The PCs are all members of a rebellion, and they are marching off to do battle with the loyalist forces. If the rebels lose this battle, they will have lost such a major portion of their army that the rebellion will be severely weakened. If the rebel leader dies, the rebellion will completely collapse. The PCs have a major role in this battle, as they must take down the loyalist leadership.
My question is, once the battle has ended, what should be the consequences for the PCs? Should they be taken prisoner, or is it more realistic that they would be executed on the spot? If prisoners, should they be put on trial? What should the penalty be after they get convicted? Death or slavery? Should they be tortured for information by the loyalists? With the rebel leader dead and the rebel armies crushed, do the loyalists even need information?
I'm going to run this battle soon, and I need to know what to do after the PCs fail their mission. I want it to be brutal and unpleasant, but I also want it to be realistic.
If I put them on trial, should it be RPed? It might be fun to watch the PCs try to get off despite the fact that the verdict was decided before the trial ever began.
why you assume that they will lose the battle?
Because that's what's going to happen. I'm very angry with this group, and it's going to show when the fighting ends.
The actions of the Loyalists should reflect the alignment of the leadership.
A "good" aligned army would probably take prisoner.
An "evil" army would likely execute the rebels on the spot.
A neutral army is likely to do any of the above.
Also consider how major the players are in the eyes of the Loyalists.
If they consider them just normal soldiers they might just get away with jail time.
why you assume that they will lose the battle?My money says they are pretty severely outnumbered militarily and the enemy has at least equivalent special forces to deal with them.
Yea, and even if they beat the enemy leaderships' body guards, more will just show up, and keep showing up until the PCs are down.
Don't feel sorry for the PCs. They well and truly deserve this.
... ok I can not condone that kind of behavior. What's got you so pissed off that you intend to force their defeat?why you assume that they will lose the battle?Because that's what's going to happen. I'm very angry with this group, and it's going to show when the fighting ends.
I ruled that the monk is automatically proficient with unarmed strikes, and the rogue and sorcerer WILL NOT let it go. Every single game session they start a massive argument with me and the monk's player about why the monk should not be proficient. Every time someone casts any sort of spell, the rogue insists on stopping play to look it up and comb through it for any hint of a possible rules violation. This takes, on average, several minutes. The sorcerer keeps dropping area of effect spells on enemies the barbarian is in melee with, regardless of what this does to the barbarian. When confronted about this, she just says "Well, he shouldn't have been in my way.". The rogue keeps trying to steal things from other party members, then throws a fit when caught, making half assed rules arguments about how it was impossible to have failed that skill roll. In conversations with NPCs, the monk feels it necessary to be the one who does all the talking, to the point of telling anyone else who talks to shut the hell up. This is despite the monk's low charisma. The barbarian likes to start fights for no reason, up and to the point of attacking children. This is despite being Neutral Good.
Shall I continue?
... ok I can not condone that kind of behavior. What's got you so pissed off that you intend to force their defeat?why you assume that they will lose the battle?Because that's what's going to happen. I'm very angry with this group, and it's going to show when the fighting ends.I ruled that the monk is automatically proficient with unarmed strikes, and the rogue and cleric WILL NOT let it go. Every single game session they start a massive argument with me and the monk's player about why the monk should not be proficient. Every time someone casts any sort of spell, the rogue insists on stopping play to look it up and comb through it for any hint of a possible rules violation. This takes, on average, several minutes. The sorcerer keeps dropping area of effect spells on enemies the barbarian is in melee with, regardless of what this does to the barbarian. When confronted about this, she just says "Well, he shouldn't have been in my way.". The rogue keeps trying to steal things from other party members, then throws a fit when caught, making half asses rules arguments about how it was impossible to have failed that skill roll. In conversations with NPCs, the monk feels it necessary to be the one who does all the talking, to the point of telling anyone else who talks to shut the hell up. This is despite the monk's low charisma. The barbarian likes to start fights for no reason, up and to the point of attacking children. This is despite being Neutral Good.
Shall I continue?
you have just described every gaming group in the known world ever.......lol but instead of killing them in game and ruining it you should talk to them about it maybe have them read the paragraph above.
I've tried taking to them. All that did is get me accused of not following the rules and start arguments of "why do rules even exist if you are going to ignore them". I've just about had it. I want payback.
More examples? Okay. A couple sessions after party was first made the rogue, barbarian, monk, and I ended up arguing for over two hours about whether the monk should lose all her class abilities for joining a rebellion. There was an NPC Paladin a while back who asked the party not to execute prisoners after a battle, and that provoked another argument about why the Paladin should lose all class abilities for not executing all loyalists in view. There was another argument (started by the same people) about why the Paladin should lose all powers for not supporting the loyalists. The rogue starts a rules argument half the time anyone else succeeds on a save, skill check, or attack roll, and whenever he fails one. The barbarian is obsessed with smashing the sorcerer. The entire party is good aligned while acting in manners best described as either neutral or evil, and yet they start alignment arguments over NPC actions all the time.
Just out of curiosity, what are the ages of everyone involved?
Late teens, early twenties.
What really sucks is that this is the first time I've RPed with dice and maps, and these idiots are screwing up what should be an awesome first experience.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First, Penny-Arcade offers insights: http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2010/12/13
The problems are the players. Killing all their characters may feel cathartic, but it won't fix the problems. If they're all your good friends, you can claim DM's fatigue, and propose other social activities instead.
... The sorcerer keeps dropping area of effect spells on enemies the barbarian is in melee with, regardless of what this does to the barbarian. When confronted about this, she just says "Well, he shouldn't have been in my way.". ...
...The barbarian is obsessed with smashing the sorcerer.
I'll give the barbarian a pass on this one, but the other behavior you describe is pretty bad. I haven't had a RL group to play with in decades, and long for the chance, but even I would hesitate to join the group you describe.
My advice, don't even play the last session.
Come join the wonderful Play by Post world here. In general I've found that the players are courteous, considerate, knowledgeable and imaginiative.
Can you find another group? Or put a new one together?
Can you find another group? Or put a new one together?
I wish. I had a hard time scraping this one together.
I think I'll stick to PbP for awhile.
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have something to say to Kelsey MacAilbert and his/her party: Grow up. All of you. Including you, Kelsey.
Trying to win by going through the rules with the fine-toothed comb? Bullying the GM into not doing his/her job? And, on the other side: playing the same silly game by killing off the party?
If you want to act like adults, do this:
Stop the campaign. It's over now. No sense in continuing this farce. You're not treating each other like friends here. If you cannot even talk about this, this whole RPG experiment has failed. If you're friends (or still friends after all this), do something else. Play Monopoly. Making each other cry is par for the course there. If you're not friends, ask yourself whether you ever want to see these people again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll give the barbarian a pass on this one,... The sorcerer keeps dropping area of effect spells on enemies the barbarian is in melee with, regardless of what this does to the barbarian. When confronted about this, she just says "Well, he shouldn't have been in my way.". ...
...The barbarian is obsessed with smashing the sorcerer.
AM MORE BARBARIAN PROPAGANDA
|
I ruled that the monk is automatically proficient with unarmed strikes, and the rogue and sorcerer WILL NOT let it go.
You do know that the monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a free feat at level 1, do you ?
Why do you even allow the sorcerer to stop the game to check spells ? Just punish him for doing so if he keeps insisting and makes everyone's fun suffer. Why don't you suggest to the barbarian to put a violent end to the sorcerer b+~*#ing around and striking him regularly with spells like he's the king ? Will he say that by RAW the barbarian can't attack his awesome character because it's mean ? Why don't the barbarian become CN/CE and meets a paladin ?Send your players on this thread, lots of people will have some butt kicking to do if these immature jerks aren't able to learn this is a game, not a simulation dedicated to make them gods.
Striking them down in the campaign may be satisfying, this is alas not the most mature way to deal with the problem ; which is your group itself.
AM MORE BARBARIAN PROPAGANDAI'll give the barbarian a pass on this one,... The sorcerer keeps dropping area of effect spells on enemies the barbarian is in melee with, regardless of what this does to the barbarian. When confronted about this, she just says "Well, he shouldn't have been in my way.". ...
...The barbarian is obsessed with smashing the sorcerer.
If the party had AM BARBARIAN the war would be over in one RAGELANCEPOUNCE that killed the leader his guards and maybe even the party casty.
why you assume that they will lose the battle?Because that's what's going to happen. I'm very angry with this group, and it's going to show when the fighting ends.
LOL!
Although hilarious, that's not very mature, is it?
Wouldn't it be better to just explain to them that they've made your life miserable and you don't want to play with them anymore?
Not burning bridges, acting our age, and all that?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you do this it won't end well, no matter how much they deserve it. So I will add my voice to those saying player problems should be addressed to the players, not the characters. Just quit DMing and let someone else do it. Tell them, "I obviously don't know the rules well enough to DM, why don't one of you do it now", and stick to it.
And don't try to sabotage their new game. Be the adult and lead by example.
I ruled that the monk is automatically proficient with unarmed strikes, and the rogue and sorcerer WILL NOT let it go.You do know that the monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a free feat at level 1, do you ?
Yes. The party rule lawyers say that that doesn't mean they are proficient with them. I think their idiots, but the argument persists.
Why do you even allow the sorcerer to stop the game to check spells ? Just punish him for doing so if he keeps insisting and makes everyone's fun suffer. Why don't you suggest to the barbarian to put a violent end to the sorcerer b#$@+ing around and striking him regularly with spells like he's the king ? Will he say that by RAW the barbarian can't attack his awesome character because it's mean ? Why don't the barbarian become CN/CE and meets a paladin ?
It's the rogue who stops the game to check every single spell, and I tried to stop it, but all the players agreed that the GM has no authority to do this. As for letting the barbarian kill the sorcerer, it certainly is tempting, but the rogue and sorcerer would probably start another rules argument over it.
Striking them down in the campaign may be satisfying, this is alas not the most mature way to deal with the problem ; which is your group itself.
I know it's immature, but the impulse is there none the less.
If you do this it won't end well, no matter how much they deserve it. So I will add my voice to those saying player problems should be addressed to the players, not the characters. Just quit DMing and let someone else do it. Tell them, "I obviously don't know the rules well enough to DM, why don't one of you do it now", and stick to it.
And don't try to sabotage their new game. Be the adult and lead by example.
I know I should be the adult here and handle this maturely. I really do. I'm just so damn angry.
I had a similar experiance when i first started GMing. We were all around 17-19. I was new to GMing (though i'd been playing for several years).
The group was far more concerned with blowing things up than any kind of plotline. They had all read the rulebooks cover to cover, min maxed their characters and constantly argued against rule calls. They also fought amongst themselves. At one point i had a player go through the module while i was asleep so that he could fore knowledge of the traps, puzzles, monsters and hidden loot.
In truth i think a lot of younger groups go through this - and i refer not only to age but to experiance.
At the time i was frustrated too. I wanted a 'serious group of roleplayers', but these were my friends so i couldnt stop GMing (or so i thought).
Looking back on it now (I'm 32) i realise that this taught me a lot of valuable skills as a GM, not the least of which was to deal with difficult players. I dont game with these guys anymore, as powergamers tend to burn themselves out, and then move on to videogames.
While I wouldnt recommend 'getting payback' to anyone, i think you should GM as you see fit, and learn from the fallout. I can certainly tell you, your players will be extremely unhappy if their characters are killed. They will likely have cultivated an attitude that they are untouchable. Character death is a great teacher for players and GMs. However, if it appears to be malicious on your part, they will be extremely resentful at what they see as an abuse of power.
Here is what i would do - seed into the plot the information that all is not well within the military leadership of the loyalists. You can do this through spy reports or captured documents (maybe the PCs raid an enemy courier convoy). Indicate that some military leaders might be able to be turned to the rebel cause. By offering a roleplaying solution you give the players choice. If they take it, let it play out and give them the chance to succeed. By winning this way they may learn something. If they instead choose the frontal assault, meet them with overwhelming force, but allow a window to escape should they choose to take it. Character death isnt the only way to defeat characters. If they persist with a "win or die" strategy - kill them.
TL;DR - try not to abuse the power of the GM position, but if the players act poorly, let them reap the consequences of their actions. You and the players will likely learn a lot, but dont expect happy players
|
|
Yes. The party rule lawyers say that that doesn't mean they are proficient with them. I think their idiots, but the argument persists.
This is the supidest thing I ever read. Do the sorcerer know there is no line in the book about being proficient in "rays" ?
Next time the boss dies, keep it playing. By RAW, a dead character is a nifty condition.It's the rogue who stops the game to check every single spell, and I tried to stop it, but all the players agreed that the GM has no authority to do this. As for letting the barbarian kill the sorcerer, it certainly is tempting, but the rogue and sorcerer would probably start another rules argument over it.
WTF ? Seriously ?
F&@$ them. Heck, tell them to f#*! themselves, and next time someone tries to go into the book, tell him he just got a negative level. If he asks why, enforce the page 9 rule = "the Game Master is the final arbiter of the rules".And there is no rules argument to have if you get killed in game for being a b~%&@. While the game doesn't encourage it, it doesn't forbids it either, something they should already know.
In my games we have one rule that trumps ANY rule written in the books.
GM/DM IS ALWAYS RIGHT,GM MAKES A CALL= PLAYERS HAVE TO ACCEPT IT.
It's the rogue who stops the game to check every single spell, and I tried to stop it, but all the players agreed that the GM has no authority to do this. As for letting the barbarian kill the sorcerer, it certainly is tempting, but the rogue and sorcerer would probably start another rules argument over it.
I will suggest a few things either for this game or futur games.
1) Let the players know that you are still running the clock, so if the rogue stops to check out a rule, then they are delaying (or using a standard action to perform a knowledge check - if you are feeling abused :)) and that the enemy will be taking their turns.
2) Let them know that you are the GM, and your interpretations are the ones that are correct for your game.
2a) If they argue a rule during the game and are wrong, they get a penalty of some kind, if they are right, no benefit. If they discuss after the game, and you are right, no penalty, but if you are wrong, they get some kind of benefit.
3) If a party member wishes to kill another party member, it is the decision of the player, not the GM. The GM may consider an alignment penalty, but then again may not if they believe that there was cause.
4) The game is supposed to be fun for everyone, including the GM.
I will echo a few of the others that it would be better to stop the campaign now if they will not start pulling together and stop harassing you, rather than wipe them out. Deliberately killing them off will likely get around the gaming community in your area and hurt you when you are trying to start another group or even join it.
So, you guys are late teens, early twenties?
This is a perfect lesson, in being a grown up. How adults resolve conflict is to talk stuff out, deal with it, and move on.
How 12 year olds resolve conflict is to kill the characters.
You have an incredible opportunity here. Being an adult (and maturity in general) is about doing what needs to be done, rather than what your baser urges tell you to do.
You will feel much better about yourself after, if you choose the higher ground here and talk things out. It may work, it may not. Remember, no ones behavior matters here but your own. They can be as mature (or not) as they want, but in 5 years, the only persons actions that will make you proud or ashamed are your own.
|
Please tell me these aren't the only people to play with in your community. Me? I'd just walk away. Gaming is supposed to be fun. If it isn't fun, it's a 100% waste of time.
From your posts here, you seem like a pretty cool person, I wish you could sit in on one of our games and see it done well. I feel for you, and I hope you can find some mature people to enjoy the game with.
I ruled that the monk is automatically proficient with unarmed strikes, and the rogue and sorcerer WILL NOT let it go.You do know that the monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a free feat at level 1, do you ?Yes. The party rule lawyers say that that doesn't mean they are proficient with them. I think their idiots, but the argument persists.
Just to clarify this issue, I'm pretty sure all characters are proficient with unarmed strikes. Check the weapons section of the core book.
Simple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons
Anybody but a druid, monk, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of simple weapons and possibly some martial or even exotic weapons. All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons possessed by their race. A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls.
Pulled from here: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons
The thing about the rogue looking up spells in game is that the players have agreed that the GM is never allowed to prevent players from looking up rules. They feel that to allow the GM to do this would facilitate GM cheating.
This is how I feel right now. I know I should be mature about this. I know I should act like an adult and shut the RP down. I just might. You guys probably are right about it being the best course of action.
That doesn't make me want to slaughter them any less, though.
I ruled that the monk is automatically proficient with unarmed strikes, and the rogue and sorcerer WILL NOT let it go.You do know that the monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a free feat at level 1, do you ?Yes. The party rule lawyers say that that doesn't mean they are proficient with them. I think their idiots, but the argument persists.
Just to clarify this issue, I'm pretty sure all characters are proficient with unarmed strikes. Check the weapons section of the core book.
Pulled from here: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weaponsSimple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons
Anybody but a druid, monk, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of simple weapons and possibly some martial or even exotic weapons. All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons possessed by their race. A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls.
Oh, god. This is great.
So, you guys are late teens, early twenties?
This is a perfect lesson, in being a grown up. How adults resolve conflict is to talk stuff out, deal with it, and move on.
How 12 year olds resolve conflict is to kill the characters.
You have an incredible opportunity here. Being an adult (and maturity in general) is about doing what needs to be done, rather than what your baser urges tell you to do.
You will feel much better about yourself after, if you choose the higher ground here and talk things out. It may work, it may not. Remember, no ones behavior matters here but your own. They can be as mature (or not) as they want, but in 5 years, the only persons actions that will make you proud or ashamed are your own.
Read her posts people, she already tried talking with them:
I've tried taking to them. All that did is get me accused of not following the rules and start arguments of "why do rules even exist if you are going to ignore them". I've just about had it. I want payback.
If you can't get another group I second therealthom, quit that group and play some PbP.
If you're going to quit the group and don't want to keep in touch with these people, then feel free to give them the most sadisdic TPK you can before telling them they're not going to see you again without much begging and pleading. Finish with the Cartman quote for extra troll points: "S*#&w you guys, I'mma going home."
This is how I feel right now. I know I should be mature about this. I know I should act like an adult and shut the RP down. I just might. You guys probably are right about it being the best course of action.
That doesn't make me want to slaughter them any less, though.
Venting is healthy, and sometimes, that's what random strangers are here for. We all have those days. Trust me, I'm a doctor. (on the internet)
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
I actually had a similar situation in high school. I ended it by privately talking to another player and convincing them to help me kill off the other PCs. That didn't go over very well and I never saw two of the players ever again.
If you really want to be a jerk, don't even show up to play. When they call you up to ask what happened, tell them that because they didn't respect you as a GM, you didn't have to be respectful of their time.
Killing the PCs will only lose you friends, although by the sound of it you shouldn't be playing with these people any way.
I wouldn't bother with a role play of a trial, and I wouldn't let them win the fight either. If you want them dead go for the TPK, don't bother dragging out the pain you are going to endure with the group any further. Make them fight their way all the way through to their goal, forcing them to use up as many resources as you can. Then, have a fully buffed and ready baddie ready for them, with two healer/supports, a couple ranged combatants, and a blaster. Really want to piss of the party and teach them a lesson? Stack the deck even more. Your sorcerer could be handled with a caster who is purposefully counter spelling them (with wands of Greater Dispel Magic!) Don't let the rogue have any cover of concealment for stealth, and give the bad guy Heavy Fortification armor. Cast Charm Monster on the barbarian, with a high DC due to any number of reasons.
And if any of the NPCs in the fight fall, have more step in.
But I warn you, forcing a TPK is really a last resort. It will result in really angry people, and you will have to deal with serious consequences. Just calling everyone up and telling them you refuse to GM again will be easier and carries fewer consequences.
The thing about the rogue looking up spells in game is that the players have agreed that the GM is never allowed to prevent players from looking up rules. They feel that to allow the GM to do this would facilitate GM cheating.
This is how I feel right now. I know I should be mature about this. I know I should act like an adult and shut the RP down. I just might. You guys probably are right about it being the best course of action.
That doesn't make me want to slaughter them any less, though.
And just as general advice to the overarching problem, I'd agree with most of what the other posters have recommended. Let them know that there are certain compromises everyone is going to have to make if they want you to continue as the GM. If they want to overrule you every time you say "No, let's just do it this way," that's fine - just let them know that you won't continue to serve as the GM under those conditions. Not to strong arm them, but just to say "The game slows down too much when we check the rules for every situation. Unless a rules decision will throw a character into life-or-death peril, let's just use my ruling and go with it. We have to work together for everything to move smoothly, and it's simply too burdensome to double check the rules every time a spell is cast." -- or whatever.
If they refuse, they really aren't operating under the cooperative spirit required for this game to function in a manner that is entertaining to all participating individuals.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
Oh, spell cards. Print doubles and throw one of them at the rogue player when a spell is cast.
Prepare the crap out of the game and be ready to shut down anything that slows down the game. If you think a rule is going to be questioned, bookmark it and make notes about page numbers and paragraphs. Because it would be the last game, try to find a compromise as quickly as possible.
If you do go the TPK route, pack up and leave as soon as the last PC is dead. You should have a two minute window of silent players to do so.