PDA

View Full Version : Unfair DM or Unfair players?



littlequietguy
2009-10-23, 08:57 PM
I got in a DnD argument with my DM and I need analysis to tell his point of view and how to resolve this.

So in the campaign there's this death cult thingy right? And the quest-giver says after the party had defeated the first part that the rest is in the shadowfell.
Player with medium but not great knowledge of what a shadowfell is: Why do you say that? :smallconfused:
Quest Giving Librarian: Seems pretty reasonable that the death cult would be in a place like the shadowfell *gives brief description of what shadowfell is*.
Player 1: There are lots of places associated with death. There isn't enough reason to go to the shadowfell.
Player 2: No I think we should go. The guy might reward us just for trying.
DMPC: I'm staying here.
DM: For every sentence that you argue a week of time passes.
Player 1: Forget this lets just go without the DMPC. We can handle it.
*DM gives player 2 some sort of secret sign that the town is going to be attacked by zombies apparently while Player 1 becomes invigorated with his marathon blinking session*
Player 2: No wait let's stay.
Player 1: Why?
Player 2: If zombies are attacking the town then the Necro-dude (that is his real name) DMPC guy will help us. If we leave for the shadowfell then it will just mean that the Necro-dude won't be fighting alongside against the zombies when we return.
Player 1: Okay.

Then the zombies attack and all the fortification ideas proved useless by the DM (he looked kinda annoyed by the atempts thought it might have been my imagination and retrospective bias). The zombies attacked and it devolved into repetitive combat with talking out instead of Dice-Rolling. Again, the DMPC turned evil (as it did the time before that and the time before that) and we had to face him in combat. The odds where unfair and the battle quickly turned into an argument between the DM and the players.

The DM said that if we weren't happy with this then that was because it was a relatively shoddy backup plan because we weren't following the obvious plot hook.

I said that as quests go, this one wasn't obvious in the slightest and that trusting someones words just on a hunch was insane.

As always I might be somewhat biased in my retelling but made a conscious effort to avoid it.

FoE
2009-10-23, 09:10 PM
Gods, that was hard to follow.

OK, as best as I can parse it out, it's the DM's fault. That's exactly the wrong way to run a DMPC, for one thing. For another, his plot hook sucked ("Let's head into this other plane of existence on a hunch"). And finally, it sounds like he got upset at you for going off the rails of his plot and threw a hissy fit.

Paulus
2009-10-23, 09:24 PM
DM: For every sentence that you argue a week of time passes.



*cough* yyeeeaaaahhh.... I think it's pretty clear who is trying to make who do what.

Pika...
2009-10-23, 09:28 PM
OK, in my opinion you caught the NPC AND the DMPC in the act, but instead of rewarding you and going with the flow the DM got pissy and punished you for it.

I am trying to play gygaxian, but even I know better than that.

taltamir
2009-10-23, 09:30 PM
DM: For every sentence that you argue a week of time passes.
Yea, that is pretty bad...

Also... let me get this straight, you traveled with a DMPC called NECRO-DUDE who turned on you mid battle? and that is the third DMPC in a row to do so?

I bet he would have turned on you in the shadowfell if you went there.

Gamerlord
2009-10-23, 09:33 PM
Get a new DM, one who enjoys sandbox-style gameplay when you ignore his plot-hooks, and one who doesn't make DMPCs.

Temotei
2009-10-23, 09:35 PM
Unfair DM. He shouldn't be getting mad that you got creative and did something that was against the plot, and if he did, then he shouldn't be just randomly turn the DMPC against the party for the heck of it. Also...a week for every sentence? Even though talking/yelling is a free action in combat?
*DM gives player 2 some sort of secret sign that the town is going to be attacked by zombies apparently while Player 1 becomes invigorated with his marathon blinking session* :smallconfused: He gave away part of the plot and got angry? :roy:

ericgrau
2009-10-23, 09:37 PM
That's a lousy DM. Talk to him and the whole group (together at once, everything in the open) and see if you can get him to improve. If not, the next question is do you have a better person to DM? Third question is do you have something more fun to do? Like Monopoly. Monopoly is loads of fun. If you answered no to both questions, then just bite the stupid plot hooks and go where he wants you to go so you guys can play. But I'd shoot for something better if at all possible.

taltamir
2009-10-23, 09:45 PM
Unfair DM. He shouldn't be getting mad that you got creative and did something that was against the plot, and if he did, then he shouldn't be just randomly turn the DMPC against the party for the heck of it.

Considering that every other DMPC always turned on the party, and that this one was literally called "Necro-Dude". I would say his turning on the party was not random... but planned at the moment of his creation.

Speaking of... did any one of you object to fighting evil with the guy who introduced himself as "necro-dude"?

RandomNPC
2009-10-23, 10:11 PM
dude, i've heard of players quitting over less. However i have also heard of players putting up with much more.

As hard as it is to get a player to follw plot points sometimes, I sandbox it and go where they go and they miss out on any time based plot rewards.

sofawall
2009-10-23, 10:13 PM
Speaking of... did any one of you object to fighting evil with the guy who introduced himself as "necro-dude"?

You do know that necromancy is not evil, right?

As for the sillyness of the name, well, no help there.

Thajocoth
2009-10-23, 10:35 PM
DM: For every sentence that you argue a week of time passes.There are only a handful of responses to something this insane. Things like ["Well, then I guess I'm done playing here"], ["I have to get going. I've only a week to plan a new adventure." To other players: "Who's in?"] or [To other players: "So, any of you want to DM next week?"]

littlequietguy
2009-10-23, 10:41 PM
Get a new DM, one who enjoys sandbox-style gameplay when you ignore his plot-hooks, and one who doesn't make DMPCs.

This guy is the only guy out of the DMs I know who puts effort in despite what it sounds like.

Thajocoth
2009-10-23, 10:43 PM
This guy is the only guy out of the DMs I know who puts effort in despite what it sounds like.

You ever try your hand behind the screen?

littlequietguy
2009-10-23, 10:44 PM
:smallconfused: He gave away part of the plot and got angry? :roy:

Actually the other guy in the party for some reason became under the impression that the town would be attacked by zombies just because it smelled bad. And he was right.


You ever try your hand behind the screen?

Eh. I might give it a shot in a short burst. I don't think I could manage an extended stint (or campaign as some would call it). My idea is to format the session into one campaign segment and one "mini-game" which would be some sort of political intrigue game or some other experiment in the campaign world.

Xenogears
2009-10-23, 11:00 PM
There are only a handful of responses to something this insane. Things like ["Well, then I guess I'm done playing here"], ["I have to get going. I've only a week to plan a new adventure." To other players: "Who's in?"] or [To other players: "So, any of you want to DM next week?"]

I think the best response is to make Monty Python Jokes until so much time has passed that all your characters have died of old age. Bonus Points if one of you is playing an Elan.

Lysander
2009-10-23, 11:54 PM
Playing devil's advocate, you probably should have taken the quest hook instead of being difficult. I mean, unless the DM worded it really badly it does make sense to follow a hunch given to you by a learned librarian wise old man type. Sure there are lots of places associated with death but it shouldn't have been too difficult to come up with a reason why the Shadowfell was the most likely place to start or even provide a contact for you to seek out there. If your DM couldn't provide any slightly plausible reason he was just lazy.

So in answer to your question: probably both.

The New Bruceski
2009-10-23, 11:58 PM
I think the best response is to make Monty Python Jokes until so much time has passed that all your characters have died of old age. Bonus Points if one of you is playing an Elan.

I was gonna suggest the same with "Modern Major General".

Katana_Geldar
2009-10-24, 12:02 AM
Unfair DM, if you fail to go for the quest hook the DM should bring in Schrondinger's gun, not railroad you with a DMPC. Maybe you you suggest to him to not have a NPC travelling with you. After all, the DM is not meant to have a player character.

valadil
2009-10-24, 12:09 AM
"DM: For every sentence that you argue a week of time passes."

As soon as I saw that sentence I knew it was a DM problem. The DMPC line above it was a strong hint too.

Alex112524
2009-10-24, 12:32 AM
I think the best response is to make Monty Python Jokes until so much time has passed that all your characters have died of old age. Bonus Points if one of you is playing an Elan.

You have any idea how long that would take? Assuming a human wizard/cleric ext. that starts at the maximum possible age roll, and dies at the lowest possible maximum age, it would take this character about 2160 weeks to keel over, that is a lot of Monty Python jokes, and remember this is the bare minimum :smalltongue: I would feel bad for a party of elves that were trying to do this :smallbiggrin:

Katana_Geldar
2009-10-24, 12:35 AM
Quoting monty python for even a short length of time is surely to irritate any DM. For good measure, go for Dennis the Peasant. And then when the rocks fall you can see the violence inherant in the system.

EleventhHour
2009-10-24, 12:41 AM
Quoting monty python for even a short length of time is surely to irritate any DM. For good measure, go for Dennis the Peasant. And then when the rocks fall you can see the violence inherant in the system.

I was going to go with the Holy Book of Armaments, since that part of the skit has a lot of superfluous lines, but Dennis the Peasant is just a better fit.

(Or ask the DM if the NPC wieghs more than a duck. A ridiculously oversized duck, on a off-center scale. :smalltongue: )

:: Or if he has his Campaign notes protected from Accountant Pirates.

Myou
2009-10-24, 04:38 AM
Playing devil's advocate, you probably should have taken the quest hook instead of being difficult. I mean, unless the DM worded it really badly it does make sense to follow a hunch given to you by a learned librarian wise old man type. Sure there are lots of places associated with death but it shouldn't have been too difficult to come up with a reason why the Shadowfell was the most likely place to start or even provide a contact for you to seek out there. If your DM couldn't provide any slightly plausible reason he was just lazy.

So in answer to your question: probably both.

No, the DM gave out two plot hook and they took one. How is that wrong? How were they meant to know that he wanted them to run off the some hellhole just in case it was helpful, but not defend the town against zombies? That doesn't make any sense.

Gamerlord
2009-10-24, 06:43 AM
He should have at least let you guys do some other quest, I mean, there is a random dungeon generator in the DMG for a reason!

Before you say anything, the 4e one DOES have a random dungeon generator, it is just very tile-based.

Asgardian
2009-10-24, 07:47 AM
I think letting them know that the town was going to be attacked by zombies was to let them know that things were supposed to be time sensitive and they had to go to the Shadowfell and get back as soon as possible and the DMPC could deal with it in the interim.

If that was the case, it sounds like everyone is wrong in this one.

If the players are obviously being railroaded in specific direction (which sucks), the players shouldn't get upset when things don't go their way if they DON'T follow the tracks. It sounds like the wound up fighting in an encounter BEFORE they ready for it

Even if the players screw up the DM's plans and ruin TWO encounters (going to shawdowfell AND coming back to a zombie controlled town by the "necro dude", hes has no right to get angry at them. All the players wanted was a REAL reason to follow the tracks, he should have come up with something more conrete like "The cultist were wearing the mark of Dark Lord Whatever of the shadowfell".

AstralFire
2009-10-24, 07:54 AM
I agree with Asgardian, the whole thing sounds like a clusterbomb.

Random832
2009-10-24, 08:51 AM
Without even reading the rest of the OP first...
"DM: For every sentence that you argue a week of time passes."

Seriously? What, characters talk that slowly?


Anyway, talk to him. Maybe not "So I asked the internets and they told me you are in the wrong here", but point out that penalizing you a week of time per sentence was childish, that his plot hooks could use some work, and that the "DMPC betrays the party" bit is getting old.


You do know that necromancy is not evil, right?

Yeah, srsly - there are [Good] spells in the necromancy school. Like Sanctify the Wicked. :smallcool:

SartheKobold
2009-10-24, 02:12 PM
I really think you should sit in the DM's chair for a few nights... A: It would give you a chance to flex an underused muscle for a while, and B: It would give your old DM a chance to recoup and replan some plot lines, and maybe shore up a few he thought were a little safer from PC destruction...

taltamir
2009-10-24, 02:22 PM
You do know that necromancy is not evil, right?

As for the sillyness of the name, well, no help there.

necromancy isn't necessarily evil (although by RAW it is)... but the last 2 DMPCs turned on them and this one is named necro dude... What do you think will happen?


To clarify a bit... yes you guys could have just followed the ill justified but obvious plot hook... but questioning it is reasonable and in character, if he wanted to push you there he could have just randomly uncovered more evidence... (say, a random attack by assassins, you find a journal on one showing how he hates the utterdark)...
Saything things like "for every sentence you argue a week passses" and then turning the DMPC on the party etc is just throwing a hissy fit.

Now if the DM said "look, OOC, I know its an obvious and maybe flawed plot hook but its all I could think up, how about you just do it?" and you were still fighting it then yea, you would have been jerks, but that didn't happen. You questioned (validly) something IN CHARACTER and got a hissy fit from the DM instead of an answer.

There is also a matter of playstyle... is this DM very story oriented or very hacky slashy?

kjones
2009-10-24, 02:39 PM
DM: For every sentence that you argue a week of time passes.

If any DM ever said this to me I would either argue until my character died of old age, or punch him in the mouth and leave.

Seriously. You don't do that..

Vangor
2009-10-24, 02:44 PM
While DMs should not railroad players, players need to assist the DM in wanting to follow tracks.

Whenever my players are wandering beyond my campaign boundaries, I inform them and the party reorients. However, my players never feel forced to decisions as far as who they align themselves with, how they approach the situation, etc.. You should accept the information given if this is obviously how the DM is giving a plot hook. The DM was being a jerk afterward and practically forcing you. A simpler solution would be merely to ask, "Do you want us to go to Shadowfell? I am not exactly trusting the information of Necro-dude...feels like a trap." You would receive an answer similar to, "I would prefer you to because this is where I have more done for the campaign, but you do not need to trust Necro-dude, just figure this is the only clue you have for the cult."

Steward
2009-10-24, 02:46 PM
Yea, when you have an NPC track record like that, there's nothing wrong with being suspicious. Doomstalker or Cornelius Voresbastid or Vince "V" Illain might be perfectly trustworthy but it's still a big risk.

cZak
2009-10-24, 03:37 PM
While the OP's description is fairly egregious, there have been many a post deploring the "DM railroad" scenario.

However... As a DM, I put much time and effort into developing a storyline that I think will be enjoyable for all. There are some players who think it is the DM's 'job' :smalleek: to entertain them, and take no consideration toward the efforts involved.

I recently created four differing 'hooks' for the characters to follow at one game session that I thought would have interesting aspects for all involved, only to have one player adamantly refuse to engage in any of them.
Rightly or wrongly, I took it as great disrespect for my time and efforts...

I would just ask players to take these things in consideration when they complain about 'railroading'.




Fools are made to suffer, not to be suffered

Paulus
2009-10-24, 03:53 PM
While the OP's description is fairly egregious, there have been many a post deploring the "DM railroad" scenario.

However... As a DM, I put much time and effort into developing a storyline that I think will be enjoyable for all. There are some players who think it is the DM's 'job' :smalleek: to entertain them, and take no consideration toward the efforts involved.

I recently created four differing 'hooks' for the characters to follow at one game session that I thought would have interesting aspects for all involved, only to have one player adamantly refuse to engage in any of them.
Rightly or wrongly, I took it as great disrespect for my time and efforts...

I would just ask players to take these things in consideration when they complain about 'railroading'.

Well if players refuse to follow ANY hooks, even ones you make up on the fly, or you aren't very good at making stuff up on the fly, LET THEM DM for the session. See how they like it.

Guarantee they will refuse the first time you suggest it. Or they will accept because they are plotting.

OR. you'll even get to play instead of DM for a while.

Everyone wins!

Raum
2009-10-24, 04:16 PM
I recently created four differing 'hooks' for the characters to follow at one game session that I thought would have interesting aspects for all involved, only to have one player adamantly refuse to engage in any of them.As GM, you need to know and understand your players' and PCs' motivations and goals. Then you build the campaign to match. Ideally, you're also ensuring (during character creation) that the PCs' goals are compatible with each other.

If you just throw out four random hooks with no regard for motivation, I'm surprised only one rejected them. Not saying you did that, I don't know...but it is the GM's responsibility* to set expectations.

*It's the GM's responsibility in games / groups ceding authority to the GM. This does not apply to all games or groups.

Vangor
2009-10-24, 04:47 PM
I recently created four differing 'hooks' for the characters to follow at one game session that I thought would have interesting aspects for all involved, only to have one player adamantly refuse to engage in any of them. Rightly or wrongly, I took it as great disrespect for my time and efforts..

This is what I spoke of in my post with players needing to want to follow the tracks. Whoever you are playing with who is adamantly refusing to follow any, why are they with you? I cannot imagine anyone playing d&d with me who tried to be a petulant child. Much of the time I discuss the setting, what I hope to incorporate, etc., before we begin play, and people offer suggestions, too.

Either a person is amongst friends or is looking to play with a group, and thus no one should be difficult. Find another person.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-25, 02:26 AM
Yea, that is pretty bad...

Also... let me get this straight, you traveled with a DMPC called NECRO-DUDE who turned on you mid battle? and that is the third DMPC in a row to do so?

I bet he would have turned on you in the shadowfell if you went there.

This actually would result in me stabbing DMPCs at the first chance available. Alignment be damned, even good characters are capable of recognizing danger.

This GM is just bad. It's not even a style difference, it's just bad. A lovely combination of railroading, grandstanding via DMPC, and just being too lazy to deviate from the prepared plot(made worse given the repetition of it). Arbitrary rules like "week of time passes for every sentence you argue" are ridiculous.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-25, 02:29 AM
Without even reading the rest of the OP first...
"DM: For every sentence that you argue a week of time passes."

Seriously? What, characters talk that slowly?


Oh, btw, if this ever comes up again, first, point out that talking is a free action. With a railroading DM, he won't care, but I consider it fair to give warning first.

Then, roleplay characters as if they suddenly took a week to say a simple sentence. Bonus points for including reasons such as "mentally handicapped" and "high". If he's not going to take the game seriously, why should you?