I recently began running a cute little homebrew campaign for my gaming group, the party consists of a Samurai, Alchemist, Mysterious Stranger Gunslinger, and a druid, all of which are second level. For their first adventure they are exploring a mysterious island inhabited by terrible beasts who roar like thunder and are coated with thick hides of scales. After a bit of aimless wandering I decided to throw a sort of decorative encounter at them, in the form of a rutting allosaurus stumbling through the woods. What was intended to be an exciting chase scene instead became a bizarre combat encounter, as the Samurai decided he would make a self proclaimed "noble sacrifice" and draw his blade against the dinosaur, which clearly outmatched him, as opposed to running...
After a round or two I brought in a second large dinosaur to challenge the first and locked the two of them in a grapple to buy the party time. Eventually the first beast slew the second, and we ended the session as the it turned back towards the puny samurai and roared triumphantly over it's kill. But now I'm stumped as to how I should end this encounter. The rest of the party wants to flee, so I think I'm just going to let the samurai die, he's consciously making a foolish decision and is trying to justify by saying it fits into his lawful alignment...it just bothers me. A 2nd level character with Wis 14 would know better...
Any suggestions on how I should handle this? Is it callous to kill the Samurai? I don't want the player to think that being foolhardy is always going to be the answer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I see this a lot. Many people mistake nobility, honor, and valor for stupidly suicidal. There are a ton of ways to go about it, but the core contention is how the player frames the type of character they are playing. If you can, engage him in a dialogue and see if you can't come to an understanding. You can pull up actual copies of the code of Bushido, or a code of Chivalry from one of the orders. Many of these men were, ultimately, soldiers in an armed force and had to obey battlefield commands to tactical advantage. If discussions do not work, then his choice to commit suicide is his choice. Honor that privilege and eat him for lunch. I hear they go good with ketchup.
As an aside...How noble is sacrifice when the dinosaur is going to go through him like a chicken nugget? Not only did he fail to buy any reasonable time, the dino can just ignore him and head to the larger group of meat tasties. Samurai goals achieved: 0. Lunches achieved: All. Now he's lost all his honor by completely failing to do anything to preserve the lives of his colleagues. So, even with his assessment of ethical obligations being considered accurate...the tactic itself is absurdly ineffective. I would have assumed he merely hated his character and wanted to die, then eaten him up.
As an aside...How noble is sacrifice when the dinosaur is going to go through him like a chicken nugget? Not only did he fail to buy any reasonable time, the dino can just ignore him and head to the larger group of meat tasties. Samurai goals achieved: 0. Lunches achieved: All. Now he's lost all his honor by completely failing to do anything to preserve the lives of his colleagues. So, even with his assessment of ethical obligations being considered accurate...the tactic itself is absurdly ineffective. I would have assumed he merely hated his character and wanted to die, then eaten him up.
Thank you! That was my point exactly! I tried to take the in character route and convince the player that this sort of foolishness does not reflect his ability scores, or even the tenets of his clan. If he was just trying to draw it's attention so the rest of the party could flee safely before he made a daring escape that would be one thing, but he basically dragged the rest of the players into the fray with him. The only truly sensible one was the druid, who grabbed the Alchemist and Gunslinger and tossed the lot of them in a mud puddle to cover their scent.
|
|
A point that may work is this: The samurai's life does not belong to him. It belongs to his lord. His lord has paid for his training, his care, and usually his armaments if he did not have a family capable of doing so. This represents a considerable investment. To throw your life away is not the samurai's choice. It is his lord's to do with as pleased, not the samurai's. Thus, to throw his life away is to squander the lord's resources much in the same way that gambling away your earnings or slaughtering peasants was.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did you talk to him out of game about it?
If they don't catch your drift when you beat around the bush, sometimes you have to take a machete to the bush and talk to them directly.
And if they then decide to get lost in the bush when there's a clear path through it...well you did all you could. That's all them at that point.
Uh... I think the solution is pretty obvious. The dino just killed another dino. It has ALL IT WANTS right there and then. Being: Lots of meat to eat. From hunting, its priorities have gone entirely to "mine!" and so long as the inconsequential little snacks don't bother it, or worse, try to take its meat, it isn't going to worry more about them. It has a 1 Int, which is pretty much full now.
@ErrantPursuit; That's a very good point, I may just throw that reasoning at him. This at least constitutes an alignment bump towards chaos...I would think, it's just trolling.
@Rynjin; I've absolutely tried talking to him about it out of character, in fact I made a poor gamemastering decision and halted the whole encounter to discuss his actions with him.
...I think I just figured it out, actually. I'm generally the PC that jokes about starting riots and leading the party off on unplanned tangents and whatnot. Plot disruption in the name of fun is my middle name...as a player. He's definitely just screwing with me...
Damn it.
@Panos71; He has yet to try. He has the feral child archetype and his animal companion is a young spinosaurus (I know...I know.)so I can't see why he wouldn't be capable of making a reasonable attempt.
@Panos71; He has yet to try. He has the feral child archetype and his animal companion is a young spinosaurus (I know...I know.)so I can't see why he wouldn't be capable of making a reasonable attempt.
Why "I know, I know", what's wrong with spinosauruses?
Anyway, since the dinosaur is hostile that will still take about a DC 25 check and one minute of work.
I generally hold the position that when a player throws their character at a monster that clearly outmatches the entire party, they will face the consequences. I'm not a killer GM, but being stupid in a lethal profession such as adventuring, will get you killed.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
which clearly outmatched him
That is your first problem.
I've been running full time multiple games a week for a very long time and often the party mix changes over time.
I've never had a group that understood what "clearly outmatched" means.
I've learned over the years that there is no way of conveying this other than to intercept their actions and bluntly tell them "no you didn't, this isn't a combat encounter and you will do this instead". In short, don't throw any encounter to your party you don't intend them to tackle with force.
Have you asked him if he just wants to play a new character? It may be that he's decided he doesn't like the Samurai, and wants to play something else, but wants to go out on a "cool" note.
Just have the dino eat him, giggle and roll out. Next, require that he cannot play a similar class like paladin, samauri or cavalier. In fact, make him be a lowly honorless rogue or lying witch just to punish him.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
which clearly outmatched himThat is your first problem.
I've been running full time multiple games a week for a very long time and often the party mix changes over time.
I've never had a group that understood what "clearly outmatched" means.
I've learned over the years that there is no way of conveying this other than to intercept their actions and bluntly tell them "no you didn't, this isn't a combat encounter and you will do this instead". In short, don't throw any encounter to your party you don't intend them to tackle with force.
I very much disagree with this. I personally really hate it when a GM says what my PC does.
There are things in the world that a PC can't realistically challenge. I think it is much better to allow the PC's the opportunity to learn that fact. Either from knowledge checks, description, legends, or rumor. If the PC's then do something stupid that is their fault.
|
I would talk with player in private and ask him about his expectations. If he believes it's fine for his character to die, just do it. You shouldn't throw at players something unkillable, altho I had similar encounter in AP, but it was scripted in such way that PC's needed to survive for 3 rounds, nothing else.
|
While I don't see the players actions as anywhere smart or noble, he might have felt not only outmatched, but also outrun by this...
Ummm, throwing things at the players that are out of their CR range, but are not necessarily combat encounters is fine. Players who feel entitled to attack everything deserve death. Then they will learn that they are not the top dogs in the world, especially not as level 2 characters. To only include things that they can beat is really limiting.
As for this dinosaur, I would have it continue to feast on the dead dinosaur, and then only attack the samurai if his sword managed to hurt the dinosaur, ignoring it like we do a mosquito until it bites us, and them we stomp it flat :)
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I very much disagree with this. I personally really hate it when a GM says what my PC does.
There are things in the world that a PC can't realistically challenge
You are missing my point:
The DM shouldn't have put the encounter in the game.
We share the disagreement on the DM telling you what your PC does, I hate it. This particular OP DM has only one reasonable choice. To tell the PC what he does (namely successfully run away.)
To only include things that they can beat is really limiting.
It is my strong believe (from experience) that players don't enjoy playing games that they feel outmatched. In the past when I was early in my DM path, I would present these encounters to my players and wonder why they always tried to make them into combat encounters.
So it comes down to this:
If you put encounters not expected to be combat into the game, expect to go through some total party kills until you stop doing that.
Ok, I don't disagree quite as much.
Your wording made me think you were saying that you've learned over the years to take over their character and tell them what to do. I'm glad that was not what you meant.
I still somewhat less strongly disagree with the statement that the encounter shouldn't have been there.
I know very well that a few/some/many groups play with the unstated rule that 'There will be no encounter that is not level appropriate.' My current group is one of those groups.
Personally, that is not my preference. (I go along because the rest of this group likes it that way.)
You are threatened by the head of the assassin's guild for the entire continent, the king's champion challenges you to a duel, the brigands that wiped out the town are on your trail, (you are being chased by a dinosaur)... Meh doesn't much matter. It might be a tough fight, but we can take them or they wouldn't be in the adventure.
If you are medium-low level PC's you should dang straight be worried about the head of the assassin's guild, king's champion, band of brigands, or dinosaur. You just might have to bargain, bluff, surrender, or run away.
The fact that running away is so incredibly difficult in PF without the odd 'chase scene rules' is a totally different subject.
Dinosaur hungry.
Dinosaur kill other dinosaur.
Dinosaur spend day eat other dinosaur.
PCs walk away.
/thread
Had the other dinosaur not come along, then the dinosaur should ignore the samurai and chase the other 3. If the Samurai would then manage to piss the dinosaur off, then the Samurai should instantly die.
However, all of that is pointless since the dinosaur has all the food it wants.
Dinosaur happy.
^ ------- Pretty much this.
Make sure the players have lots of potential options and anticipate what they might do. If they come up with something ridiculous then don't be afraid to respond. Keep in mind that it's a game not just a story, because the PCs will always treat everything as a challenge.
My good friend likes to DM but... the moment any PC does something that plays to their strengths or does something he didn't explicitly anticipate, he just plays god and negates what you did.
I can only imagine how this will play out when our Ninja friend gains the ability to pass through walls. Once before there has been a situation where:
"I use X ability"
"Nope."
"What do you mean 'nope'? That's a core class ability!"
"I'm the DM, I'm god." *insert come-at-me-bro gesture*
Being a DM is more than being able to tell a good story or know the rules by heart. IMO it is more about being versatile and allowing your players to BE their characters. When an encounter you plan out is designed to take 20m but takes two and half hours due to the PCs, you know you're doing it right.
I recently began running a cute little homebrew campaign for my gaming group, the party consists of a Samurai, Alchemist, Mysterious Stranger Gunslinger, and a druid, all of which are second level.Can the druid use wild empathy on the dinosaur to save the samurai?
"To use wild empathy, the druid and the animal must be able to study each other, which means that they must be within 30 feet of one another under normal conditions. Generally, influencing an animal in this way takes 1 minute but, as with influencing people, it might take more or less time."
The samurai is going to be an appetizer before that minute is up. I would classify a predator fresh off a kill as to be particularly inclined to defend its meal.
I very much disagree with this. I personally really hate it when a GM says what my PC does.
There are things in the world that a PC can't realistically challenge
You are missing my point:
The DM shouldn't have put the encounter in the game.
We share the disagreement on the DM telling you what your PC does, I hate it. This particular OP DM has only one reasonable choice. To tell the PC what he does (namely successfully run away.)
To only include things that they can beat is really limiting.It is my strong believe (from experience) that players don't enjoy playing games that they feel outmatched. In the past when I was early in my DM path, I would present these encounters to my players and wonder why they always tried to make them into combat encounters.
So it comes down to this:
If you put encounters not expected to be combat into the game, expect to go through some total party kills until you stop doing that.
Right. I strongly disagreed with your original idea of saying “No you didn’t” but your’e right. In general, D&D is such that the DM is not supposed to (without warning) throw a bunch of encounters at the party which they can only handle by running away. Where’s the fun & challenge of that?
Yes, you don’t always have to have encounters where the Pc’s can win the combat- it’s Ok to have a encounter with a BBEG where the PC’s fail the diplomatic part so they have to run, sure. But that has a ‘win”- the PC’s must ‘win’ the diplomatic part. So, the PC’s can win – by talking, they "lose' by attacking. But if the only way to “win” is to run- there is no fun or challenge.
This was a poorly designed encounter.
With a monster with a higher speed, you only die tired. The allosaurus= Speed 50 ft. The “exciting chase scene’ would be over very quickly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
http://www.artofmanliness.com/2008/09/14/the-bushido-code-the-eight-virtues -of-the-samurai/Make him loose his class abilities until he meditates on things.
Such an act is:
Against rectitude: act with reason, not emotion - die when time is right, live when to live is right.
Against courage: its the hard choice, the easy way out for such a suicidal person.
Against benevolence: Killing some witless creature going about its business.
Against honor: slaying animals offers no honor (thus why samurai wern't known for their hunting unlike knights who thought killing anything challenging holds some honor.
Against loyalty: he owes the other PCs his best and this ain't it (assuming they have helped/healed etc him before.
Nor does it show much self control.Once he looses his samurai powers perhaps he should become a favored enemy 'animal', ranger big game hunter or a bloodthirsty barbarian with a self-hate complex?
What? No, that's retardulous.
Let me make sure I get this clear, you threw an opponent at your PCs knowing that they couldn't possibly defeat it, and then get mad when they don't run and you wonder if it is fair to kill one of them for it. That pretty much sum it up?
Have you ever, EVER, looked at how bad running away is, tactically speaking? Let me explain this to you. You have an enemy that is more than twice as fast as your pcs. Have you ever ran a race against someone who was twice as fast as you? It doesn't work well.
So not only are you railroading them, but you're also trying to force them on a rail road that realistically won't end well for them. But let's look at one more thing, why is it attacking the pcs to begin with? Obviously it has a good source of food already, being that it killed another dinosaur so it isn't doing it for food, it is 30 ft long and weighs 10,000 pounds so it isn't like it perceives them as a threat or a rival for a mate, it isn't evil so it isn't attacking them out of a desire to do evil. . .
Ah well. . . at least it wasn't a paladin alignment thread.
Alright Mr. Condescending attitude through the bowels of the internet, let me make this clear for you, yes, I did in fact throw an opponent at my PC's that they couldn't, and shouldn't defeat in a straight up slug match. I did not get mad when the PC's didn't flee, I was simply dumbfounded when one decided to make a...bizarre decision.
The encounter may be a bit railroad-y, yes, but this is my first attempt at really running a game, and I thought it'd be nice to offer some encounters that weren't just combat or mindless skill checks. The whole point of this dino stumbling across the party was to hurry the lot of them along towards the opening of the dungeon I had prepared, before we had to end the session. I wanted my players to feel like there was an actual world around them, instead of just foes and skill challenges scaled appropriately to level. They wanted to go to the "Island of the Thunder Lizards", they got it.
The first beast wouldn't have continued to pursue the players after being locked in combat with the other dino had the Samurai not thrown himself into the middle of their scrap and proceeded to poke everything in sight with his little Katana. To address your bit about how tactically foul retreating is, I think you're straight up talking out of your ass. They aren't battling on an open plains, this is dense jungle, there are large trees in every direction that could've inhibited the beast's advance via the virtue of deus ex machina. I wasn't just going to kill my party with a dinosaur, I'm not a dick, but I do expect them to pick the lesser of two evils when faced with a tough decision. But oh well, I suppose I was wrong to make assumptions. I guess I've learned from this experience.
Oh, and this player has already stated that if the Samurai dies he wants to roll a paladin...I think I'm gonna put my foot down and say no for once.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Players should not rely upon the DM giving them a “deus ex machina.” And with a 50” speed, running was just a silly move.
Calling this “a bit railroad-y” is like calling the ocean “a bit damp-ish”.
Dinosaur hungry.
Dinosaur kill other dinosaur.
Dinosaur spend day eat other dinosaur.
PCs walk away./thread
Except that the dinosaur will not start eating with a percieved threat still around, it will try to drive the PCs away, which in turn will probably just make the samurai attempt to attack again.
|
Alright Mr. Condescending attitude through the bowels of the internet, let me make this clear for you, yes, I did in fact throw an opponent at my PC's that they couldn't, and shouldn't defeat in a straight up slug match. I did not get mad when the PC's didn't flee, I was simply dumbfounded when one decided to make a...bizarre decision.
The encounter may be a bit railroad-y, yes, but this is my first attempt at really running a game, and I thought it'd be nice to offer some encounters that weren't just combat or mindless skill checks. The whole point of this dino stumbling across the party was to hurry the lot of them along towards the opening of the dungeon I had prepared, before we had to end the session. I wanted my players to feel like there was an actual world around them, instead of just foes and skill challenges scaled appropriately to level. They wanted to go to the "Island of the Thunder Lizards",...
I fully agree with the way you handled this as GM. If you're trying to create an expansive world, what better way to show it than introduce them to something they can't defeat AND can't reason with? This isn't Skyrim... the dungeons aren't going to level up with them.
As a general rule, I've noted that players are better at securing their own demise than GMs. GMs should offer reasonable, logical conclusions to the players' actions.
If I had been the GM for this particular session and the samurai wanted to stare down a powerful (unintelligent) foe, I would say something along the lines of: "I'm not sure you understand the gravity of the situation you find yourself in. You've sized this thing up as something much more powerful and faster than you; if you stick around, you'll likely get eaten and so too will your buddies. But it's unintelligent and may only want to eat its fresh kill... and you want to poke it with a stick? Are you absolutely, positively sure?"
If he says yes and continues down the path of lawful stupid, the only reasonable, objective, logical conclusion is lawful tasty snack.
Sometimes players don't foresee the full consequences of their actions, and its our duty as GM to remind them of that. However, after we've fulfilled our duty, the consequences of their actions falls on them.
Obviously it has a good source of food already, being that it killed another dinosaur so it isn't doing it for food, it is 30 ft long and weighs 10,000 pounds so it isn't like it perceives them as a threat or a rival for a mate, it isn't evil so it isn't attacking them out of a desire to do evil. . .
it would probably see them as rivals for the carcass. A dinosaur is probably not smart enough to realize that the humans don't intend to take any of the meat, and even if they did, it wouldn't possibly understand that the amount they would eat would be negligible compared to the amount supplied by the carcass.
Also in dinosaur world smaller creatures can still be threats, especially those that come in groups and even more so when one of them was even trying to fight them. A carnivorous dinosaur will not rest until all other animals it doesn't recognize as either part of their own group or as herbivores are driven away, so it can turn its attention toward feeding.Let me make sure I get this clear, you threw an opponent at your PCs knowing that they couldn't possibly defeat it, and then get mad when they don't run and you wonder if it is fair to kill one of them for it. That pretty much sum it up?
Have you ever, EVER, looked at how bad running away is, tactically speaking? Let me explain this to you. You have an enemy that is more than twice as fast as your pcs. Have you ever ran a race against someone who was twice as fast as you? It doesn't work well.
So not only are you railroading them, but you're also trying to force them on a rail road that realistically won't end well for them. But let's look at one more thing, why is it attacking the pcs to begin with? Obviously it has a good source of food already, being that it killed another dinosaur so it isn't doing it for food, it is 30 ft long and weighs 10,000 pounds so it isn't like it perceives them as a threat or a rival for a mate, it isn't evil so it isn't attacking them out of a desire to do evil. . .
Ah well. . . at least it wasn't a paladin alignment thread.
Alright Mr. Condescending attitude through the bowels of the internet, let me make this clear for you, yes, I did in fact throw an opponent at my PC's that they couldn't, and shouldn't defeat in a straight up slug match. I did not get mad when the PC's didn't flee, I was simply dumbfounded when one decided to make a...bizarre decision.
The encounter may be a bit railroad-y, yes, but this is my first attempt at really running a game, and I thought it'd be nice to offer some encounters that weren't just combat or mindless skill checks. The whole point of this dino stumbling across the party was to hurry the lot of them along towards the opening of the dungeon I had prepared, before we had to end the session. I wanted my players to feel like there was an actual world around them, instead of just foes and skill challenges scaled appropriately to level. They wanted to go to the "Island of the Thunder Lizards",...
I can fully appreciate this. A game should have some variety, not everything has to be fighting appropriate encounters and rolling a bunch of skill checks. That being said, it is unfortunately the rule, it would seem that GMs only throw level appropriate encounters at their players, which is why it is important to make sure to establish to your players that they might occasionally run into enemies they shouldn't try to fight.
Having events that railroad PCs somewhere every now and then isn't bad practice either. As long as you don't force them along Final Corridor XIII all the time, and make the event feel organic, which i think a dinosaur chase scene would have accomplished, had it not backfired with the samurai.
This isn't Skyrim... the dungeons aren't going to level up with them.
Hey, in Skyrim you also sometimes run into things that will murder you as soon as you're at arm's length.
[I fully agree with the way you handled this as GM. If you're trying to create an expansive world, what better way to show it than introduce them to something they can't defeat AND can't reason with?
And can’t run away from…... where the only thing to save them is (as the OP/GM has put it) “the virtue of deus ex machine”. So standing there hoping for a miracle is just as logical as running and hoping for a miracle.
The OP/GM has admited it, what was going to save them was a "deus ex machine*”.
*deus ex machina
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Calling this “a bit railroad-y” is like calling the ocean “a bit damp-ish”.
Alright, alright *cheap laughter* that's completely valid, I just figured being run down through the woods by a dino was more exciting than some mundane travel through a thunderstorm, making camp, and rolling fortitude against environmental conditions. I suppose I could've thrown a more manageable encounter at the party, but I wasn't trying to challenge them, this wasn't supposed to be a real encounter, it was just meant as a story propellant towards a comfortable ending place. The whole idea may be silly, and it may be a rule of thumb that any encounter has three separate routes to PC victory, but sometimes in life you're forced to deal with a difficult decision that has no happy-shiny solution.
@Threeshades, We're on the same page, groovy. We ended the session with the first beast turning it's head towards the samurai, and roaring triumphantly over it's kill. Naturally now that it has a meal still twitching at it's feet it has no reason to pursue the party, which makes this their 3rd opportunity to safely run away. The rest of the PCs are hiding in the surrounding shrubbery, waiting for something to happen.
@DrDeth, yes, this is a poorly designed encounter, but it wasn't meant to really be an encounter, it was meant as a story propellant...towards the encounters!
The PC's don't know that the beast has a running speed of 50ft, the players might if they crack open a bestiary during combat, which should never be ok. Also, I don't know why you're correcting me on my spelling, I wrote "Deus Ex Machina" the first time around.
|
|
The OP/GM has admited it, what was going to save them was a "deus ex machine*”.
Yes, but he pointed out this became the case only AFTER the samurai poked everything in sight with his katana. Which isn't entirely smart when confronted with big, scaly reptiles...
The logical conclusion of the player's actions is that Mr. Dinosaur gets another tasty treat.
|
|
They may not know that the beast has a 50ft speed, but I know enough to know that if I come face to face with a cheetah I'm not outrunning it.
I hope you'd know that if it's in the middle of a meal, you shouldn't poke it, either!
But the samurai did, and now the dinosaur will have its just desserts. Heh heh...
Dense jungle is reason enough for a 30 ft. long dinosaur to be significantly slowed down. Contrary to popular belief an allosaurus can't just tackle trees down in pursuit, it would break every bone in its body, dooming itself to a slow and painful death, even tripping over a slightly stronger branch can be a death sentence, it has to dodge every obstacle carefully.
Don't feel bad about the encounter OP. It sounds fun and a nice change from "stuff appears we kill it." It's perfectly acceptable to improvise some rules (the "deus ex machina") for a chase with such a big creature.
When players do something like this I prefer to give everyone a DC 5 wisdom check, or something similarly easy. Someone will make it, and I just tell them "You realize that you're in way over your head." Works for me.