the mechanism provided for him in order to rid his sword of the magic that infused it. He is provided with a means he knows will work, but rather than use that means he tries to "burn it out" with spells that aren't designed to dispel, mitigate, or remove magic from a weapon. He is playing with fire, so to speak.
It really sounds as if the player doesn't give a rats ass about the consequences, and "story hour" doesn't even have a point here. I've known plenty of GMs who'd pull this same thing just pulling crap out of nowhere. Speaking of pulling crap out of nowhere, how did the player come to the conclusion that pipes of the sewers are evil? Because they're not.
This is a perfect example of a player who isn't invested in a given world. Even after the GM has already provided for the fact that magic can have unintended effects, the player still pulled a dumb-dumb. Even his character now knows that using magic in such a fashion can have unintended consequences, so it is also a "stupid" character move.
If you think this is unfair, how about providing a wholly different solution? I would hope you'd think that an intelligence or wisdom check versus a DC of 10 should be enough to let his character realize that magic doesn't function in a vaccuum in Ash_Gazn's world and that maybe he shouldn't do this without studying the potential consequences first. If he still insists, then I say that whatever Ash decides is fair game.
Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
Heaven forbid that a GM actually work with the circumstances presented by the player to make things interesting.
Having the game entirely decided upon by mere dice rolls = lame.
Bravo to the OP for actually coming up with a flavorful side effect that apparently has no real mechanical consequences, just RP ones.
|
|
I can't tell if you're joking or not.Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
I'm really not. If a GM did this to me I would be royally pissed. It's nothign short of turning my own item creation feats against me.
The GM's only saving grace is IF the player botched his magic item creation skill check and produced a cursed item. If that's not the case, than this is absolutely a case of a GM treating a player unfairly for the sake of his "story hour."
And then starting a thread asking ho to further screw the player when he tries desperately to fix his sword as as soon as possible?
Bad frikkin' form.
The player isn't using the mechanism provided for him in order to rid his sword of the magic that infused it. He is provided with a means he knows will work, but rather than use that means he tries to "burn it out" with spells that aren't designed to dispel, mitigate, or remove magic from a weapon. He is playing with fire, so to speak.
It really sounds as if the player doesn't give a rats ass about the consequences, and "story hour" doesn't even have a point here. I've known plenty of GMs who'd pull this same thing just pulling crap out of nowhere. Speaking of pulling crap out of nowhere, how did the player come to the conclusion that pipes of the sewers are evil? Because they're not.
This is a perfect example of a player who isn't invested in a given world. Even after the GM has already provided for the fact that magic can have unintended effects, the player still pulled a dumb-dumb. Even his character now knows that using magic in such a fashion can have unintended consequences, so it is also...
But, you see, that isn't in the book, RAW. You must couch your argument in a RAW manner, or RavingDork will dismiss it. The "Holy Text" (i.e. the rulebook) is all. Creative license? Not if they don't have a rule for that. Common sense? Better be in Chapter Three.
I'm really not. If a GM did this to me I would be royally pissed. It's nothing short of turning my own item creation feats against me.
The GM's only saving grace is IF the player botched his magic item creation skill check and produced a cursed item. If that's not the case, then this is absolutely a case of a GM treating a player unfairly for the sake of his "story hour."
And then starting a thread asking for advice on how to further screw the player once he understandably tries to desperately fix his sword as as soon as possible?
Bad frikkin' form I say!
SHAME!
Based on a comparison to other cursed items, how is this item cursed? Does it provide a mechanical penalty? From his description, it doesn't, it's merely fluff with no mechanical effect.
IMO, the GM did something creative. He didn't give the player anything bad, change any mechanics or remove any of the players abilities. He added a small amount of color is all, no different than making a weapon glow.
I suggest you check out some of John Wicks articles on GM'ing. In his opinion, it's a GM's job to "screw over" his players. Not to remove their ability to do things, but rather to do bad things to them to provide them a chance to overcome obstacles.
In this instance, the player took an action: destroying the Pipes of the Sewers. The GM provided a consequence for that and even introduced a sub-plot to resolve the issue. The player decided to take a short-cut and took it in a dangerous area. Assuming the player KNEW that it was a wild magic area, it's not the GM's fault that something goes wrong.
To the OP: I would talk to the player. Explain to him how you see the situation and see what he thinks. Tell him that his character has made both an inopportune decision followed by a bad one and there will be consequences. Make sure he understands the consequences have to be negative, but merely flavor, not crunch. Let him decide what goes wrong with the sword, but warn him, if he doesn't come up with something negative and instead suggests something positive, you're going to warp it into something bad.
Yes but there's a difference between "making things interesting" and allowing a situation to occur which then encourages the player to think the sky is the limit when it comes to creating magical items.
Maybe someone could explain whether or not the initial premise put forth (player forges sword and burns up a magical item and somehow transfers the magic to the sword) is actually possible, because that seems to have started the whole ball rolling in this conundrum.
(EDIT: me and my slow typing.... ninja'd!)
Barring further info, I wouldn`t say that this is evidence of a player who isn`t invested in a game world.
It seems just like the behavior of a chaoticaly inclined arrogant caster type, who flys by the seat of his own pants and makes snap judgement calls on everything because he believes himself a know it all, etc... Likewise, it seems true to form for such behavior to come back to bite him. If every time he tried to make a plain vanilla magic item according to RAW he had to face `retribution`, sure, I would thinl that`s harsh... but this is all specifically in response to the player`s purposeful divergement from those RAW ´safe´ options... sounds like a fun game!
Just a note, I wouldn't classify the player as "dumb", just because he threw pipes of the sewers into a forge. Maybe he thought the item was evil because of the consequences the saw wrought by it. Perfectly plausible to me at least.
get yourself the 2nd addition complete mage book and read the section on wild mages. there is a table that has a crap load of random effects... better yet, here is the table.....
every time he casts a spell that has a variant such as fireball and lightning bolt, roll on the table for the random effect just increase from just a roll of a 1 on a 20 to a % say, 50% of the time you get a random effect.....:)
Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
Heaven forbid that a GM actually work with the circumstances presented by the player to make things interesting.
Having the game entirely decided upon by mere dice rolls = lame.
Bravo to the OP for actually coming up with a flavorful side effect that apparently has no real mechanical consequences, just RP ones.
Agreed - the rules are guidelines... the play's the thing... improv for such things really goes to the heart of the game: creative situational problem solving (with a bonus for entertainment/comedic value).
The whistling sword is brilliant. Stupid PC ideas often lead to some hillarious runs of cause and effect. The ultimate result of stupid is death. However, the timing, complexity and details of such demise should be directly proportional to the intensity of the stupidty. Seriously dumb ideas should make a colorful and lasting impression, but beware such creative idiocy may be therafter executed simply to test your ability to respond. Also bear in mind that some folks actually either a) enjoy or b) can't shake being habitual crash-test dummies.
I can't tell if you're joking or not.Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
I'm not. I read to the end of the second sentence and double checked the topic title to see if this was really about dumb PCs instead of DMs.
Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
Heaven forbid that a GM actually work with the circumstances presented by the player to make things interesting.
Having the game entirely decided upon by mere dice rolls = lame.
Bravo to the OP for actually coming up with a flavorful side effect that apparently has no real mechanical consequences, just RP ones.
....
What? No mechanical consequences? He tries to throw his weapon - a pain in the ass thing to specialize in - and it summons rat swarms. Why? The DM thought it was funny. So he wants to get rid of it. Of course he tries to do it in a dumb way, but the DM is already screwing with him so it doesn't really matter.|
|
Wait just a minute. He enchanted his own sword? And presumably succeeded on the necessary checks to do so? And you decided to screw him over by arbitrarily cursing his sword?
SHAME ON YOU!
The flavor of what you are trying to do is nothing short of awesome, but you've crossed the line when you broke the rules in order to ruin a player's fun.
You make a good point, and I agree with it. However, he wasn't enchanting the sword, he was just WORKING on it. It was already masterwork, he wanted to (eventually) make it keen, but generally, he was just making his own repairs. (he really gets into the ROLE of roleplaying... the fighter/sorcerer took ranks in both Craft (Weapons) AND Profession (Blacksmith) )
I haven't read much below this yet... so anyone shaming Me... I stick My tongue out at you.
Actually I'm kind of with ravingdork on this one.
It's kind of jerklike to just throw something bothersome at a player because he in character decided to get rid of a magical item he thought was evil instead of just doing the old "loot and sell" shtick.
He then goes through the work of burning out all his magic for the day basically hosing himself to get rid of the bad magic and the GM wants to hose him again instead of just letting him finally get rid of an effect that was forced on him?
Now the idea of the effect? Neat. The fact the player seems to really hate it? Not so cool for the GM now.
Generally put if you're going to pull something out of thin air and give me a drawback to doing things in character I do kind of expect a bit of something in return -- after all you are messing with the only part of the game I control when I've done nothing to screw up the part of the game that you control.
Now I think it's neat that the GM is putting the time and effort to put in special extras -- but these things shouldn't just be a "hey I think you are stupid so here's something to bugger your character".
You don't bugger the fighter when the player can't wear full plate and swing a sword do you? Then why bugger the spell caster when the player isn't (according to you) the sharpest too in the shed?
EDIT:
So what a minute -- it's not even a magical weapon -- he was simply repairing the sword something that is only role play and being in character and you still hosed him?
Man if you are going to make my sword have bad effects just for using it you had better make it a +1 sword for free while you are at it.
It's absolute crap otherwise.
|
|
The OP gave the player a "safe" way of removing the whistling sword problem, i.e. the anvil. The PC chose to go a different direction, perfectly within his right. That decision has consequences that can be good or bad. I wouldn't necessarily call the player "dumb", perhaps he is doing an excellent job or ROLEplaying. Perhaps his PC has a history of making a series of bad choices. It sounds like both sides are roleplaying quite well. The only time I think it becomes vindictive, is when the GM creates a situation where the player has no reasonable chance of extricating himself. I don't see this as the case.
So to the OP:
Enlighten us. Are there any mechanical implications when the rats & mice appear? Or are they just color and nothing more? Do they turn into a swarm and attack? Do they become difficult terrain under people's feet? Can the owner of the sword command them?
And is the player enjoying the situation you've put him in?
EDIT: Ninja'd
See Cartigan? No mechanical implications. How is the player getting hosed again?
The OP gave the player a "safe" way of removing the whistling sword problem, i.e. the anvil. The PC chose to go a different direction, perfectly within his right. That decision has consequences that can be good or bad. I wouldn't necessarily call the player "dumb", perhaps he is doing an excellent job or ROLEplaying. Perhaps his PC has a history of making a series of bad choices. It sounds like both sides are roleplaying quite well. The only time I think it becomes vindictive, is when the GM creates a situation where the player has no reasonable chance of extricating himself. I don't see this as the case.
An anvil that wasn't available, was a long way off, and until he could get to it (and he probably didn't know how long that would take) is hosed when it comes to using his weapon.
In addition the DM does something that hoses his weapon when all he was doing was role playing fixing it -- not even trying to get an advantage without gaining anything for the hosing he just received, and the DM thinks the player is the dumb one?
How you feel if you are doing the right thing and suddenly you get screwed for it, and then to get unscrewed took extra time and effort on your behalf -- followed by you getting blamed for something that wasn't clearly explained to you?
The Gm asked him if he was sure he wanted to do that -- the GM didn't say "Hey man that could be a bad idea and could have bad effects on your sword." He just asked "So you are going to work on your sword while the pipes burn?"
Why not simply give the sword a perk instead -- maybe rat/ratkin bane?
Oh wait cause that doesn't cause the character pain so we can't do that.
I may just let Spalding speak for me from now on. He pretty much hit the nail on the head when it comes to how I view this matter.
An anvil that wasn't available, was a long way off, and until he could get to it (and he probably didn't know how long that would take) is hosed when it comes to using his weapon.
In addition the DM does something that hoses his weapon when all he was doing was role playing fixing it -- not even trying to get an advantage without gaining anything for the hosing he just received, and the DM thinks the player is the dumb one?
How you feel if you are doing the right thing and suddenly you get screwed for it, and then to get unscrewed took extra time and effort on your behalf -- followed by you getting blamed for something that wasn't clearly explained to you?
The Gm asked him if he was sure he wanted to do that -- the GM didn't say "Hey man that could be a bad idea and could have bad effects on your sword." He just asked "So you are going to work on your sword while the pipes burn?"
Why not simply give the sword a perk instead -- maybe rat/ratkin bane?
Oh wait cause that doesn't cause the character pain so we can't do that.
So you throw your sword and rats appear = hosed
Might as well say:
- every time you score a crit with your sword, it say "ha, HA!"
- 50% of the time when you draw your bow, butterflies appear
- 25% of the time when you use your wand of cure light wounds, a halo appears around your head
- every third time you use your staff of fire, your eyebrows singe
|
|
How you feel if you are doing the right thing and suddenly you get screwed for it, and then to get unscrewed took extra time and effort on your behalf -- followed by you getting blamed for something that wasn't clearly explained to you?
I accept it as part of the game and come up with another clever solution.
Sometimes even doing the right thing has negative consequences. The game thrives on conflict. PC's fight through a dungeon to save a damsel in distress, uh oh, the damsel is really a dragon in disguise and now the PC's must solve the new problem.
So you throw your sword and rats appear = hosed
Might as well say:
- every time you score a crit with your sword, it say "ha, HA!"
- 50% of the time when you draw your bow, butterflies appear
- 25% of the time when you use your wand of cure light wounds, a halo appears around your head
- every third time you use your staff of fire, your eyebrows singe
Those are classic, hope you don't mind if I use a couple.
My apologies for not being clear: that 25% of the time that it called the local rats, the blade otherwise worked COMPLETELY normally. It did everything the PC wanted it to, PLUS the rats came by to see what was going on, and smiled, and danced around the Man with the Singing Sword.
Well that's not quite as bad then, however a nonmagical sword having magical properties?
I would offer the following compromise to the player to get back to "neutral ground" as a GM -- cause I do understand a player being upset when I "muck around" with his character:
The sword counts as a magical weapon when it comes to DR and the like -- but it doesn't have an actual enchantment bonus -- however this is tied to the rat effect and removing the rat effect would remove this too.
After the fire thing:
The sword glows in the dark like a torch (it constantly looks like it's being heated on a forge), but keeps the above bonus (counts as magical without actually being magical) -- this removes the rat effect but keeps the magical bonus. Alteratively the sword could do 1d4 fire damage on a critical hit *both* the user and the target (since it's wild not properly set fire magic) -- but I would let the player decide if he wants this perk/flaw.
However if he knows he is in a wild magic field and is casting spells I would go ahead and roll the standard rolls for wild magical effects -- whatever those are for the campaign (and if I'm having wild magical effects I would have written rules for this so as to avoid the suggestion of "you're just doing bad things to me).
I would suggest that getting the sword "fixed" on the forge could remove both the side effect and the minor perk that it currently has, or that actually turning it into a magical weapon might remove the side effect too.
So you throw your sword and rats appear = hosed
Might as well say:
- every time you score a crit with your sword, it say "ha, HA!"
- 50% of the time when you draw your bow, butterflies appear
- 25% of the time when you use your wand of cure light wounds, a halo appears around your head
- every third time you use your staff of fire, your eyebrows singeThose are classic, hope you don't mind if I use a couple.
By all means :)
Well that's not quite as bad then, however a nonmagical sword having magical properties?
I would offer the following compromise to the player to get back to "neutral ground" as a GM -- cause I do understand a player being upset when I "muck around" with his character:
The sword counts as a magical weapon when it comes to DR and the like -- but it doesn't have an actual enchantment bonus -- however this is tied to the rat effect and removing the rat effect would remove this too.
After the fire thing:
The sword glows in the dark like a torch (it constantly looks like it's being heated on a forge), but keeps the above bonus (counts as magical without actually being magical) -- this removes the rat effect but keeps the magical bonus. Alteratively the sword could do 1d4 fire damage on a critical hit *both* the user and the target (since it's wild not properly set fire magic) -- but I would let the player decide if he wants this perk/flaw.
However if he knows he is in a wild magic field and is casting spells I would go ahead and roll the standard rolls for wild magical effects -- whatever those are for the campaign (and if I'm having wild magical effects I would have written rules for this so as to avoid the suggestion of "you're just doing bad things to me).
I would suggest that getting the sword "fixed" on the forge could remove both the side effect and the minor perk that it currently has, or that actually turning it into a magical weapon might remove the side effect too.
Or, just make it ripe for enchantment as a Sword of the Sewers
|
|
My apologies for not being clear: that 25% of the time that it called the local rats, the blade otherwise worked COMPLETELY normally. It did everything the PC wanted it to, PLUS the rats came by to see what was going on, and smiled, and danced around the Man with the Singing Sword.
That's an important clarification--I'll admit, I would have been bugged if 25% of the time my weapon didn't work because I tried to get rid of a different magic item. So yeah, it does seem like your player isn't being very smart.
However, I'm not sure this doesn't warrant a discussion with the player. Because his behavior sounds to me like passive hostility. You two seem to have really different expectations. You wanted to introduce a harmless, amusing random ability on his weapon; he's annoyed and wants to blow everything up. There's a disconnect there. And I don't think bringing the full consequences of wild magic down on his head is going to solve either a communication problem or his passive hostility.
Why did he think the pipes were evil? Does his character have some religious reason not to use the pipes? Maybe he feels like he's being punished for character choices? Just speculating, here.
Since your wild magic effect is going to have to have its consequences, I'd come up with a very precise way of determining the effects. How is he doing this? Casting each spell individually? I'd roll for each spell. Maybe he doesn't even get a chance to blow all the spell slots. It seems to me that given your situation, it's important to make sure everyone agrees that it is fair and not arbitrary.
Just my two-cents, of course.
But the PC became impatient and decided not to run off to where the anvil was. Being a sorcerer with a fire and lightning fetish, he decided that one morning, while doing his pushups and meditation readying for the day, he would BURN all his spell slots of the day as lightning and fire spells, and channel them thru his blade, burning the magic out.You know, I might have just allowed this to have the intended effect, except the day he decided to do this, the party was standing in a clearing in a mountain range known for magic being disrupted, or having the "wild magic" trait, ie Spells Don't Work Right.
I triple checked. Yes, he was doing this, in this place, now.
What would you do, as a DM?
Hmm. Assuming having real time to play with, putting myself in your shoes, and wanting to run with this, I'd probably work out a chart of 1d4, 1d6, or 1d8 "random things" that would happen by taking the course of action you've laid out. Then when you get together for your next session, recap the scenario, and then roll the die and see what "wild magic" outcome transpires. The consequences can run from silly, to dire, to beneficial as you see fit. You know the player's tastes. Just tailor the outcomes to his (and your group's) entertaining pleasure.
Honestly I think calandra has the right of it. There is definitely a disconnect, and fixing that is the first priority (and if it can't be fixed deciding on either getting rid of the player or stepping back and letting someone else run for a while -- not as an insult but so things can spread out and others can get a feel for the GM's shoes and the work involved with doing it).
Why did he think the pipes were evil? Does his character have some religious reason not to use the pipes? Maybe he feels like he's being punished for character choices? Just speculating, here.
Why wouldn't he think they were evil? Perhaps he has extensive arcane knowledge he would realize it is a neutral magic item as opposed to an evil one wielded by wererats to summon rats to attack people with.
|
|
Bravo! That sounds hilarious and fun. Just because something happens that a character or player did not anticipate or want to happen, that doesn't mean their fun is ruined. To the contrary, winning all the time is boring.
What I might do:
Melt the sword.
Then, when the initial wave of panic has passed, tell him he succeeded, though his sword now has the 'broken' trait and will be destroyed if it is subjected to that sort of punishment again before being fixed. Then tell him how long it'll take to fix.
I would tell him how much energy damage he need to do to destroy the magic, then I would roll to see if there is a wild surge for every spell he cast and then just roll it out see if it worked, if it did then great if not, it is the dice's fault not you
Also i like the whole idea, Making magic items should be dangerous and I like the idea of a sword being tainted, If the player has a problem with that, well get over it.
Really, I'm with the dissenters here. Have you established in your world that the burning/melting/destruction of basic (non-Artifact) magical items have some kind of lasting effect? If not, I can understand the player being unhappy about the situation. Even if you think it is fun and quirky, he may not if there was never an indication that such an event might take place.
The player isn't dumb, he just has different expectations of the game-world than you do. If this was the first time you wanted to introduce something of this nature, it would have been a good idea to pull the player aside and explain the possible situation and make sure he would be on board with it.
Also, that sort of makes me think of something. Who is upset by the turn of events, the Player or the Character? This is a pretty important distinction.
I agree with Calandra too; something isn't right here. Sounds like a communication issue, not a "dumb player"/"dumb GM" issue. I've GMed for about 10 years now, and my cardinal rule has always been "make sure the players have fun". Most of the time, that has made the game fun for me too. If you and your player have different ideas or expectations about the game world, you need to make sure those get brought out and discussed. At a minimum, I would make sure you make it clear to the character that given his/her knowledge of the arcane, his/her current plan to remove the problem is risky, and not guaranteed to succeed. It might also help to let them make a roll and get some interesting alternative plans, figure out how far away the anvil is, etc. I'm sure something fun and creative can come out of this, but just letting them proceed and then punishing them for it because it's "obviously a dumb idea" will probably not go over well.
Not to start a big fight or anything, Player always get up set when thing don't go there way but some times that is the Adventure. And I am in the camp that DM do not always have to explain things right away. I do think I would give Knowledge Arcana rolls to know thing like, Burning Magic Items near other Items is a bad Idea.
Also I like that you gave the Players Idea about burning out the cruse. Give and take is a big part of the game and why people keep playing. And there will always be problems with DM and Players. Sometimes you will have to apologize about the confusion.
I don't think your player is dumb, just not picking up on your hints. That might because you are not speaking the player language.
I always have a conflict with one of my player because he think I change the rules all the time. but most of the time I am just trying not to bog down the game with petty rules that i don't know right off hand. Or more often he does not understand how something is supposed to work. I tell him that "Hay this is a game and should be fun and if you are not then don't play and that is fine" I try to be fair but some time my story is not fair, that is why the PC have to go adventuring. Most of my player, in fact all but one pretty much always like the story in the end even if the Character has some trouble.
Anyway that is my thoughts probably more then I should write, but there as been a more to "fair" and less from fun. anyway that what I think.
just to throw my 2 cents in, in the original post it doesn't look like the guy was actively trying to make the sword magical by using the pipes. To me it read as if he was working on his sword, repairing etc, and decided you know while the forge is hot might as well melt down these pipes. So he tossed them in there and kept working. Now I may be totally incorrect in my interpretation if so disregard me. However if you pull a classic cartoon moment and use a stick of dynamite as a candle bad things happen. If you throw depleted uranium near a school bad things happen. If you melt down a magic item and don't try to contain the damage the resulting freed magic could do then bad things COULD happen.
In this case he has a hilarious side effect. Note that the weapon still performs as it was intended. In no way is the weapon reduced in effectiveness it just has the ADDITIONAL effect of summoning dancing rats, have i mentioned how ridiculous this is yet? So the guy can bloodstorm blade it up and chuck his weapon in a line and it MAY summon rats? Hmm well if that's a problem he can stop chuckin his weapon and swing it himself, or as a sorc he could also just blast out a lightning bolt, bigger line of effect than a sword chuck imo.
Just saying the nay saying in regards to hilarious side effects that could drive the party towards another adventure, read magic anvil of magicness, shouldn't be shat upon but instead should be looked at for what they are. PC made what the DM felt was a silly choice, he now has a silly effect, his silliness can be rectified by a trip/adventure. Instead he's gonna fix it by channeling nukes through it..... Last time i checked nukes don't fix things they more revolve around destroying things. Hell you're nicer than me i'd just have him reduce his sword to slag if he channeled his full complement of spells through his blade in the period of a few rounds magic overload and whatnot.
|
|
I would explicitly give him a knowledge Arcana or Spellcraft check to know explicitly that his actions have a chance to not work as he intends to specifically to the wild magic zone he is in. If he still goes ahead let the dice decide.
PS: Make the DC to gain the knowledge low. Like if he has maxed his ranks in either skill, can't miss low.
For my two scents as both a player and a DM your mistake is not in what you did as a consequence of his actions (which I think were interesting, not "hosing" and all in all pretty cool). Your mistake is in categorizing him as a "dumb" player.
He sounds like an interesting, creative and involved player. So far your description of him makes me wish some of my players would take after him a little bit more. Unfortunately he doesn't always think clearly through the possible implications of his actions. You've said before that you warned him and he went ahead and did it anyway. Either 1) you're not giving clear enough hints and need to work on that or 2) he's getting them but decides to take the risk anyway for which I would applaud him. Sometimes risky moves pay off. Sometimes they don't.
As for what he's trying now...frankly it sounds like that's probably the BEST (not worst) location on your world to try it. If there is anywhere where you can twist magic away from it's intended effect then it's a wild magic zone.
As for how I'd handle it I'd have him roll 1 or more caster level or spellcraft checks. This see how well he is able to control the magic he is using a force it to his purposes. If you are going with multiple checks I'd recommend one per level of spell he has.
If he rolls amazingly well then it should not only fix the problem but maybe pick up a few new powers. Something fire or lightening themed.
If he rolls good then have it work and he picks up a very minor bonus. Like it's hot enough that you can use it start campfires and warm food.
If he rolls okay the current problem goes away, but something else takes it's place. I like the idea of his eyebrows being burned off. Or maybe when it crits there is a cracle of lightening and his hair stands up like he's just be zapped.
If he rolls bad the sword is damaged (not destroyed) and the problem remains.
If he rolls really bad the problem gets worse (no reward without risk right?) The idea of the swarms of rats being fire elementals is a neat one.
If he rolls abismally (like a nat 1 or 2) well...that's not good for his team. Two ideas for this are:
1) the sword detonates dealing 1 point of damage per level of spell he used to everyone in a big area and the party is blown further down the mountain.
2) The magic force the "curse" out and into him, turning him in a wererat.
It's an interesting idea he had, and personally I like it. It shouldn't be without risk and it shouldn't be easy. So give him a chance and see how good he is. Also if he does more RP than just "I cast the spells at it" and actually describes the ritual I'd be more generous in interpreting the die roll.
