RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
This is something I'm mostly interested in seeing others' opinions on, since I have done ideas myself but haven't come to a concrete conclusion yet. So the general question is: how much do you, as a GM, help direct your players' actions by suggesting, subtly or otherwise, courses of action to them?
For example. Let's say the PCs are going through a dungeon, and usually they search the rooms for secret doors, hidden items, and so on. But in one particular room, for some reason, they forget or neglect to search, and there's something important in that room. Do you remind them that they forgot, recommend they thoroughly canvass the area, or just let them completely miss it?
Another example. There is a particular knowledge check which can be made to recall an important piece of information relevant to the task at hand, but no one so much as broaches the subject of making a knowledge check. Do you let them know they can make a check, or let them only make it if they get the idea to do so themselves?
Again. The PCs are in a situation where they could use the help of a particular NPC, magic item, spell, or other assistance. Such an aid would prove to be very useful (let's say, using Speak With Dead on a particular corpse). But no one gets the idea to do so. Do you remind them that that aid would be useful, or recommend that course of action?
These are, of course, all generalizations of situations which have happened in my own games. I'd be interested to see how other GMs deal with it. I'd also like to hear from the player's perspective: what would you prefer your GM do in situations like those, and why?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my opinion, whenever necessary to keep the story going is theeasy answer.
|
The PCs are (presumably) experienced adventurers and should have a standard routine for looting fallen enemies and searching rooms. Unless they are under attack or otherwise unable to go through their normal procedures, you should assume they do so. Nothing is more frustrating to a player than finding out that he missed treasure because he wasn't specific enough in detailing his search. The first time that happens, you are going to lose 10 minutes of play time per room as the party goes through every nook and cranny for the rest of your campaign.
If a knowledge check is relevant, then I don't see a problem with mentioning it, unless it is really obscure.
And you should not play their characters. The decision to cast speak with dead should be theirs alone. Likewise consulting an NPC.
Before you stress about "nudging" your player, consider how you paint the scene. It sounds like you want the PCs to remember some clue that connects, or find an important item, so try to be highly descriptive in the moment. This could be a vivid image of what they are looking at which might spark the player's memory from a previous meet, leading him to make the knowledge check. And players always love to explore interesting things, and lets face it, the "aged mahogany chest, adorned with wrought-iron edging and a archaic lock crafted in the shape of a dragon's head" is far more appealing then "some boxes in the corner".
On the issue of knowledge checks and the like, you as the DM can also take charge. You could prompt a player (someone with a rank in knowledge-religion for the Speak with Dead) to make a knowledge check. Or, you could simply roll their knowledge check secretly (assuming you know what their skill modifiers are) and simply pass them a note with something they remember.
Of course, sometimes players simply act dumb. In those moments, I pick up my trusty weapon of days gone by, "ClueHammer"! Yup, I keep a boffer hammer (a PVC, foam, and duct tape prop weapon from my days of LARPing), that I have lovingly written "ClueHammer" on the head of, nearby while DMing and occasionally find myself playing with it, or even swinging it at my players, to encourage them to think about the situation again. Trust me, boffer hammers are far superior to real hammers for this task.
My GM doesn't "nudge" my group. If we didn't think to do something, then it's our loss. If it's an item we missed, he would probably make up for it later with something else. If it pertains to the story, he might do it if we get really off track or flat out forget something. Usually he rewards us with XP for figuring out clues and tie-ins to side stories.
I think a lot of it depends on how frequently the group gets together. Our group plays once a week, so its easy to forget details that happened months ago, despite it being just a few days ago in game. Our group has no problem asking the DM "is that something we would know?" Nor does our DM have an issue with mentioning "you've seen this before," or "roll a knowledge check." Of course, we also get the dreaded "are you sure you want to do that?" so take it with a grain of salt.
I think the biggest thing here is how much your group keeps an open dialogue. It's a highly person thing, and it's going to be different for every group. Is it more important to gloss over small details like looting and remembering names/clues in order to preserve flow and fun? Or is it more important that the DM simply arbitrate your actions and that every clue, name, and detail must be remembered by the player to make victory that much more amazing/satisfying? It's probably more of a scale than anything.
|
From a player's perceptive; put secret doors/hidden items that you want the players to find in locations that are likely to be found, or general perception checks(DC 25 perception check to find the hidden door in this room). It may not make sense, and may take some of that challenge away but no one has fun when you spend half an hour to an hour slowly going through an area for one certain item or entrance to complete the dungeon.
I think the main reason i think of this is one time during a home game we were in a dungeon crawl retrieving a few items, we had cleared off what seemed to entire dungeon and still only had 2/3 of the items. After a long freaking time spent going from room to room and turning up nothing it turned out that the "secret door" was in a random spot in a random corridor. I say "secret door" because it wasn't a secret door at all, it was section of wall was made out of a soft plant like material that could have easily been pushed out of the way. it wasn't mentioned because we didn't do a freaking search check (3.5) in the right square... i guess this is just a worst case scenario... i hope
Also if you want to have puzzle sections actually have some clues on how they work and what to do, i think my mind has repressed the horrible memories some bit. hell even if it's just some knowledge checks that might give a clue
I forgot to mention to my PCs that they (STILL) need to be proactive and not reactive about detect magic.
This came up recently because they were opening a series of locks on a magic trap. After they were right about to trigger the trap, I told them they triggered it and asked if anyone had used detect magic. "Oh, yeah, me, yeah," and I gave them a -2 on Perception to see the trap. They failed because of the -2.
I nudge my PCs in social situations all the time, though. It depends on how proactive they're being-- the more proactivity, the less nudging.
When it's something important, and the character wouldn't overlook it, even though the player does, our DM has us roll the appropriate ability check. Usually this is intelligence, occasionally it's Wisdom. Like when I was new to the game and my ranger was trying to decide between spending two rounds making fire arrows or just unloading at the troll immediately.
"Make an Intelligence Check."
"I got a 16."
"You think the fire arrows are totally worth it."
He also has us roll intelligence checks when we're stumped by one of his riddles; if we pass he gives us a hint.
Sometimes the character is smarter than the player. I often note this fact when trying to analyze and see which spell is appropriate with my controller wizard.
"Well?
"Gobo is smarter than me, so you'll have to give it a second."