I phoned my Kingmaker GM earlier today and I...
...asked him if he was free to run a solo session for my character in our Kingmaker game.
You see, we captured a dangerous werewolf who was running around murdering people in our fledgling town. We held a public trial, found him guilty, and staged a public execution in which we would hang the criminal and elevate our status as goodly leaders with the peoples' safety in mind.
Well, the man hung for minutes before he finally stopped twitching. He was clearly dead. Only then did he transform into a wearwolf, escaped the noose, dashed through the crowd, and disappeared into the forest a few miles away. Hmm...I didn't think lycanthropes could do that post mortem.
My character, an archer ranger with favored enemy human--and the local law, lept from the gallows to his nearby horse (animal companion) and gave chase. The other PCs gave chase as well, but none could keep up with the extremely fast run actions the barbarian werewolf was taking across open ground. I managed to keep up with my horse for several rounds (shooting arrows as I did so), but it soon became clear that, even with my horse taking the run action, I was not going to be able to keep up.
That's where we left off.
So I called my GM today to ask if I could have a solo session in which I would track the werewolf and attempt to apprehend him again by myself. I was even willing to give up the XP (since we like to keep the entire party on the same level). I just wanted to hang out with my friend, play out my character, and see if I could catch/kill the bad guy.
I guess I caught my GM in a bad mood. He not only flatly refused to host the solo today, he refused to do it ever. The following is a paraphrased summary of our discussion (I don't recall the exact words):
ME: Are you busy today? I was hoping you could run that solo game I talked to you about before. I want to see if I can track down and stop that werewolf murderer from killing any more people.
GM: *sounding groggy* Oh. I thought you wanted to hang out. No. You aren't going after the guy.
ME: Not in the mood today then?
GM: *sounding upset* No. Because he got away. He outran everyone.
ME: That's not too much of a concern to me. I'm a ranger. A tracker. I'll simply follow his trail and catch up to him when he is forced to rest.
GM: *sounding angry* No. It's part of the story. The guy escapes. You can't catch him.
Then he hung up on me abruptly. He sounded fairly pissed for some reason.
Now I'm pissed, not because he turned me down for a solo session, but because of the way he went about doing so.
What he did is tantamount to telling us players that our characters and their actions don't matter in the slightest. Only the narrative story matters.
I cannot believe that. It's the very antithesis of roleplaying! That's storytelling, not roleplaying.
If he had simply put it off ("I'm not in the mood today") or met with me for five minutes ("No matter how hard you try, you can't seem to find his trail--it's as if he was swept away with magic"). But no. He didn't so much as try to give me a semblance of respect. "You can't catch the guy because the story says you can't."
SCREW. THAT. SHIT.
He's doing it wrong.
At this point I'm not sure I even care about spoilers in regards to this barbarian werewolf guy. What the hell makes him so special?
It's possible he didn't mean to be so rude--that I maybe just caught him at a bad time. It's possible that this is some horrible attempt at mercy, that he is certain the werewolf would kill my character too easily or something. It's hard to tell though. He's hard to read, which is part of what makes him (normally) such a great GM.
Even if it's the latter case, you'd think it would still be my choice. My risk. My character. There is absolutely no in game reason whatsoever for my character not to pursue. It's his freaking job even!
I understand that some hidden railroading will always exist in games...but he didn't even try. He just completely role-blocked me with metagame.
Essentially, he's keeping me from playing the most basic aspects of my character. It's not like I even came up with anything crazy! I merely wanted to use my class abilities in the way they were meant to be used!
you either be blunt and open about it (explain this to the other party members as well) or simply refuse to follow the story anymore. Have your characters go off and do something else. Make him wing it for awhile.
If he just DM fiated the escape like that I would guess that he was already upset during the game session, but did not know how to express it.
I would ask him what is going on? It may be another player that is irritating him. 'He could be upset for any number of reasons.
I am sure he knows he is breaking the rules, or for those of you that don't believe a GM can break rules, that is doing what he wants without regard for the rules. Reminding him of what happened is not what I would do. Trying to find out why he is doing things the way he is will probably be better. If he is burned out then it might be time to let someone else DM.
PS:I would give him some time to cool down first, and if one of the other players is closer to him than you are then let them do the speaking.
How do I go about explaining to the GM that he's "doing it wrong," that this "isn't roleplaying," and that "he's ruining my fun" without making this a more volatile situation than it already is?
My guess is you got him on a bad day. Though not knowing you or the GM personaly I have a couple of questions...
1) Does he normaly run solos for people?
2) How did he react when you first brought this up? How many times did you bring this up before this? Could it be you were pestering?
3) Evidently this is not a normal werewolf(I have no idea about the SP...so I can't not comment on what it actualy might be)...which mean maybe the GM got creative here and modeled it off some werewolf myths in which you have to kill the werewolf twice(once in human form...once in wolf form)...maybe he has something special plan here...that requires the whole group. Maybe you could not take the hint...and he got fed up...?
Though even without the above questions my suggestion would be to apologize first and than bring up your concerns in a polite and calm manner. Also if he is not in the mood to talk about than don't talk about it or argue with him.
How do I go about explaining to the GM that he's "doing it wrong," that this "isn't roleplaying," and that "he's ruining my fun" without making this a more volatile situation than it already is?My guess is you got him on a bad day. Though not knowing you or the GM personaly I have a couple of questions...
1) Does he normaly run solos for people?
2) How did he react when you first brought this up? How many times did you bring this up before this? Could it be you were pestering?
3) Evidently this is not a normal werewolf(I have no idea about the SP...so I can't not comment on what it actualy might be)...which mean maybe the GM got creative here and modeled it off some werewolf myths in which you have to kill the werewolf twice(once in human form...once in wolf form)...maybe he has something special plan here...that requires the whole group. Maybe you could not take the hint...and he got fed up...?
Though even without the above questions my suggestion would be to apologize first and than bring up your concerns in a polite and calm manner. Also if he is not in the mood to talk about than don't talk about it or argue with him.
Some DM's get really mad if you don't do things the way they would do it.
I had a DM give me dark side points in SW Saga because we took a different route that what he would have, and no I did not kill or harm anyone in any way.
How do I go about explaining to the GM that he's "doing it wrong," that this "isn't roleplaying," and that "he's ruining my fun" without making this a more volatile situation than it already is?My guess is you got him on a bad day. Though not knowing you or the GM personaly I have a couple of questions...
1) Does he normaly run solos for people?
2) How did he react when you first brought this up? How many times did you bring this up before this? Could it be you were pestering?
3) [nixed due to spoiler content]
Though even without the above questions my suggestion would be to apologize first and than bring up your concerns in a polite and calm manner. Also if he is not in the mood to talk about than don't talk about it or argue with him.
John, Wraithstrike: Please be mindful of spoilers. I didn't exactly put "KINGMAKER SPOILERS!" in the thread title. Please use the appropriate tags for other people's sakes.
1) There's no precedent in his case, but I didn't think it an unreasonable request.
2) It seemed to me that he was interested in "hanging out" but not roleplaying. I suspect that, the fact that I opened up with roleplaying, may have been what set him off. It's been some weeks since the last game. At the end of the game I brought to his attention my desire to pursue the NPC alone during a solo game. He never agreed to it at the time, but he certainly didn't seem against the idea either. Until yesterday, I hadn't brought it up since.
3) I dunno.
How do I go about explaining to the GM that he's "doing it wrong," that this "isn't roleplaying," and that "he's ruining my fun" without making this a more volatile situation than it already is?My guess is you got him on a bad day. Though not knowing you or the GM personaly I have a couple of questions...
1) Does he normaly run solos for people?
2) How did he react when you first brought this up? How many times did you bring this up before this? Could it be you were pestering?
3) [nixed due to spoiler content]
Though even without the above questions my suggestion would be to apologize first and than bring up your concerns in a polite and calm manner. Also if he is not in the mood to talk about than don't talk about it or argue with him.
John, Wraithstrike: Please be mindful of spoilers. I didn't exactly put "KINGMAKER SPOILERS!" in the thread title. Please use the appropriate tags for other people's sakes.
1) There's no precedent in his case, but I didn't think it an unreasonable request.
2) It seemed to me that he was interested in "hanging out" but not roleplaying. I suspect that, the fact that I opened up with roleplaying, may have been what set him off. It's been some weeks since the last game. At the end of the game I brought to his attention my desire to pursue the NPC alone during a solo game. He never agreed to it at the time, but he certainly didn't seem against the idea either. Until yesterday, I hadn't brought it up since.
3) I dunno.
Sorry about that, I forgot you had spoilered that part. I have edited my post. To use DM Fiat in such a manner is strange though.
** spoiler omitted **
Some DM's get really mad if you don't do things the way they would do it.
I had a DM give me dark side points in SW Saga because we took a different route that what he would have, and no I did not kill or harm anyone in any way.
True. I don't have the AP...and really hope to play it someday....
But that does not mean the GM here did not change it up...I mean alot of GMs change up a module.
But you are right it may also be a case of DM Railroading and punishment here. But it could be possible(though looking at it...it is small possibility here) he might be changing thing.
Maybe the DM feels that giving "solo" time to a character could be construed as being a form of favoritism or even being unfair to other players (if the other players didn't feel like pursuing that werewolf, lets say).
If he had just said something to that effect, then there'd be no problem.
Martin: It's my character's job to hunt down and stop criminals. It's not the other characters' jobs. It makes perfect sense in game and out that I would do this alone (or with NPC henchmen). Though I don't disagree with your view, I don't think it necessarily applies in this scenario.
EDIT: I just edited the OP's title as few seem to care to use the spoiler tags (Thanks Wraithstrike).
John, Wraithstrike: Please be mindful of spoilers. I didn't exactly put "KINGMAKER SPOILERS!" in the thread title. Please use the appropriate tags for other people's sakes.
Sorry I thought that by I saying I never read the AP I did not know what is going on was hint that what I said is not a spoiler.
How do you do spoiler here?
1) There's no precedent in his case, but I didn't think it an unreasonable request.
2) It seemed to me that he was interested in "hanging out" but not roleplaying. I suspect that, the fact that I opened up with roleplaying, may have been what set him off. It's been some weeks since the last game. At the end of the game I brought to his attention my desire to pursue the NPC alone during a solo game. He never agreed to it at the time, but he certainly didn't seem against the idea either. Until yesterday, I hadn't brought it up since.
3) I dunno.
Yeah...I stand by the way I said you should approach it in my first post. Just apologize first...it will put him in a better mood...even if you feel you should not apologize just do it. Hopefuly he will apologize back for what seemed like biting your head off.
I have to say I find his response a little strange. Which leads me to agree with Waithstrike take on it...IE you guys did something the GM did not want you to do...
If he does not like solos...which is his right I would think he would have just say so...
If he wanted to wait to give the other PCs a chance...I think he would have said so...
Etc.
I would say that it sounds like it may be partly a matter of you assuming he would do so when he never really said any such thing... Coming back weeks later and bringing that up in a way that suggests you EXPECT him to run this event (i think it`s fair to say he didn`t prepare for this solo adventure) can easily come off badly. especially when it`s taken as this special solo adventure which he didn`t really agree to takes precedent over normal social hanging out. if he wasn`t already in `the space` to be thinking about the game, clarifying his exact thinking or rationale (i.e. if he doesn`t like solos period) very well may not have occured to him to share with you.
My advice: next time you play, or are discussing the game, tell him you just see consistency problems with what happened... probably if YOU forget about it until an opportune moment, i.e. can hang out with normally until then, that is going to be ideal and put both of you on a more normal footing, so to speak.
i think you CAN proceed from the standpoint that the chase/tracking isn`t happening, and find a rationale for that: Fiat that you failed the tracking roll, possibly with heavy rainstorm interceding to wash away tracks, etc... Now you can role-play disappointment at failing at your job. i think accepting the GM`s ruling is the basis of a good game, and going to the effort of working out how his explanation COULD possibly make sense both shows your respect of him AND your dedication to role-playing and in-consistency. he`ll probably even fold back into the story another encounter where you can track down the werewolf.
John click the link
how to use spoilers
For what its worth...
** spoiler omitted **
My horse, being an animal companion, didn't have the run feat during the chase.
To complicate matters, however, we leveled up after the game. Now my horse DOES have the run feat and so...
John click the link
how to use spoilers
Now we will see if it works...
Edit:It Worked :)
|
Martin: It's my character's job to hunt down and stop criminals. It's not the other characters' jobs. It makes perfect sense in game and out that I would do this alone (or with NPC henchmen). Though I don't disagree with your view, I don't think it necessarily applies in this scenario.
If he's worried about giving unfair time to one player, he could run it as a normal session, with the other players taking control of some of the local hunters.
If your PC is the Royal Sheriff (or similar title), shouldn't he have some henchmen under his command? Regardless of whether he has the Leadership feat? Unless he's expected to personally run down every pickpocket in the land.Kingmaker, with its focus on the 'big picture' would seem to be ideal for this style of play, which has been the model for other games such as Ars Magica for years. (In AM, each player creates one wizard and several mundane helpers, all of whom are part of the same organisation. Each scenario assumes one active wizard, accompanied by several mundanes from the PC pool.)
If you want to sell it to him, you'll need to show willing that your PC will step down when it's time to spotlight another PC's speciality.
You could have a pure roleplay session where a PC bard takes the lead (Next session, well be thrashing out a treaty with the dwarves; better forget to invite Mongo the Cha 5 half-orc with Tourettes. You'll be playing Chancellor Valorum next week...).
|
|
We held a public trial, found him guilty, and staged a public execution....Well, the man hung for minutes before he finally stopped twitching....then...escaped the noose, dashed through the crowd, and disappeared.
I see this complaint all the time, and I just don't get it.
GMs: If the NPC is so important, don't put him in a position where the PCs could bring him down. If all it takes is one failed save or one lucky crit to wreck your whole scenario, then maybe you need to rethink the encounter. Don't have the BBEG pose on top of a precarious perch to deliver a gloating speech, that the PCs will refuse to listen to ("That's gotta be six seconds, can I shoot him yet?").
If you're not prepared to risk his death or capture, then don't bring him to the table. Keep him as a mysterious threat, that his lackeys speak of in hushed, fearful tones. Then, when the PCs get to the point at which his defeat is 'dramatically appropriate', you can take the gloves off, and he will be all the more memorable, as he has traction in their minds, rather than being 'that nameless chump you critted with your axe'.
For what its worth...
A horse with the standard run feat moves ten feet faster a round than that the werewolf using the run action, so he hasn't even got greater speed justified.
You move at half your normal speed while following tracks (or at your normal speed with a –5 penalty on the check, or at up to twice your normal speed with a –20 penalty on the check). The DC depends on the surface and the prevailing conditions, as given on the table.
No offense, but fast tracking something is hard. A Human gets these modifiers based on his "speed while tracking":
- 0 15ft/round.
-5 30ft/round.
-20 60ft/round.
You will be slow... it will be fast. If you are on horseback, then you will get heavy penalties, probably way more if tracking while on the back of a galloping horse.
Perhaps your DM was doing you a favor and keeping you on track by not letting you continue with this fruitless endeavor?
You move at half your normal speed while following tracks (or at your normal speed with a –5 penalty on the check, or at up to twice your normal speed with a –20 penalty on the check). The DC depends on the surface and the prevailing conditions, as given on the table.
No offense, but fast tracking something is hard. A Human gets these modifiers based on his "speed while tracking":
- 0 15ft/round.
-5 30ft/round.
-20 60ft/round.You will be slow... it will be fast. If you are on horseback, then you will get heavy penalties, probably way more if tracking while on the back of a galloping horse.
Perhaps your DM was doing you a favor and keeping you on track by not letting you continue with this fruitless endeavor?
It's certainly possible that was his intent. Keep in mind though that tracking is not necessarily about speed so much as it is persistence. He has to rest, and deal with the difficult terrain of the forest (whereas I have endurance and am not slowed by natural terrain--to say nothing of a fast horse with longstrider cast on it). That's time that can be used to catch up to him.
If, at the next game, it is clarified that my character successfully tracked him to the border of our kingdom, than I will be perfectly satisfied that I did everything I could within the limits of my jurisdiction. We now know exactly who he is (as do most of our citizens). If he ever re-enters the kingdom, he won't accomplish much before being captured or run off again.
It the GM's reaction towards me and the in-game "disconnect" that really bothers me. I can certainly live without the solo.
For what its worth...
A horse with the standard run feat moves ten feet faster a round than that the werewolf using the run action, so he hasn't even got greater speed justified.
You move at half your normal speed while following tracks (or at your normal speed with a –5 penalty on the check, or at up to twice your normal speed with a –20 penalty on the check). The DC depends on the surface and the prevailing conditions, as given on the table.
No offense, but fast tracking something is hard. A Human gets these modifiers based on his "speed while tracking":
- 0 15ft/round.
-5 30ft/round.
-20 60ft/round.You will be slow... it will be fast. If you are on horseback, then you will get heavy penalties, probably way more if tracking while on the back of a galloping horse.
Perhaps your DM was doing you a favor and keeping you on track by not letting you continue with this fruitless endeavor?
I believe the point was that since RD chased after the werewolf from the hanging (i.e. still in sight of it) he should not have had to track in the first place. The DM then fiated that the werewolf was faster than the horse, which then takes it to tracking.
Honestly, I'd ask him why he's upset, be a good friend etc. Go hang out or see a movie or whatever, then when things are all good, be like "so can I just not track this werewolf? or whats the deal?" and see if he'll admit to "railroad choo choo, i did it badly" or whatever.
True, if you just hop on the horse and ride after it that would be totally legit.
DM should have had it Run by the horses and spook them into running off on his way out.
|
I believe the point was that since RD chased after the werewolf from the hanging (i.e. still in sight of it) he should not have had to track in the first place.
*ding ding ding!* we have a winner! I'm well aware of the fast tracking rules thanks. I'm also satisfied with the speed issue as RD's horse didn't have Run...
|
Minor interjection, courtesy of a Morbid Fact du Jour from way back... 'botched' hangings, wherein the subject's neck wasn't snapped immediately, could take in excess of 15m-30m (or multiple retries, or the executioner sitting on or hanging from the subject's shoulders) to actually result in fatality, so the shapeshift may not have been postmortem. In fact, one unfortunate soul in England was found to have a still beating heart 3h after his 'execution' during the subseqent medical dissection (in the days when that was the sole source of cadavers). Not much bearing on your player-GM troubles, but some on the lead-up I guess.
Raving_dork, reading your description of your conversation with your GM, two things struck me:
1. "I thought you just wanted to hang out." Sounds like your GM was hopeful for some friendly downtime with a pal, and was disappointed you just wanted to use him for gaming--and moreover solely in order to challenge a decision he made as a GM as well. As far as I can tell, you basically called him, possibly woke him up, and said in so many words, "You're wrong, and I want you to take the time design me a special solo scenario just for me so I can prove that I'm right." Raving_dork, I am saying this because I genuinely am trying to help: as far as I can tell, you were very disrespectful of your friend's time and his friendship outside of your gaming situation.
I agree that he made a poor decision in narrating the criminal's getaway. I think he could have worded what he was trying to accomplish in a better way. But I also know that--even if I had messed up running a scenario--to have one of my players call me without so much as a "Hi, how are you? I'm so sorry, you sound tired. Did I wake you? Should I call back?" and follow up with a request for me to take the time to do extra GM prep to design an adventure for them specifically because they're mad at me for how I handled things, I would be a tad bit pissy to say the least. And were you in your GM's shoes, would you feel differently?
2. I don't know how experienced your GM is, but especially when dealing with pre-written adventures--which sometimes write in railroading without providing a lot of advice to GMs on how to handle the situation--trying to adapt to player creativity is very hard. Players often come up with plan Q when the Adventure only describes plan A and B. I don't think your GM handled the conversation very well either, but his particular frustration smacks of trying to run the game the way the adventure describes and not knowing how to deal with alternate plans. "But this is the way it's written," is an easy fallback because it puts responsibility in the hands of the writers of the adventure. Is this right? Not very; I don't excuse the mindset, just am trying to explain it. But GMs usually need a lot of experience to figure out how to handle these situations, and some have better instincts than others with how to deal with it.
In this light, I think your GM could use some advice with how to deal with players who take the story off the rails... but right now he is clearly on the defensive, which is not going to make things easy.
My advice would be to let this particular issue lie for NOW. I know it's frustrating to do so and requires a very uncomfortable swallowing of pride, but before you broach the issue again, leaving yourself and your GM some space to calm down will be very valuable.
Later on, maybe get your GM a copy of the GMG and bring up--asking him if he is in the mood to talk about gaming FIRST--the issue in a general matter, talking about giving players agency to choose their fate.
Also, some general conflict resolution advice:
- Frame your statements in "I feel..." not "you [did it wrong]."
- Vent your frustrations, but also let him vent his--without interruption. Repeat back the frustrations he mentions to show you understand how he feels. If he sees that you are acknowledging his feelings in the matter, he will be a lot more likely to acknowledge your frustrations in turn and be willing to seek out a solution.
* Disclaimer: I don't know what happens in Kingmaker 2 because I'm playing Kingmaker and we haven't gotten there yet, so I have no idea what's supposed to be part of the story and what isn't. (I promise I won't metagame. :) )
By requesting a solo session, I immediately would take it as proving the DM wrong. The other question I would ask, is this the first time something like this occured? Everyone makes mistakes, and has bad moments, so I would consider overall taking these experiences to improve everyone's enjoyment in the future. Usually, it is just a simple rule clarification so everyone may benefit.
So talk with your DM, and discuss the rules, and state it didn't make sense to you the first time it happened (don't start with accusations, or proving you may understand the rules better). Just ask for clarifications, so you both may be elightened.
Or course, if either of you has a point to prove, then the above advice will not go very far.
Your Horse can get/has scent, doesn't it? - Use it to track for you. Scent tracking is pretty fast.
Conflict resolution? Really?
DM made a decision and it's over. Just move on.
Minor interjection, courtesy of a Morbid Fact du Jour from way back... 'botched' hangings, wherein the subject's neck wasn't snapped immediately, could take in excess of 15m-30m (or multiple retries, or the executioner sitting on or hanging from the subject's shoulders) to actually result in fatality, so the shapeshift may not have been postmortem. In fact, one unfortunate soul in England was found to have a still beating heart 3h after his 'execution' during the subseqent medical dissection (in the days when that was the sole source of cadavers). Not much bearing on your player-GM troubles, but some on the lead-up I guess.
Just a minor point sometimes the long hang time wasn't the result of botching but intentional, depending on the severity of the crime and the malice of the force dictating the punishment.
Conflict resolution? Really?
DM made a decision and it's over. Just move on.
That is the sort of attitude that has let so many bad DMs wallow in their terribleness for years.
I have a story about a crappy GM.
It's a pretty good story.
So we're cruising through Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil, and I'm playing a monk who's on point. I listen at a door. I roll a NATURAL 20. I hear nothing. I open the door, and am SURPRISED by a HOWLER.
HOWLER.
The very same creature who's description in an earlier monster manual said something along the lines of, "Nary is an adventurer surprised by this beast, for it's HOWLS echo through the dungeon for MILES ON END."
Now me and a buddy of mine had had enough, because this sort of thing was happening every gaming session so we decided instead of protesting verbally, we'd make signs. We each had a piece of paper in our folders full of play stuff, on which we wrote in fat black sharpie(profanity shortened to keep it kid friendly) "F the GM. F him in his Fing A."
Identical signs.
So then every time he did something else like that, for the rest of the campaign, we would both hold those signs over our head, silently, with grins on our faces. And it happened quite a bit. And he kept doing it. We were like the Dungeons and Dragons Tea Party, except less Obama.
Never did finish that campaign.
I phoned my Kingmaker GM earlier today and I...
** spoiler omitted **...
The key word here is "groggy". I think you're being too intense about this. Let it go. Pick up the social cues: don't make this into a power struggle.
Hmm.. I think I recognize the encounter. I wonder if the GM is confusing one of the possible outcomes mentioned with "what is supposed to happen"? If he suddenly felt like he made a mistake and tried to fix it by fiat, that might explain a bit. Unfortunately, the "fix" might be creating an even bigger problem (negating the party's effect on the story).
Do the others in the group feel like this was mis-handled?
As far as I can tell, you basically called him, possibly woke him up, and said in so many words, "You're wrong, and I want you to take the time design me a special solo scenario just for me so I can prove that I'm right."
Huh? Prior to the phone call, things were fine. I hadn't accused him of doing anything wrong or anything.
A lawman chasing a criminal who has escaped the gallows is perfectly logical. A lawman who tracks a criminal who outpaces him is likewise perfectly logical.
Everything seemed fine up until I called the other day.
|
|
RD, honest question, here.
Do you, as a character, take great pains to make sure nothing gets away, EVER?
Or (alternately) do other members of your party frequently take great pains to make sure nothing gets away, EVER?
I ask because, my gaming group is like that. It's sort of annoying as a GM when nothing you put in front of the players can EVER escape for any reason (without protracted argument ended by GM fiat or me simply caving in, of course).
Is this an ongoing problem for your GM? Just thinking that there may be a baby in that bathwater somewhere.
So, I don't know your GM is planning specifically, since he's deviated from the written module a little bit
But what my "GM sense" says that he's doing is that he's setting up some sort of encounter for next session. I mean, someone fleeing a public execution like that is a dramatic cliffhanger. Sounds like next session is going to start off with a bang for how you deal with that sort of cliffhanger. And by "you" I mean it in the plural: "you and your whole party."
So let's say I'm asleep, or just learned that my boss is giving me a bad review this quarter, or something. I'm not thinking about game. My friend calls me up: yay! I was moody and wanted someone to care about my F-ed up personal life. Then I'm disappointed that you don't care about me and just want me to do something for you. I'm really not in the mood for that right now. Besides, your plan would totally destroy the cool session kick-off I'm planning for next time. And rather than come up with some sort of neat explanation, because I'm sleepy/depressed I accidentally let my guard down and just admit "it's a story thing, leave it alone."
Give him the benefit of the doubt and don't incrimindate him on the internet. If he has a repeated history of "doing it wrong", then you should talk to him about your preferred playstyle. However, mortals are allowed to slip up occassionally.
Some days there's more to be gained by just rolling with the GM and letting the story develop along.
To be honest, if the encounter was played out from the get go then obviously there's a whole town that had to be navigated first, and the werewolf would have been running down tight spots, crossing rooves the whole shebang.
In a well played out situation you would have had to have pursued on foot, or try to grab your horse, guess which way he was headed, and try cut him off at the pass.
The rest of the post gets srota moot after that, had he got on rooves and shot the town wall (or got off your immediate 'radar') you would have had to spend time finding his trail and THEN started running...
Some players want to go down that "No one ever escapes us, ever" and yeah it can get a bit tiresome. Sometimes bad guys escape. True story. Even despite 21st century technology in our penal system.
I think it was a poorly run escape sequence, I'll give it that, and the GM could have come up with other ways to handle it, but to call him out and get cranky because something didn't go as you'd have liked seems a little harsh.
Note: I have NOT read the AP. What I am going to say is pure conjecture on my part not "spoilers" of the AP.
DM's are people too. It may be that if you already "went off the path" so to speak that he was tired of the WW and was done with it and just wanted it to run off. Maybe he has some plan for it to come back later and harrass you and that won't work if you go and track it down and kill it.
If the DM is usually reasonable and such I'd say.. let it pass. See what happens in the future. Sometimes the DM *has* to fudge things if he has a specific idea he's planned out. I know that we, as players, don't always like that.. but if the DM has put alot of thought and planning into some future idea- its part of his fun too. As annoying as it would be for some AP-written BBEG to get 2 shotted by the good guys before he even gets two words into his monologue I can only imagine the frustration at having some NPC you actually had plans for get hanged before his moment to truly shine came into play.
He was probably having a bad day when he talked to you on the phone. Relax, take a breath, give it a day or two, see how it pans out at the next session. Maybe you won't have to hunt the hairball since it'll be coming after you. (again a guess on my part- not a "spoiler" of the AP).
-S
RD, honest question, here.
Do you, as a character, take great pains to make sure nothing gets away, EVER?
Or (alternately) do other members of your party frequently take great pains to make sure nothing gets away, EVER?
I ask because, my gaming group is like that. It's sort of annoying as a GM when nothing you put in front of the players can EVER escape for any reason (without protracted argument ended by GM fiat or me simply caving in, of course).
Is this an ongoing problem for your GM? Just thinking that there may be a baby in that bathwater somewhere.
Bad guys that get away can relay party tactics, among causing other problems. There are not to many times when letting someone get away is a good idea.
PS:If I want a bad guy to show up and escape I normally do it as a cut-scene, not in an actual fight. The dice gods have a strange impulse to randomly ruin a GM's plan.
We held a public trial, found him guilty, and staged a public execution....Well, the man hung for minutes before he finally stopped twitching....then...escaped the noose, dashed through the crowd, and disappeared.I see this complaint all the time, and I just don't get it.
GMs: If the NPC is so important, don't put him in a position where the PCs could bring him down. If all it takes is one failed save or one lucky crit to wreck your whole scenario, then maybe you need to rethink the encounter. Don't have the BBEG pose on top of a precarious perch to deliver a gloating speech, that the PCs will refuse to listen to ("That's gotta be six seconds, can I shoot him yet?").
If you're not prepared to risk his death or capture, then don't bring him to the table. Keep him as a mysterious threat, that his lackeys speak of in hushed, fearful tones. Then, when the PCs get to the point at which his defeat is 'dramatically appropriate', you can take the gloves off, and he will be all the more memorable, as he has traction in their minds, rather than being 'that nameless chump you critted with your axe'.
The thing about telling a GM he is doing it wrong, is that about 90% of the time, players have no idea if he is or isn't.
This is a prime example of this. You THINK you know what happened with the bad guy in question. But there are all sorts of things that could have happened, that you are intended to discover, that were not immediately apparent. But what is apparent is that the OP immediately jumped to a conclusion about it.
I had a problem player who for years could be counted on to jump to a conclusion 50% of the time that I was somehow nerfing, cheating, doing something wrong, bending some rule, etc., every time he couldn't immediately explain something. An entire session could be disrupted by his assumptions, until the whole group could find some way to convince him that a legitimate cause likely was at play and could be found in time.
I never gave him a reason to think I was cheating him in this way. It was simply his personality. Unfortunately, another player - a close friend of his - picked the habit up, and so even after the problem player was gone, sometimes would question me. It took years of building trust afterwards before he came round to learning patience and actually apologized to me for it.
Thing is, you're talking about a world filled with magic and the supernatural. Not everything is what it immediately seems to be. PCs can be protected from, brought back from, and even made to simulate death, yet somehow GMs are expected to make sure no NPC ever is? Ridiculous. If it serves, it serves. Sometimes patience is paramount.
Some days there's more to be gained by just rolling with the GM and letting the story develop along.
To be honest, if the encounter was played out from the get go then obviously there's a whole town that had to be navigated first, and the werewolf would have been running down tight spots, crossing rooves the whole shebang.
In a well played out situation you would have had to have pursued on foot, or try to grab your horse, guess which way he was headed, and try cut him off at the pass.
The rest of the post gets srota moot after that, had he got on rooves and shot the town wall (or got off your immediate 'radar') you would have had to spend time finding his trail and THEN started running...
Some players want to go down that "No one ever escapes us, ever" and yeah it can get a bit tiresome. Sometimes bad guys escape. True story. Even despite 21st century technology in our penal system.
I think it was a poorly run escape sequence, I'll give it that, and the GM could have come up with other ways to handle it, but to call him out and get cranky because something didn't go as you'd have liked seems a little harsh.
I think he was cranky(insert other word as appropriate) because the GM decided to ignore the rules, which is a valid reason to be cranky, and since RD is more rules entrenched that a lot of the rest of us are then he is probably more troubled by it than the rest of us would be.
I can't say it is harsh. It depends on whether or not the group has a norm of being a by the book group vs a storytelling group. When you break the group's playstyle people tend to be upset. I am about 85-90% rules and 10-15% story. What that means is I try not to use a lot of mcguffins and plot devices, and I don't throw the group a lot of bones. Some people like the challenge, knowing I will smoke them at any given time, while others care more about the story, and don't like the fact that the character they spent a lot of time on might die.
I won't tell a GM to run either style, but I do suggest that he/she remain consistent.
We held a public trial, found him guilty, and staged a public execution....Well, the man hung for minutes before he finally stopped twitching....then...escaped the noose, dashed through the crowd, and disappeared.I see this complaint all the time, and I just don't get it.
GMs: If the NPC is so important, don't put him in a position where the PCs could bring him down. If all it takes is one failed save or one lucky crit to wreck your whole scenario, then maybe you need to rethink the encounter. Don't have the BBEG pose on top of a precarious perch to deliver a gloating speech, that the PCs will refuse to listen to ("That's gotta be six seconds, can I shoot him yet?").
If you're not prepared to risk his death or capture, then don't bring him to the table. Keep him as a mysterious threat, that his lackeys speak of in hushed, fearful tones. Then, when the PCs get to the point at which his defeat is 'dramatically appropriate', you can take the gloves off, and he will be all the more memorable, as he has traction in their minds, rather than being 'that nameless chump you critted with your axe'.
The thing about telling a GM he is doing it wrong, is that about 90% of the time, players have no idea if he is or isn't.
This is a prime example of this. You THINK you know what happened with the bad guy in question. But there are all sorts of things that could have happened, that you are intended to discover, that were not immediately apparent. But what is apparent is that the OP immediately jumped to a conclusion about it.
I had a problem player who for years could be counted on to jump to a conclusion 50% of the time that I was somehow nerfing, cheating, doing something wrong, bending some rule, etc., every time he couldn't immediately explain something. An entire session could be disrupted by his assumptions, until the whole group could find some way to convince him that a legitimate cause likely was at play and could be found in time.
I never...
I am going to have to disagree with that 90%.
"Doing it wrong is" subjective though, and the DM can retcon the reason to make sense such as "The bad guy has ability ______, but that does not mean he did not initially dropped the ball.With regard to your player, as much as I am all for player equality and allowing them to question me, I am not for disrupting a session. He has about 60 seconds to find the rule. If he can find it I will reverse the ruling. I have done so before, but if not then I will be more than happy to do an in depth check after the game and get back to him. If a DM says "I know" that should let the player know the DM has a reason as to why an rule appears to be broken, but actually hasn't. I have no problem explaining how X happened once the situation will have not further affect on the game. This gives them a peak behind the DM screen to an extent, but that should not be an issue since it helps them understand things more as a DM. That way they become better DM's, if they ever want to try it, and even if not it normally makes a lot of questions go away.
PS: As to the single player session which I have failed to address I would not do it unless there was a special reason to do so, and it benefited the group as a whole. I would also give XP as if the entire group is there.