Need help with a "Issue" player.

[gc25774]

So. I need more help. There has been a player in our session who tries to put "logic" into DnD. He's a solid roleplayer and puts out lots of effort to make the game enjoyable. But sometimes he would lay traps and not tell me about them. He think I'm gonna metagame him. I want to know how I can counteract this. He "confronts" me mid session on why his solution should work without really studying the rules. He also often ignores me saying "Logic, Bitch." He's my friend and I want to know a subtle way of solving this. Any advice will be appreciated.

[thatryanguy]

Well, it would seem to me that "Rules, bitch." would supersede his argument (assuming they do). Logic and Physics are not the prevalent forces of D&D.

And if he as a player, is doing things specifically and intentionally outside of the knowledge of the DM, then the DM has every right in the world to say that they did not happen. Especially if he's doing them that way because he figures you wouldn't let them work otherwise. That shows an intense lack of respect for you and your role at the table. He's basically saying "I don't care what you say, this is MY game."

[georgie_leech]

Point out that this is the equivalent of claiming that you "totally moved that chess piece" or "I actually hid my trap card" or "I actually pushed the buttons on this controller." A PC has no input unless run by the DM, any more than you can play a video game without pushing buttons.

[Muggins]

In the case of setting traps, you could always tell him to write them down on a piece of paper (or in an envelope) and leave it face-down in the middle of the table. Unless you've got some weird form of X-ray vision, there's no way for you to know what's on the card (thus preventing metagaming) and the player is made to declare these things earlier (thus preventing this seemingly anti-DM bias). You can do the same thing for readied actions and other, "you can't know I did this so you're a metagaming cheater" situations.

[gc25774]

Well, it would seem to me that "Rules, bitch." would supersede his argument (assuming they do). Logic and Physics are not the prevalent forces of D&D.

And if he as a player, is doing things specifically and intentionally outside of the knowledge of the DM, then the DM has every right in the world to say that they did not happen. Especially if he's doing them that way because he figures you wouldn't let them work otherwise. That shows an intense lack of respect for you and your role at the table. He's basically saying "I don't care what you say, this is MY game."

Holy hell. That was fast. You have a point. So what do I do when he jumps to conclusions? (I.E. "You hear that the villagers have been affected by a strange illness. So when a vampire allied npc catches it, he argues that she should be cured by a paladin/cleric, although I've established that cure spells and magic does not work from the start when the npcs explained the illness.) He tends to take in facts that other npcs have said and assumes that they are the DM's word. He's having issues figuring that npcs can be wrong too. When I tell him otherwise, "Rules, bitch." He's a very good friend so be... gentle. Nothing friendship shattering.

[Droningbass]

I understand that it can be tempting to apply logic to game settings, but you're the Dungeon Master and the interpreter of the rules. If this player can't cite rules to follow his "logic," then you need to tell him/her that logic doesn't always work in a world filled with magic. How many times in D&D are you able to answer a question with "because of magic?" Pretty much every day!

Ultimately, the player needs to respect your decisions regarding rules if you are the DM. The next time he/she tries to drag you into a "logic" argument, I would suggest that you say something along the lines of "can you find a rule that supports your idea?" If he/she can't, then you can say that you get to decide the outcome until a time when he/she can find one.

I hope that it will all work out!

[(Un)Inspired]

Holy hell. That was fast. You have a point. So what do I do when he jumps to conclusions? (I.E. "You hear that the villagers have been affected by a strange illness. So when a vampire allied npc catches it, he argues that she should be cured by a paladin/cleric, although I've established that cure spells and magic does not work from the start when the npcs explained the illness.) He tends to take in facts that other npcs have said and assumes that they are the DM's word. He's having issues figuring that npcs can be wrong too. When I tell him otherwise, "Rules, bitch." He's a very good friend so be... gentle. Nothing friendship shattering.


I would take him aside and talk to him. It's often much easier to make an impact on people when you're one on one and there isn't the pressure of the other players listening in on either of you. Tell him that as the DM you need to be an absolute authority figure in you games. Getting a bunch of players together tends to require a strong guiding hand and its not easy. When he calls you a bitch in front of your players it does damage to the position you need to be in as the head of the gaming table.

I would open with that and then tell him bluntly that aside from the damage it does to the table dynamic, calling you a bitch in front of your players is socially unacceptable. The dude's your friend, you're working hard to run a game for everyone and he's insulting you.

Tell him you love his roleplaying and that he's a good friend and that he's completely unwelcome at your table if he continues to talk to you like that.

[TypoNinja]

I have a friend who pretty much stopped playing D&D for similar reasons. There is so much about the game and the game world that just.... doesn't stand up to detailed analysis, and it bugged him mightily. To the point of distraction.

I'd suggest reminding him that the rules exist as a system, not individually, so individual rules are allowed to be a little screwy in the name of stabilizing the entire system, or simply easing play.

In a world with as much magic as D&D "That's just how it works" is an entirely acceptable answer. Or, if you prefer, the short hand at my table is "A Wizard did it" for any thing we stumble across that makes not a lick of sense.

As DM, anything the players want to do really needs to be run by you, you are essentially the equivalent of the computer in a computer game, if you don't know about it, it never happened. If hes really that worried you'll counter him meta-wise, I suggest going with the delayed note. Anything he wants to be a surprise he needs to write down and leave that note in a visible place where everyone knows it hasn't been changed until its sprung.

Don't be afraid to counter him anyway once you see whats on the note. Chances are your BBEG is smarter than you are, just because his trap was a surprise to you as the DM, doesn't mean your BBEG wouldn't have thought of it.

[BloodyMartian]

Explain to him the difference between in character and out of character knowledge. He knows the Cure Disease spell cures all disease but does he know that there are curses that cause symptoms similar to diseases and can spread just as easily? Does the NPC he is talking to know any of this? Does the NPC know what a disease is? When something doesn't go the way he expected (for example cure disease on a "diseased" person) just say "IT DIDN'T WORK" "BUT RULES, BITCH" "BUT MAYBE THOSE RULES DON'T APPLY IT'S YOUR JOB TO FIGURE OUT WHY, ADVENTURE, BITCH!" (of course be kinder/more level headed than this) You as DM are all knowing; he as a player is not. When you say a rule doesn't apply you mean it. It's his job to figure out why(In character not by going through the SRD). That is the adventure. Explain that to him slowly and clearly.
And about traps being laid... You are the controller in this game. If he didn't tell you he hit quarter circle + punch he doesn't get his hadouken.

[jaydubs]

Don't be afraid to counter him anyway once you see whats on the note. Chances are your BBEG is smarter than you are, just because his trap was a surprise to you as the DM, doesn't mean your BBEG wouldn't have thought of it.

But if you take that reasoning to its conclusion, players can say the same thing. "Sure, I didn't think of it. But my wizard has 28 intelligence, and totally would have caught on to it. So he avoided that trap and didn't take any damage."

If your players are clever, reward them for it. Don't retroactively change things up to railroad toward a certain conclusion.

[Immabozo]

Explain how in D&D, pi=4, how there is no inertia with the commoner railgun, healing by drowning, the magical darkness spell illuminating night time, and other things that are well documented in the rules dysfunction threads, that make science, logic and your friends argument, sit down and cry in the corner. Because magic.

Then explain to him that this is a game, with rules. Sometimes the rules dont make sense. Sometimes, the rules make physics and logic cry. But they are that way because the game needs to go on and sometimes a less "logical" or "physics oriented" approach and something else needs to happen since it is, after all, a game.

And if he wants to play, he agrees to the rules of the game you are playing. Any variations to the rules as they are written, are house rules and decided upon by the GM.

Tell him he is a good friend, but if he cant play by the rules, he will not be invited to future game sessions and you would rather not do that. If he would like to ask you, or another player with a superior rules knowledge, if something works that way, he is encouraged to. But no more silently plotting and schemeing without telling them DM, or in the manner mentioned above, about writing it down

[TypoNinja]

But if you take that reasoning to its conclusion, players can say the same thing. "Sure, I didn't think of it. But my wizard has 28 intelligence, and totally would have caught on to it. So he avoided that trap and didn't take any damage."

If your players are clever, reward them for it. Don't retroactively change things up to railroad toward a certain conclusion.

Absolutely. It should work both ways. I'm a clever guy, but my int score is still going to be somewhere around human norm, A wizard with an 18 is smarter than me, never mind the 20-30 they try to go for. Its part of the reason Wizards are that powerful, they get scary smart. And as a DM, you should be handing your players information the PC should know that the player has missed out on.

A good plan is a good plan, let it work if its good, but if you see a players plan and think "Surely a competent villain would be worried about this?" then the answer is yes, he did worry about it, and decided to take steps. Anybody going to fight a red dragon knows to pack the cold spells, but a red dragon knows to pack some protection from cold energy either in spells or in magic items, cause hes not stupid and knows that people think cold magic when it comes to red dragons.

Your villains 'counter' doesn't have to be 100%, if your players have a plan to draw off his body guards maybe the plan doesn't distract all of them, but they are still better off than if they didn't try it.

[Seppo87]

Play a game of chess with him and follow your logic instead of the rules.
"My knight can go straight because logic"
"I ordered my pawn to attack in front of him, not at his sides"
"it dodges your attack because he's trained"
"there is no way my pieces wait for your turn. they are in constant motion. Here, I'll move this, and this. logic"

At some point he will use logic himself and try to argue why his pieces win over yours.

The whole discussion will see no winner. It's impossible, because each player can make up new reasons on the fly or just try to deny what the other one said.

In the end, you'll both realize it's pointles to keep arguing. That's where you'll teach him this lesson:

DnD is a game of make believe, but it has a structure that fulfills this purpose: determining what is possible and what is not for your character

Just like pieces of the chessboard can only perform certain movements at certain times
A fighter can't cast spells
Your success is determined by the rolls
And so on

If you remove the structure, it ends up just like the game of chess: a pointless argument where everybody lose

[rexx1888]

id like a bit more context on this to be honest. If hes as good a friend of yours as you say, why has he decided that you will meta him in to the floor(an im not actually saying you have done anything wrong here, i just feel there must be more to this, even if its just a misunderstanding on his part).

as to logic, it depends what we are talking about. Fact is, ive seen dm's come up with some completely outrageous bull in the name of their story, literal inconsistencies of character that could shatter the very fabric of a universe kind of dumb stuff, so if he's questioning the logic of npc decisions, that could possibly be warranted an in the interests of being an awesome dm, you should have a look at the decisions you have made in past games. On the other side, if he's whinging about the functioning of the game world, point out that magic is everywhere and pretty much makes all of dnd function(even mundanes, who, with a str of 18-20 can pretty much lift cars with little effort) an he just better shut it an live with it.

Final point though, regardless of anything else, it is not an will never be ok to call your friend a bitch in context of a game just because they disagree with you and are in charge of running that game. Thats crap, an not fair, an he should be told so at some point.

[Kesnit]

Holy hell. That was fast. You have a point. So what do I do when he jumps to conclusions? (I.E. "You hear that the villagers have been affected by a strange illness. So when a vampire allied npc catches it, he argues that she should be cured by a paladin/cleric, although I've established that cure spells and magic does not work from the start when the npcs explained the illness.) He tends to take in facts that other npcs have said and assumes that they are the DM's word. He's having issues figuring that npcs can be wrong too. When I tell him otherwise, "Rules, bitch." He's a very good friend so be... gentle. Nothing friendship shattering.

Players can only know what the DM tells them. Are you giving him any chance IC to realize the NPC is wrong/lying? If not, when the Cure Disease doesn't work, it can easily look like you (the DM) lied, which can easily lead to him not trusting you in the future. Or lead him to think you are meta-gaming.

For example:

NPC: We're all sick! Help us.
PC: Of course. Here's a cleric. He can cast Remove Disease on all of you.
Cleric: *casts Remove Disease on NPC*
NPC: It didn't work. I'm still sick!
Player (reading the rule book): "Remove disease cures all diseases that the subject is suffering from. The spell also kills parasites, including green slime and others. Certain special diseases may not be countered by this spell or may be countered only by a caster of a certain level or higher." (thinking) It's possible this is a disease that isn't affected, or the cleric's CL isn't high enough. But it's more likely the DM just forgot about Remove Disease and is claiming now that it didn't work because he wants to force us into his solution.


Don't be afraid to counter him anyway once you see whats on the note. Chances are your BBEG is smarter than you are, just because his trap was a surprise to you as the DM, doesn't mean your BBEG wouldn't have thought of it.

Which means the DM is meta-gaming, like the player fears.

[prufock]

Seems like we've been getting a lot of these gamer tales of obnoxious jerkass players lately.

"Doesn't work that way."
"Yeah but..."
"Read the rules."
"But it would..."
"Not interested."
"Logic, bitch."
"DM said so, bitch. QED. Also you're being a jerk. Shut up so we can get on with the game."

If you didn't tell the DM you laid a trap, you didn't lay it. Remove disease doesn't always work, read the book. He likes to claim "logic" but his logic is faulty by ignoring the basic premises: the rules. Also, he's an ass.

[Immabozo]

Which means the DM is meta-gaming, like the player fears.

That is not meta gaming. If there is an in-game reason for him to know it (super-human int could be a good reason) then it is not meta gaming. It is utilizing knowledge you previously didn't have to RP someone who is much smarter than he is, and even much smarter than the world's smartest person.

[Kesnit]

That is not meta gaming. If there is an in-game reason for him to know it (super-human int could be a good reason) then it is not meta gaming. It is utilizing knowledge you previously didn't have to RP someone who is much smarter than he is, and even much smarter than the world's smartest person.

It is metagaming, since the enemy in question didn't actually have the solution in place until the DM found out what the PC had done.

[mashlagoo1982]

Your player really needs to let you know everything his character is doing so the world can properly reflect and behave in a manner that makes sense with the player's actions.

If his character is laying traps but he did not tell you, it did not happen. End of story.

As much as I want to support the idea of him writing down where his character placed his traps, even that idea seems flawed.

When DMing, you need to roll additional actions to see if the monsters you are playing noticed the traps (I believe Spot checks). That becomes more difficult if you don't know where they are. By keeping those locations secret, you endanger breaking the game mechanically (accidently or intentionally by "forgetting" a trap was placed somewhere) and breaking the flow of play (being required to go back and roll checks against traps).

EDIT: I believe I thought of a solution to the problem that would help your player with their metagaming concern while still addressing the DMing concern. Provide your player with two types of tokens. One token will represent a trap on one side but be indistinguishable on the other. The second token will be blank on the back but indistinguishable on the other. This way the player can place traps around but you as the DM will not know which locations are traps. You could take appropriate actions against the trap locations with Spot and such.

[Sartharina]

It is metagaming, since the enemy in question didn't actually have the solution in place until the DM found out what the PC had done.

This.

People jump on the player a lot - But I've also seen a lot of DMs with control issues.
Players are fallible. DMs are fallible. Rules are guidelines. The DM has the authority to change the rules, but not always the wisdom to do so in a good manner (Count how many threads we have jumping on DMs for "Bull**** Houserules", such as fortitude-save traps, darkvision not seeing through nonmagical darknesses, critical fumble rules, expanded critical success rules, caster nerfs, caster buffs, melee nerfs, melee buffs, Custom Spells, no-sell effects, etc.)

Some players try to use game rules or Logic in the hopes those will protect them from/cope with bad DMs - but those practices also skewer good DMs.

Talking about the "Need" to be the single authority voice leads to complaints from players about "Control-Freak" DMs.

[Dimcair]

EDIT: I believe I thought of a solution to the problem that would help your player with their metagaming concern while still addressing the DMing concern. Provide your player with two types of tokens. One token will represent a trap on one side but be indistinguishable on the other. The second token will be blank on the back but indistinguishable on the other. This way the player can place traps around but you as the DM will not know which locations are traps. You could take appropriate actions against the trap locations with Spot and such.

Its a nice attempt but too messy. Just trust your DM in this. He needs to know the proximity and size of the trap to set the appropriate Perception DC. Throwing around tokens doesn't help much.

[mashlagoo1982]

Its a nice attempt but too messy. Just trust your DM in this. He needs to know the proximity and size of the trap to set the appropriate Perception DC. Throwing around tokens doesn't help much.

Yeah, it is messy. But if this player has as big a issue as the OP suggests, this maybe the best option available. To help control the mess, the DM could always put a cap on how many token can be put in play... something like # of Traps + 4.

[Renen]

This.

People jump on the player a lot - But I've also seen a lot of DMs with control issues.
Players are fallible. DMs are fallible. Rules are guidelines. The DM has the authority to change the rules, but not always the wisdom to do so in a good manner (Count how many threads we have jumping on DMs for "Bull**** Houserules", such as fortitude-save traps, darkvision not seeing through nonmagical darknesses, critical fumble rules, expanded critical success rules, caster nerfs, caster buffs, melee nerfs, melee buffs, Custom Spells, no-sell effects, etc.)

Some players try to use game rules or Logic in the hopes those will protect them from/cope with bad DMs - but those practices also skewer good DMs.

Talking about the "Need" to be the single authority voice leads to complaints from players about "Control-Freak" DMs.

But sometimes the DM needs to metagame. Hell, in another game (not dnd) the rulebook even tells the GM: Feel free to play really powerful/smart characters in such a way that they seem omnipotent. Like having a group arrive somewhere after running away from some NPC, and finding that NPC to be waiting for them at the location for like the last hour.

Did the GM know they would go to the location? No. But the super clever NPC sure did.

Same applies here. The player might not have told GM that he laid a trap. But if the BBEG has access to (lets say) divination, then the GM is fully justified in saying "Oh yeh, he knows every trap you planted"

[Dimcair]

Yeah, it is messy. But if this player has as big a issue as the OP suggests, this maybe the best option available. To help control the mess, the DM could always put a cap on how many token can be put in play... something like # of Traps + 4.

True. Or going back to writing it down: Write the location down on a piece of paper, put it on the table. Communicate to your DM the distance and size of the respective trap.
The DM could just avoid exceeding the radius, but if the opponent doesn't have a good reason to stay within this circle (like casting a spell, etc.) it would be quite obvious and bad form.

Another idea is just writing down the location and then communicate the DC to your DM yourself (finding the rules shouldn't be too dificult). It can't be cheated since you wrote down the location earlier. This actually takes away some of the workload of the DM which is a plus imo!


I do like the general idea as i think it would help the DM as much as it helps the player.

Imagine that you as the DM (A) are faced with the decision to charge either player B or C.

Between A and B there is a trap, between A and C there is none. A failed his saving throw and is not aware of the trap.

A --- C
x
B

However, he could STILL decide that charging player C is what the NPC he plays would naturally do.
(Example C is a Wizard and B is a fighter while A is an intelligent foe)

There are obvious examples where his decision is logical/makes sense. There might be closer calls where the DM himself is fighting against his bias.

[mashlagoo1982]

True. Or going back to writing it down: Write the location down on a piece of paper, put it on the table. Communicate to your DM the distance and size of the respective trap.
The DM could just avoid exceeding the radius, but if the opponent doesn't have a good reason to stay within this circle (like casting a spell, etc.) it would be quite obvious and bad form.

Another idea is just writing down the location and then communicate the DC to your DM yourself (finding the rules shouldn't be too dificult). It can't be cheated since you wrote down the location earlier. This actually takes away some of the workload of the DM which is a plus imo!


I do like the general idea as i think it would help the DM as much as it helps the player.

Imagine that you as the DM (A) are faced with the decision to charge either player B or C.

Between A and B there is a trap, between A and C there is none. A failed his saving throw and is not aware of the trap.

A --- C
x
B

However, he could STILL decide that charging player C is what the NPC he plays would naturally do.
(Example C is a Wizard and B is a fighter while A is an intelligent foe)

There are obvious examples where his decision is logical/makes sense. There might be closer calls where the DM himself is fighting against his bias.

If the DM can trust his player to be honest and calculate DC correctly, I see no problem with the paper writing method. I also agree that less workload on the DM is always a good thing. Unfortunately, that has not been true with my past experiences (honesty was fine, calculations... not so much).

I am already going off the assumption that the DM is not metagaming... otherwise it kinda defeats the purpose of this thread as the player is valid in their concern.

[Immabozo]

There is also the problem the making a monster roll to find traps and the DM ask the player if there are any, will needlessly bog down the game in unfun and unneeded shenanigans.

[Alent]

It kind of needs to be asked: what kind of "traps" is he setting? When I first read the thread I got the idea he was trying to use logic traps, not literal traps.

If it's literal traps, make him roll craft(Trapmaking) checks by the book, time rules and all. Does he even have craft(Trapmaking)?


Making the Checks

To determine how much progress a character makes on building a trap each week, that character makes a Craft (trapmaking) check. See the Craft skill description for details on Craft checks and the circumstances that can affect them.

He'll probably protest that he shouldn't need a whole week to place a trap, but this is your rules shutdown of him setting traps. Additionally, if you're using pathfinder, I believe there's rules for increasing/decreasing the perception DC to spot said trap based on how much you beat/miss the crafting DC by, and you can default his trap DC to the most unfavorable roll. Of course, you're also able to set traps as a full round action in Pathfinder, so that may invalidate the above. (Trap Ranger, Kobold Trapsetter)
I would remind everyone that NPCs are unreliable narrators (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreliable_narrator), and make sure they understand that means NPCs can ONLY know their own perspective of the story. Give them the reading materials so they understand what you mean, if he refuses to understand what an unreliable narrator is after that, he fails logic forever.

But, it sounds like he isn't using real logic, he's just using "logic" as an excuse to retaliate for some prior offense he isn't mature enough to confront you about.

[atemu1234]

This is a game. The guy needs to realize this. While logic works, it shouldn't supersede the DM's word.

[Barstro]

Explain how in D&D, pi=4, how there is no inertia with the commoner railgun, healing by drowning, the magical darkness spell illuminating night time, and other things that are well documented in the rules dysfunction threads, that make science, logic and your friends argument, sit down and cry in the corner. Because magic.

I know it's off topic, but there was an interesting series I read where people from our world could be allowed to live in a dimension of magic for limited periods of time. Technology from our world worked chaotically there (guns not firing, or bullets going in wrong directions when the guns did fire) and magic didn't work too well around large concentrations of of people/items from our world either.

It sounds like your friend is either 1) a jerk who demands things to go his way, or 2) just needs to learn that DnD relies on a different set of science/physics and adjust his logic to that. Hopefully the latter situation is the true one.

[Chernobyl]

Holy hell. That was fast. You have a point. So what do I do when he jumps to conclusions? (I.E. "You hear that the villagers have been affected by a strange illness. So when a vampire allied npc catches it, he argues that she should be cured by a paladin/cleric, although I've established that cure spells and magic does not work from the start when the npcs explained the illness.) He tends to take in facts that other npcs have said and assumes that they are the DM's word. He's having issues figuring that npcs can be wrong too. When I tell him otherwise, "Rules, bitch." He's a very good friend so be... gentle. Nothing friendship shattering.
Three thoughts:
1. Red Herrings: In terms of realizing that NPCs can lie / make mistakes, sometimes a little object lesson can do wonders. Introduce an NPC into the story that is an exaggerator, a liar, mildly delusional, etc. to give the party incorrect information that they later discover to be false. Force them (not just your friend, but the whole party) to start doubting NPC testimony. Players are smart, generally speaking, and they'll start to look for corroborating evidence or testimony before they just launch off down the nearest sinkhole in search of wondrous treasure that may or may not be there.

2. Int Checks: Sometimes it's helpful to call for Intelligence checks. Have one or more players roll their Int bonus vs. a DC of 10 or so (or higher, if you just want to signal that they should be using their heads a bit here). Success means they figured out something important (that should've maybe been obvious to them).

3. Mystery: I've found that the best defense against player accusations of this sort is to just remain mysterious. "Yeah, you're not really sure why that didn't work. This must be a strange illness indeed." Let them ponder that for a while. After all, it's not like their characters know everything that's going on. This is an adventure, after all. Time will tell, but sometimes it won't.

Hope this helps.

-Chernobyl

[Trasilor]

Three thoughts:
1. Red Herrings: In terms of realizing that NPCs can lie / make mistakes, sometimes a little object lesson can do wonders. Introduce an NPC into the story that is an exaggerator, a liar, mildly delusional, etc. to give the party incorrect information that they later discover to be false. Force them (not just your friend, but the whole party) to start doubting NPC testimony. Players are smart, generally speaking, and they'll start to look for corroborating evidence or testimony before they just launch off down the nearest sinkhole in search of wondrous treasure that may or may not be there.

2. Int Checks: Sometimes it's helpful to call for Intelligence checks. Have one or more players roll their Int bonus vs. a DC of 10 or so (or higher, if you just want to signal that they should be using their heads a bit here). Success means they figured out something important (that should've maybe been obvious to them).

3. Mystery: I've found that the best defense against player accusations of this sort is to just remain mysterious. "Yeah, you're not really sure why that didn't work. This must be a strange illness indeed." Let them ponder that for a while. After all, it's not like their characters know everything that's going on. This is an adventure, after all. Time will tell, but sometimes it won't.

Hope this helps.

-Chernobyl

All three are excellent suggestions, however, know your players.

Red Herrings
Personally, I have had bad luck with Red Herrings. I play with parents of young kids, so time is precious - red herrings just detract and take up time from the game. I have since moved to Plot Twist - the head of the Good Curch of Goodness is in league with the Prince of Darkness!

Int Checks
A bit meta-gaming but the characters are probably smarter than their players. Good way to progress the story.

Mystery
This can actually help you. Due to tight schedules, planning for more than a session ahead is nearly impossible - as such, sometimes I let the players "discover" the solution. Essentially, the players deduce that the reason it doesn't work is because of X. And I think, sure that's a good reason - now how do they prove that or 'discover it'? You may be surprised at how often players come up with even more diabolical schemes than I ever could.:smallamused:

[Immabozo]

Int Checks
A bit meta-gaming but the characters are probably smarter than their players. Good way to progress the story.

this is the opposite of mets gaming. Using in-game reasons and in game knowledge to inform the players

[aleucard]

Explain to the player that real-world logic applies here as much as it does in most any other game. To make an analogy, if DnD were a computer game, the Player would be the guy holding the controller, and the DM would be the Console, with the actual game being the CD. In this analogy, as far as the game itself is concerned, if the player doesn't provide the input to do an action (IE: tell the DM what he's doing) then the action never occurred. If this kind of thing is allowed, then all sorts of shenanigans could be unleashed later with the DM being rendered completely unable to get the game back to sensible ranges without doing a hard reset of some kind (either of the 'previous session was a dream that you forgot a couple seconds after waking up' or 'Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies' variety). If he wants to inject real-world logic into the game, he needs to discuss with you the potential creation of house rules to that effect, and most likely include the other players as well to avoid potential arguments. However, he needs to realize that the DM is just as much the game itself as he is another Player. That's kinda how this #@$^ works. :smallamused:

[gc25774]

Thanks for all the help. I solved the issue. Having a red herring there and there did wonders. I also managed to get this back on track. You guys were just very helpful. Thanks.

[Immabozo]

Thanks for all the help. I solved the issue. Having a red herring there and there did wonders. I also managed to get this back on track. You guys were just very helpful. Thanks.

Good job! Glad to help