Master Marshmallow, sounds like you've got a good storyline going and I wish you luck - as I said previously it's tough to advise from the "cheap seats", right? I hope it was somewhat productive for you. As you mentioned earlier and from what I've tracked I think the phrase "lying to my players" really wasn't even all that accurate, but again, not really that important and it sounds like you've got other plans now.
You also have a plot device in the form of the Princesseseses (however you say it) soul, which sounds like something you can mine for some good storylines. Maybe even make it a different dimension if you aim to take it that far. I'd see it as an opportunity to take the premise of the Skyrim "Dawnguard" DLC (the soul gem dimension thing) and make it sexier, so to speak. Because if you introduce the ability to transfer souls into weapons, then "going there" seems like a logical next step. But hey, it's just one of several ways to mine your storylines.
Another important thing and something I've always found to be true is the absolute treasure trove of storylines that your players will hand you on a silver platter speckled with flecks of platinum. If they spend time on a backstory I will incorporate as much of it as I can into the campaign and modify where I see fit. Actions speak louder than words and carry consequences both positive and negative. Ideally you can combine those elements, your ideas and the player's ideas into a cake that will taste fun. Ok, with that food reference I'm now going to eat something. Peace and again, luck to you sir Marsh of Mallow.
I think a lot of the stuff Said about DMPCs is rigth but as far as the Rail Road goes, remember it is only railroading i they see the tracks. It is fine to let him come back as the Ghoul Prince or somthig but why should they kill him isent he there friend?
Remember to hide the tracks and be ready to leave them if need be.
why should they kill him isent he there friend?
Remember to hide the tracks and be ready to leave them if need be.
Because they are players and players kill things, it's what they do.
|
Is your goal simply to make the players care about the NPC so that the plot twist is more dramatic? If so, there's absolutely no need to have a GMPC. Involve him in their lives, have him throw a birthday bash for a character, work on some art deals together, guard a shipment for him. Over time, players will be lulled into the notion that "hey, I did a good thing early on and now I've got a friend for life." Make sure you also include other NPCs in this game as players get pretty tired of the old "get you attached to the NPC and then BLAM, he's gone" routine.
What happens if the party declines his offer to adventure with them? After all, they're used to risking their lives for one another, and they probably don't want to share treasure. What happens if the prince, through unlucky rolls, dies (or should die if you don't fudge dice rolls, which if you do will tick your players off even more to find out you're protecting your prized GMPC)?
There appears to be no benefit to forcing him on the party if your goal is to heighten the plot twist.
Is your goal simply to make the players care about the NPC so that the plot twist is more dramatic? If so, there's absolutely no need to have a GMPC. Involve him in their lives, have him throw a birthday bash for a character, work on some art deals together, guard a shipment for him. Over time, players will be lulled into the notion that "hey, I did a good thing early on and now I've got a friend for life." Make sure you also include other NPCs in this game as players get pretty tired of the old "get you attached to the NPC and then BLAM, he's gone" routine.
What happens if the party declines his offer to adventure with them? After all, they're used to risking their lives for one another, and they probably don't want to share treasure. What happens if the prince, through unlucky rolls, dies (or should die if you don't fudge dice rolls, which if you do will tick your players off even more to find out you're protecting your prized GMPC)?
There appears to be no benefit to forcing him on the party if your goal is to heighten the plot twist.
So, you didn't read the thread?
Hi, I'm going to be doing something widely considered to be a dick move that pisses off players. I don't want any comments on that decision. I would just like input on how to best lie to my players so that I don't know I'm doing said dick move until it's too late.
[50 messages later]
Why are you guys being mean? I told you I didn't care about any of your opinions in the original post.
Looks like you didn't read it either.
I decided that he's gonna be an NPC, won't be involved in any adventures, and will most likely have all the story events happen off screen.
The horse is dead dude.
The irony is if master_marshmallow turns out to be the Picasso of game design.
"That's why."
The horse is dead dude.
Meh, to be fair, it's totally y'r own fault.
You did, after all, threaten ta' call somethin' a GMPC that wasn't actually a GMPC.
Thus, that means, clearly, y're a dirty GMPC user.
Ya'... ya'... monkerdoodle.
But yes... feed me... please read the OP incorrectly... yeeeeeeeeeeesssssssss...!
Although, in honesty, I still think you're making the wrong decision. I just think that now, at least, you're making the wrong decision with the right methodology.
But that's just a difference in playstyles. :)
Regardless, it sounds like you've got a great idea. Here's hoping it works out.
EDIT: to be clear, this isn't a rebuke, at least not meant as one. I'm just giving you my opinion, which is what you asked for in the OP.
So, to be clear, were it up to me, I would have gone with your original plan without the "this is my GMPC!" angle, since it wasn't a GMPC.
You then have multiple ways of heading toward the same general direction/conclusion with a variety of methods of getting there. Thus, if the PCs refuse to help the prince, he dies on his own blaming them, and is raised or "undeathified" (as appropriate) with a grudge against them. He's out for murder and to get his beloved back, and becomes unhinged such that he can no longer tell that even if he gets his wife back, she'd hate what he became. But ultimately, his blindness is his weakness. In this scenario, ultimately, he'd be destroyed, and, even if his love was later restored, she would be empty. The countries are doomed to warfare, conquest, and destruction almost regardless of what the PCs do - and, after a fashion, it's their fault. Ultimately, much of this happens "off screen".
If, on the other hand, they take him with them, he turns, but does not hate or blame them. Instead, he becomes a BBEG that will, repeatedly, attempt to spare his friends, even as they stand in his way, because he still loves them. Thus his hand will be softened against them, and there will be many chances to escape or survive an otherwise grueling encounter. In this scenario, the bard would hold much more personal power, and be a much more impressive villain... but one who respects his foes and loves them. In this scenario, he may be redeemed. The countries might be in a stalemate, and ultimate peace might be possible - especially if the soul is freed.
While still getting to the same goal (the moment of ascension/failure) while leaving the ultimate outcome of those up to the PCs.
There are a number of methods to effectively almost ensure that the ritual (whether resurrection, animation, or otherwise) to be un-interrupted (depending on the PCs levels, this will change, naturally) until its completion. If they defeat these wards: congratulations! Free victory! If they do not, congratulations, you've got a great long-term BBEG!
In any event, he needs to be changed thereafter, or he'll be a pushover.
And that's really what I mean. Just making him an NPC and mandating that it be "off screen" is not the way I'd handle it. But it's better - to my way of thinking - than claiming a GMPC when it is not. It's a more honest approach, and I appreciate that. Thus an improvement in methodology, though a mistake in design focus, from my point of view.
However, given that your players sound, from your brief description, like trigger-happy aggression-focused crew of professional "problem killers" (emphasis on the "killer") this might not work for them. It is, instead, tailored toward my various groups' styles, not yours. Thus, that's where I come from with this suggestion.
Not, "You're doing it wrong." but rather, "Not the way I'd handle it."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@master_marshmallow You've gotten a lot of guff but the thing is, sandbox style play goes in and out of vogue. When I learned how to play, highly scripted stories were all the rage. The pendulum's swung back the other way now. But back then you would have been regarded as a little immature and "not getting it" if you ran dungeon crawls, and now you're regarded as a little regressive and "not getting it" for including a more scripted or railroady type of interlude.
Of course I was putting peanuts in my coke when Country wasn't cool, but I'm just awesome like that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stop, please. I came into this thread reading the OP and I thought "what a cool story! I hope he makes this into a novel" but then I started getting into the thread and everyone started taking cheap shots at everyone.
Double-M: I think you're an excellent writer. Your plot looks very interesting from an audience standpoint. As for your OP where you were basically asking "would a DMPC be wierdly off-putting for the players or would the ending justify it?" I suppose that would depend on your players.
From here on in I can only go by my own opinion and experiences since I don't know you in RL and am not one of your players. In my games I've run many DMPCs. I have learned from painful experience that the second said DMPC overshadows the PCs I lose the players.
Also whenever I plan how to have an NPC orchestrate things beyond a single decision point it always blows up in my face. You are more than likely a better GM and chess player than I am so you can make this happen.
So to answer your query: if it were in MY game I wouldn't have the confidence to pull something like this. More than likely my PCs would get to the secret wedding, smuggle in weapons anticipating in-law shenanigans and TPK themselves trying to save the bride in the first place. Not to mention the fact that my players are also the types that, toward the end of the plotline as the prince turns, they'd be like "wait, what was his name again? Oh right... he's evil now? Ok, we teleport to him. Here's my initiative..." I don't think they'd be moved by the pathos of your tale.
So for other posters in this thread: it might not be OUR cup of tea to run a game like this for many reasons, but the Mallow-Man wants to and he's asking for advice doing so, not a judgment of whether he should or not. I hope for this and future threads we can separate the two. And this isn't me on a soapbox; my first instinct was to howl and rage against M-squared for suggesting this plotline, but then I read the actual question and realized this was the ADVICE thread, not GENERAL DISCUSSION.
I really don't get how so many people here are so against a DMPC in the first place. I have had to run them several times before because the players asked me to, because none of them wanted to run a healer, so I made various NPCs from different regions to act as their guides and to act as their healer.
The division between player's rights and DM's rights itt really bothers me the most. I don't understand what is supposed to happen in the game if the DM doesn't have some kind of story. All I really have is a rough outline of events to happen, and places for the players to explore. I guess that makes me a crappy DM.
I'm not forcing my own PC on the players, that was never the intention, ever. I was planning on having a surprise factor for them by having who they thought was the good guy turn into the bad guy.
|
Just to clarify when I poo poo DMPC its not because of anybodys rights. If you have fun its the right way to play. I just find them to be less fun when I am at the table. Whether they are simply a walking cure wounds wand or a significant part of the story. Part of it is my players they start meta gaming instantly. If I put a GMPC in the game they would nickname him, shady McSeemsgenuine and start anticipating the moment the NPC screws them. /shrug
That's a good point @Pan. For metagame reasons the PCs are not going to expect another player to betray them. But DMPC? I'd institute every paranoid anti-betrayal and anti-doppelganger contingency I could devise. I'd feel guilt about killing another player's character, but an NPC? That's what they're for!
It comes down to a couple of very separate issues.
It sounds like what you mean is just an NPC.
...I have had to run them several times before because the players asked me to, because none of them wanted to run a healer, so I made various NPCs from different regions to act as their guides and to act as their healer...
To many of us, this is not a DMPC. This is just an NPC that happens to be along with the group sometimes for a specific task or role. Nothing wrong with that.
Many of us have an experience with what we call a DMPC. A character built with the same rules, backstory, goals, authority, and decision making, etc... as the PC's.
In practice what happens is the DMPC. Always makes the right decisions and does better than every other PC because the GM knows what is going to happen. Consequently he outshines all the PC's so they are chumps. Making all the players feel like they are sitting around watching the GM tell himself a story.
That is the emotions, memories, or definition invoked when someone throws out the term DMPC. Virtually all negative.
This is a case where your definition of a term does not match up very well with many of your readers definition of the term.
Many people will hold up the holy grail of complete sandbox as the only way to play. If you decide or work up anything ahead of time you are doing it wrong. I have almost never seen that work well in actual play. Yes there are a very few GM's that can just do everything off-the-cuff. I'm not one of them. I've only ever met one that I thought did it well.
Most AP's, modules, scenarios, and even most homebrew campaigns are somewhat scripted. It is hard to see how you could write anything that wasn't. Your description sounds a little more scripted than some, but not what I would call excessive. (It sounded much more scripted when you first described it in the initial post.)
Also some groups actually do not like sandbox campaigns. My current group is one of those. If given to much freedom to decide they have a tendency to not decide on anything. Then they get bored.
I really don't get how so many people here are so against a DMPC in the first place. I have had to run them several times before because the players asked me to, because none of them wanted to run a healer, so I made various NPCs from different regions to act as their guides and to act as their healer.
The division between player's rights and DM's rights itt really bothers me the most. I don't understand what is supposed to happen in the game if the DM doesn't have some kind of story. All I really have is a rough outline of events to happen, and places for the players to explore. I guess that makes me a crappy DM.
I'm not forcing my own PC on the players, that was never the intention, ever. I was planning on having a surprise factor for them by having who they thought was the good guy turn into the bad guy.
You're pulling off DMPCs or GMPCs or whatever; that makes you a superior GM (in my book anyway). I run a lot of NPCs with unique personalities; some of these are even recurring characters. But the last GMPC I ran was a bard/monk of Saranrae. With the players' approval I got permission to modify her weapon mastery in monk to add scimitar. I then built her mainly to draw aggro darting in and out of combat on the frontlines and if she survived in one place for a couple rounds she'd flurry while dervish dancing.
She wasn't overly optimized, but a couple times she got lucky with crits. On top of high crit damage she also had a trait that added 1 Fire damage to these. the effect was that often she'd spin like a top, landing solid blows with a suddenly-flaming sword and do as much on those crits as the Power-Attacking dwarf fighter with his hammer.
It only happened a few times. Every time I got dirty looks. Add to that her tendency to move faster and dodge more AoO's than everyone else, her desire to want to "nudge" the party toward certain points and her knowledges being equal to ALL the other players; needless to say I decided to retire her at 5th level.
I'm saying if you can run your prince, play right alongside your players and guide this story to its conclusion then you sir are my hero.
I'll update this thread when it actually happens, but there are several weeks of game time that will happen so you may not see an update to this thread for a month or so with the actual results.
In a twist of fate that none of us saw coming, my players actually asked the paladin to join their party an entire adventure before I had this planned and it segged beautifully into this scenario.
As for actually playing him, I was keeping him pretty well underplayed, not trying to outdamage the Invulnerable Rager, or out talk the group's party face. For an entire fight, he was acting as a secondary buffer and healer.
My players actually complained for him to start carrying his weight more and start killing enemies more often.
Hmm. The story has great potential if you take the RPG out of it. However, thats not an option. Rather than telling them you are running a GMNPC, just have the prince travel with them for a time as an NPC. GMNPC has the connotation that it is equal in power to the PCs and will have multiple chances to shine, and it would not serve the prince's ultimate goal to let them believe or see that. He should be underestimated. He could be an on-and-off-again NPC, until such time that he betrays them/vanishes in a cloud of smoke/fakes his own death/unveils his evil scheme/whatevs.
EDIT: I didn't read the second page of this. I see you have already begun, and my advice is somewhat moot. :)