Thoughts for my first session as a DM

[KindOfGoodGuy]

In a week or two I will finally get to try my hand as the DM of my own campaign (pathfinder). I've seen enough stories and gathered enough ideas that I am trying out a homebrew setting and I would like the Playground's opinion on it.

The idea here is that the game will start out with everyone walking into the church in town to respond to a help wanted poster in the town. When they get there, the head priest will explain how only a few days ago, the strongest paladin in the local clergy fell and ran away from the town after turning into an antipaladin. The reason he fell was due to his wife. A number of years ago, they met and seemed to fall madly in love (love at first sight scenario). They spent every waking moment with each other seeming to be as happy as a couple could be. What he never knew though was that she was in fact, a succubus. This was only discovered after the wedding bells had tolled the week before, because as soon as the kiss to announce them man and wife occured, his god took away his powers. This was because sure, any man could fall for the charm of a succubus if the timing is right, but for a paladin to MARRY one? That was a bit wrong. So his god sapped his power as a way of saying,"HEY, THERE IS SOMETHING REALLY WRONG HERE!" However, not being the wisest paladin on the block, as wisdom tends to be a preferred dump stat, he took it as the opposite. That if he wanted to stay with her he would need to sacrifice his job as a paladin. The succubus took advantage of it though and very easily convinced him to change, since he had already gone as far as losing his holy powers Also the reason the wasnt discovered beforehand as a demon was a subtle but powerful enchantment that masks her alignment. Also he never considered to scan her with detect evil.

Anyways, backstory aside......

Rumors have it that the "Couple" ran off to an abandoned crypt not too far out of town to possibly establish a base of opperations, so the clergy send the party to investigate what was going on. BUT, they are given the warning not to engage the now antipaladin in a fight, and if at all possible, to run should they enounter him (he's level 6 while the party is level 1). As backup, a level 2 paladin that ill be playing will accompany them. When they enter the cave there will be the standard fight of goblins and kobolds that the party should mop up fairly quickly. When they reach the big chamber, The Antipaladin will emerge on a small but high up platform he will then levitate down (Forgot tomention that he is a drow with the 3 drow nobility feats) and greet the party, but telling them that they should leave. The Paladin im controlling will then rush fowards and try to convince him to turn back to his richeous path (general lecture about good being better than evil). In turn the Antipaladin will respond with an extreme lack of caring and just attak him. The hope here is that he will 1-shot the paladin and kill him instantly (ive set his health low enough for it to work, but not low enough for it wto look too silly). Once this happens, he will levitate back up onto the ledge and cast deeper darkness on the party and tell them to,"Have fun" as he exits. The door he leaves through will be magically sealed so the party can't get through.

Once this ordeal is over they can go back to the town to get rewarded. Should anything come up that hinders this I am more than willing to improvise, but I want to know what you guys think about this.

Also I specifically gave him the nobility feats so he could seem really beefed up on power without beefing him up too much. It will look like a lot though, because he will have his Helmet on to prevent the party from knowing his race (because of the whole,"drow have tons of inate magic power" and also to give a small mystery to the party)

[Curbstomp]

Umm... why are there goblins and kobolds working for this (only recently) fallen Paladin? Wouldn't some kind of low-end evil outsiders who had been allied with the succubus make more sense? Imps or something? They can take an alternate form.

Also what happens when your party tries to save the allied Paladin in your scenario? I'd have the allied Paladin not adventuring with the party at all. Have him have set off on his own and they are supposed to reinforce him, but arrive too late. All they see is his death scene on the ledge that they cannot reach quickly. Anti-paladin exits just as you have described with his wife at his side.

One final suggestion: start them at level 2. Level 1 characters are pretty fragile and I'm assuming that this is the intro to a full campaign. It would not be ideal to off the PC's accidentally in the 1st session.

[KindOfGoodGuy]

Umm... why are there goblins and kobolds working for this (only recently) fallen Paladin? Wouldn't some kind of low-end evil outsiders who had been allied with the succubus make for sense? Imps or something? They can take an alternate form.

Also what happens when your party tries to save the allied Paladin in your scenario? I'd have the allied Paladin not adventuring with the party at all. Have him have set off on his own and they are supposed to reinforce him, but arrive too late. All they see is his death scene on the ledge that they cannot reach quickly. Anti-paladin exits just as you have described with his wife at his side.

One final suggestion: start them at level 2. Level 1 characters are pretty fragile and I'm assuming that this is the intro to a full campaign. It would not be ideal to off the PC's accidentally in the 1st session.

(facepalm) I had completely forgotten about imps. Really nice idea there. Ill be sure to try level 2 instead of 1 now that I think about it. Also as far as the scenario with the paladin goes, it was meant as a way to greatly exagerate the power of the anti-paladin. Sure he is powerful, but I want him to engage the party later on instead of early on. In order to do this I wanted to take procautions and give the party a firm example of how outmatched they are and how threatening he is to them as of the moment. I know that some people would look over this and try to fight him if the whole party could just leave without being injured, but I just want to make sure I'm playing my cards correctly and remove someone from the group in the first session to truly plant those small seeds of fear in the PC's. And what better person to kill off in this regard then a DMPC?

[Crake]

If you decide to make the succubus a major NPCs, consider giving her some class levels. 3 levels of cleric (if she follows some evil god or demon lord this could quite easily fit), 2 levels of bard, or 1 level of beguiler (from 3.5) would have given her access to undetectable alignment, which prevents her alignment from being found. Alternatively, if you have something else in mind, a ring of mind shielding does the same, but is a magic item, and also has the benefits of stopping discern lies and detect thoughts.

That way you don't have to handwave it and say "some mystical magical enchantment" and instead have a concrete, definite way that she's doing it that the players can interact with.

Personally, I'd start the players at level 1, but warm them up with some roleplay in town, which will grant them enough XP to levelup to 2. Tell them to levelup beforehand so you dont waste time, but that way you get the satisfaction of actually starting at level 1 but still being level 2 before any combat actually starts.

Also, be careful, you might be getting some people in here who are going to question the whole "married a succubus, you fall" aspect of your story. Hell, I might be one of them... because is marriage REALLY something worth falling over? Perhaps instead, on their wedding night, she confessed to him with teary eyes what she was, and that she swore she loved him with all her heart (a lie) and he instead, when confronted with the decision himself, renounced his paladinhood to be with her? I think that would be more likely for him to become an antipaladin. That would also make it a bit more of a challenge for the players to turn him back, and the succubus loses the weakness of her being exposed for what she really is to him (because i'm assuming with your current story, if he ever found out, he would immediately turn on her, right?)

Anyway, just some food for thought, I've had my fair share of experience DMing with succubi, so I thought I might give you some ideas to work with.


I have some more shenannigan based ideas, but they start to get into the higher level stuff, so probably not quite just yet

[Kol Korran]

Hi, first, welcome to DMing. It seems like you have put some decent effort into making this work. i do however have a few ideas?

1) There is nothing in the story that ties to the characters, or the players. You are telling your story, and the characters just seem to follow it. Why should the characters care? One of the DM's most powerful tools is to get the players motivated. Note I said "players"... characters come second. Tie the story to the characters and find a reason for the PLAYERS to be interested. Appeal to their interests and sensibilities. If you get them involved, it makes the game a WHOLE LOT better!

2) The initial reveal is too big, and too much "off the start". Part of what makes an RPG interesting, is to explore a mystery, a story, to find a twist and get that "Ah! So that's what happened!" moment. Instead you're telling it all from the start. I suggest to just tell the party that they this righteous paladin ran off after the wedding, and that his wife disappeared. If this is the first session, let them explore about the paladin a bit (his friends, his home, and so on), so they could get to relate to their final enemy (Also a powerful tool of the GM), and find clues that leads them to the crypt. Then, inside the crypt, pepper clues that leads to his struggle or such. make it a slow reveal. Make it engaging.

3) About him falling: It does seem like... a bit of a jerk move the way his god acted. A paladin falls due to a conscious act of failing his principles. If he married someone whom he didn't know who she was... well... that is a bit weak. The god could have acted in many other ways to warn him. The actual falling should be something of his doing, of his choice, knowing well the consequences. Think on Vaarsuvius (I can't remember how to spell then name)- Doing something he felt was right, for all the wrong reasons and such...

Also, a suggestion- Don't let it be known that he has fallen. Live that as an open question. A good RPG is about two main things- answering questions, and choices. The party should find that he is struggling with some choice, struggling to find a decision that he can live with. The result should be the climax, when the party faces this question, and affect it directly. Which leads me to:

4) Don't have a scripted ending, and don't decide on that result: You have scripted a lot of the game. Some in the playground may call it "railroading". You see, this isn't a movie... You're not showing your work to the players, you are CREATING IT WITH THEM. You have decided that they have an accompanying paladin, what if the party doesn't want it to come? (I'll get to that later). You have decided it survives the crypt- it has some sort of a plot shield? You have decided that it engages the anti paladin in a conversation in the end. What if the party attacks before that? What if they don't like the paladin and shut him up? What if THEY decide to engage the antipaladin instead? And you have decided that the anti paladin is beyond redemption, and that it escapes without the party facing. If you have decided all of this, what is the party there for? Just to watch?

Thing is, you are not making a movie, you remaking a game. And the most important things in this game is that the player actions matter. They make a difference, they affect the world in more ways than just "Do we live to see the end of the story line or not". They make the story WITH you. The GM set the stage, for some question to be resolved. How it is resolved, and what is the final outcome, is the result of the players' decisions and actions.

Consider the following- The foe hasn't fallen yet, but he is on the verge to do so. He has come to this crypt in order to find some answer/ contemplate/ maybe perform the final deed. He is in between. As the party explroes him, and find out more about him and the dilemma, they finally meet him. And then, by their actions, decisions, and so on, the foe makes his final decision, and either falls, or doesn't fall, or a myriad of other options.

It tool me a loooooong time to understand something as a DM, a few years and a lot of maturity in fact- Don't control everything, let things evolve, responds to the players instead of trying to predict them and decide on n outcome. Let the game surprise you- you will enjoy it a hell of a lot more!

5) The accompanying paladin: With every feature you put in the game, you need to ask yourself "What is it's purpose? What goal does it serve?" If the paladin's entire goal is the speech at the end nd then getting killed, I say ditch him- don't include him at all. First of all- it's the scripted problem that I've talked about. Secondly- the game is about the PLAYERS AND CHARACTERS. Let THEM engage the anti paladin, It's the characters stage, not the one of an NPC. And lastly, he starts at a level higher, and from the feel of it is sort of an "authority figure", which players utterly despise... This feels like a character the GM wants to ply along with the party. Again- keep the PCs center stage. Whatever you do, whatever you plan, find a way to have the PCs in the center of it.

6) The Anti paladin's escape: I understand you plan to make it a long running villain? Even if you don't agree on my advice to let the question remain open, there are certain elements in foe making that are crucial. One of them is to make the party respect them. If the antagonist just disengages, for no good reason, when he could have killed them easily, then the players will think one of the two:
- You're trying to protect them. (Which is NOT good. It relieves the sense of danger, and makes them feel that they are alive only because "you allowed it to be so/ had pity on them/ been merciful". Which again- takes the choice out of the PCs hands.
- The antagonist is making crucial mistakes, and is therefore either a fool, a mockery villain, or both. They lose respect for the villain. It feels like not a rel threat.

Instead, how about the following: The anti paladin is in the crypt for some sort of reason, a plan, a goal. One that not involves killing the PCs directly. Perhaps it's some sort of a ritual, construction, understanding a puzzle or whatever... You decide. When the party meets him he is in the final stages of this endeavor, and as the party engages him (In talk, subterfuge or battle), he focuses his efforts mainly on achieving his goal. The encounter's focus turns from "Who kills the other first", to "can the PC's stop whatever he is doing before he accomplishes it?" which makes for a much more interesting and climatic encounter! Let them feel his power at times, but for the most part he tries to finish whatever he is doing. Again, I suggest to live the answer here open- the character can succeed, or they can fail, and it will affect something in the future. Either way- he has just achieved what he was after, or he has failed, and in both cases he has nothing left to do here.

I highly advise NOT to use some sort of a block between the party and him. Again, this takes the decision out of the party's hand and feels very heavy handed. Instead let them decide- whether to fight this superior power enemy, or withdraw, as he leaves them. (Maybe trapped, maybe to his minions, maybe just beaten and bloody). The party will feel the choices are theirs, nd that the danger is real. Aaaannnd, you get a bonus- the party now a vested interest in revenging the defeat. A good motive like no other! :smallbiggrin:

7) Last bit of emphasis: Players and characters, always, always think of them, and what could make it more appealing to them, and get them more engaged. You set the stage for the story, but it is their decisions, their actions, that MAKE the story.

Good luck to you. GMing is a never ending lesson. I keep learning new things, improving, and making better games. It's really a great part of what makes it fun, so don't let it discourage you. Welcome to the GM's set!

[Curbstomp]

On a making them care note, perhaps the anti-paladin is a mentor or relative of your PC's. Additionally to help them dislike him and want to hunt him down you might consider a bestow curse on the party as he exits. They can make the save or not, but it's the kind of **** move that makes a party hate a villain. Perhaps he also mocks their capabilities.

[Arbane]

Oh, goodie. At least this time the paladin getting his self-destruct button pushed isn't a PC. :smallsigh:

It's worth remembering that a succubus can kill an entire party of level 2 characters at its leisure. (DR 10 and an unbeatable charm DC are hard to get around....) And they're smart enough to know this.

[Crake]

Oh, goodie. At least this time the paladin getting his self-destruct button pushed isn't a PC. :smallsigh:

It's worth remembering that a succubus can kill an entire party of level 2 characters at its leisure. (DR 10 and an unbeatable charm DC are hard to get around....) And they're smart enough to know this.

based on the OP, it would seem that the succubus is absent for the encounter itself

[HighWater]

A few notes of critique and comment, but I'll start with this:

Listen to Kol Korran (and the others) on storybuilding. The advice is solid.

The good:
You've clearly put thought into this. This is important, feel free to compliment yourself for making an investment of time and energy to improve the experience for your players. This is a good characteristic for any prospective DM.
You've also decided that you want to be "good" and to get "better", so you've come to this place to ask for honest feedback on your plans. This is also a very good characteristic: it can be difficult to expose your creations to potentially cold and harsh critique, but it is a great way to improve your storytelling capacities.
Keep these two things in mind, this is in the end what will make you a good DM. We are going to critique your story and it will seem like we hate everything about it (because pointing out the negative is so much easier than the positive). Remember that the willingness to learn and invest time and energy are the most important DM attributes: whatever we fault you for next is secondary.

The story you have come up with has a few ingredients that can work very well: forbidden love, a turn to the dark side, heedless devotion... but their deployment can be improved with a few tricks that use the unique story-methods that are possible (if not required) in table-top RPGs.

Here are some suggestions as to how:

#1: Your story lacks interactivity. The PCs are being told this and that, and get a DM-babysitter that is stronger than they are, that takes away pretty much all agengy. (In DnD almost nobody wants to travel with "Gandalf" because he's an overpowered, spotlight hogging element of plot-exposition. This works great in a book/movie, but poorly in an adventure game.) In DnD the spotlight should be on the PCs and on the events they touch. Your "back-up" is guaranteed to survive to the end of the dungeon and is then guaranteed to Talk, Attack and Die. The plot moves completely independent of any player action: they might as well not be there. Give players influence on the outcome, be it small or big. Currently, none of their actions are important to the plot except the "report back to cleric"-phase (and this too would've been fulfilled by the babysitter never returning because he's dead). Where can the players influence the story?

#2: Give the players a reason to be there (preferably the characters have a reason as well). Curiosity, revenge, monitary benefits: they can be a powerful motivation. Especially curiosity can be used to fuel player interaction and player investment. Think up little mysteries, let the players discover truths and falsehoods for themselves. Don't spoonfeed these: their own inquisitiveness should reward them with more information, not some data-dump at the start of the mission and another data-dump at the end. A good way to do this is is to either make a simple quest that is clouded by lack of information (then slowly reveal information as the players search for it), or a more complicated plot with possibilities for the PCs to change the course of events (preferably both).

Example: My first plot involved a very straightforward search&rescue mission, but the PCs first had to find out clues as to where to find their target was located. The hamlet it took place in and around was wrought with hints that things may not be as they appear, and there were hints in the "dungeon" as to why the little boy that needed to be rescued was taken. None of these mysteries were spelled out, and they greatly intrigued the players even if they had no mechanical impact on their role. The players could also have more direct effect on the outcome: if they were slow the boy would die, they could try to dissuade some of their opponents, the mysteries of the Hamlet were would only give small clues but resolvement was extremely unlikely (but again, not impossible had the PCs gone off the path the NPCs wanted them to take)...


And a few minor remarks on the story itself:
#1: The "Paladin's Fall" in the Original story really makes his God come off as a total [expletive]. The paladin is being punished for being in love and uninformed. Not for doing something wrong by choice. We here at the Playground generally feel that Paladins get screwed over enough as-is without unintentional failures booting them from their God's favour. Be nice to them. The paladin discovering the true nature of his love (by her confession to him) and then chooising her over his god makes for a much nicer (and relatable) fall from grave.

#2: If the succubus has an item that hides her alignment, the excuse that the Paladin never (accidentally) hit her with a Detect Evil is going to feel both unnecessary and contrived if you bring it up (breaking suspension of disbelief). Either remove the item and give the Paladin a relatable reason not to D:E her (if a player asks why he didn't D:E, tell the person they should ask the Paladin A possible answer would be: "would you cast detect evil (an act of mistrust) on a person you trust and love intensly?", another would be "It tells me she is Evil, but in my heart I know that cannot be so"), or keep the item and just mention that nobody suspected she was Evil (even the baby-sit Paladin, who had some suspicions, was first put at ease by his D:E not turning up anything).

#3: You mention the AntiPaladin being a not-level-appropriate-encounter, but the Succubus herself is even worse. Find a reason why they don't wipe the PCs out as the little pests they are (it would take them less than a minute) rather than letting them live.

[KindOfGoodGuy]

A few notes of critique and comment, but I'll start with this:

Listen to Kol Korran (and the others) on storybuilding. The advice is solid.

The good:
You've clearly put thought into this. This is important, feel free to compliment yourself for making an investment of time and energy to improve the experience for your players. This is a good characteristic for any prospective DM.
You've also decided that you want to be "good" and to get "better", so you've come to this place to ask for honest feedback on your plans. This is also a very good characteristic: it can be difficult to expose your creations to potentially cold and harsh critique, but it is a great way to improve your storytelling capacities.
Keep these two things in mind, this is in the end what will make you a good DM. We are going to critique your story and it will seem like we hate everything about it (because pointing out the negative is so much easier than the positive). Remember that the willingness to learn and invest time and energy are the most important DM attributes: whatever we fault you for next is secondary.

The story you have come up with has a few ingredients that can work very well: forbidden love, a turn to the dark side, heedless devotion... but their deployment can be improved with a few tricks that use the unique story-methods that are possible (if not required) in table-top RPGs.

Here are some suggestions as to how:

#1: Your story lacks interactivity. The PCs are being told this and that, and get a DM-babysitter that is stronger than they are, that takes away pretty much all agengy. (In DnD almost nobody wants to travel with "Gandalf" because he's an overpowered, spotlight hogging element of plot-exposition. This works great in a book/movie, but poorly in an adventure game.) In DnD the spotlight should be on the PCs and on the events they touch. Your "back-up" is guaranteed to survive to the end of the dungeon and is then guaranteed to Talk, Attack and Die. The plot moves completely independent of any player action: they might as well not be there. Give players influence on the outcome, be it small or big. Currently, none of their actions are important to the plot except the "report back to cleric"-phase (and this too would've been fulfilled by the babysitter never returning because he's dead). Where can the players influence the story?

#2: Give the players a reason to be there (preferably the characters have a reason as well). Curiosity, revenge, monitary benefits: they can be a powerful motivation. Especially curiosity can be used to fuel player interaction and player investment. Think up little mysteries, let the players discover truths and falsehoods for themselves. Don't spoonfeed these: their own inquisitiveness should reward them with more information, not some data-dump at the start of the mission and another data-dump at the end. A good way to do this is is to either make a simple quest that is clouded by lack of information (then slowly reveal information as the players search for it), or a more complicated plot with possibilities for the PCs to change the course of events (preferably both).

Example: My first plot involved a very straightforward search&rescue mission, but the PCs first had to find out clues as to where to find their target was located. The hamlet it took place in and around was wrought with hints that things may not be as they appear, and there were hints in the "dungeon" as to why the little boy that needed to be rescued was taken. None of these mysteries were spelled out, and they greatly intrigued the players even if they had no mechanical impact on their role. The players could also have more direct effect on the outcome: if they were slow the boy would die, they could try to dissuade some of their opponents, the mysteries of the Hamlet were would only give small clues but resolvement was extremely unlikely (but again, not impossible had the PCs gone off the path the NPCs wanted them to take)...


And a few minor remarks on the story itself:
#1: The "Paladin's Fall" in the Original story really makes his God come off as a total [expletive]. The paladin is being punished for being in love and uninformed. Not for doing something wrong by choice. We here at the Playground generally feel that Paladins get screwed over enough as-is without unintentional failures booting them from their God's favour. Be nice to them. The paladin discovering the true nature of his love (by her confession to him) and then chooising her over his god makes for a much nicer (and relatable) fall from grave.

#2: If the succubus has an item that hides her alignment, the excuse that the Paladin never (accidentally) hit her with a Detect Evil is going to feel both unnecessary and contrived if you bring it up (breaking suspension of disbelief). Either remove the item and give the Paladin a relatable reason not to D:E her (if a player asks why he didn't D:E, tell the person they should ask the Paladin A possible answer would be: "would you cast detect evil (an act of mistrust) on a person you trust and love intensly?", another would be "It tells me she is Evil, but in my heart I know that cannot be so"), or keep the item and just mention that nobody suspected she was Evil (even the baby-sit Paladin, who had some suspicions, was first put at ease by his D:E not turning up anything).

#3: You mention the AntiPaladin being a not-level-appropriate-encounter, but the Succubus herself is even worse. Find a reason why they don't wipe the PCs out as the little pests they are (it would take them less than a minute) rather than letting them live.
You really seem to know your stuff and I thank you wholeheartedly for your advice. As for his god punishing him, you make a valid point about the lack of love here so I guess it seems better to go along the route of falling after the confession.
With the lack of evil alignment detecting, I will be doing what someone else threw out and give her 3 class levels as a cleric. This way she not only has a legitimate reason for the protecting of her alignment but it adds to the whole religious aspect of the game.
Finally there are a few reasons I had already thought out beforehand why the party should be left alive to live. The first is that by having the DMPC paladin to be the only one to die, the anti-paladin would make the party's report back to the clergy more of a,"Oh god, we have to tell them why the paladin isn't here don't we?", instead of,"Yay the quest is over! Time to get paid!" situation. The other is that from what I know about Succubi from not just D&D but folklore is that they are a fair bit Sadistic, rather wanting to make an enemy suffer beforehand in any way possible than to just outright murder them. I'm fairly certain that minor psychological trauma would count on the scale of possible torture methods. Also if the anti-paladin just starts to levitate back onto the platform after killing the paladin, she might just take it as a,"looks like our job here is done".

[KindOfGoodGuy]

based on the OP, it would seem that the succubus is absent for the encounter itself

Not really. She would be there but I would make the party roll perception beforehand. It won't be a hard roll but if they pass they will notice her in the doorframe that the anti-paladin came from. The same one that magically locks itself when shut.

[KindOfGoodGuy]

Hi, first, welcome to DMing. It seems like you have put some decent effort into making this work. i do however have a few ideas?

1) There is nothing in the story that ties to the characters, or the players. You are telling your story, and the characters just seem to follow it. Why should the characters care? One of the DM's most powerful tools is to get the players motivated. Note I said "players"... characters come second. Tie the story to the characters and find a reason for the PLAYERS to be interested. Appeal to their interests and sensibilities. If you get them involved, it makes the game a WHOLE LOT better!

2) The initial reveal is too big, and too much "off the start". Part of what makes an RPG interesting, is to explore a mystery, a story, to find a twist and get that "Ah! So that's what happened!" moment. Instead you're telling it all from the start. I suggest to just tell the party that they this righteous paladin ran off after the wedding, and that his wife disappeared. If this is the first session, let them explore about the paladin a bit (his friends, his home, and so on), so they could get to relate to their final enemy (Also a powerful tool of the GM), and find clues that leads them to the crypt. Then, inside the crypt, pepper clues that leads to his struggle or such. make it a slow reveal. Make it engaging.

3) About him falling: It does seem like... a bit of a jerk move the way his god acted. A paladin falls due to a conscious act of failing his principles. If he married someone whom he didn't know who she was... well... that is a bit weak. The god could have acted in many other ways to warn him. The actual falling should be something of his doing, of his choice, knowing well the consequences. Think on Vaarsuvius (I can't remember how to spell then name)- Doing something he felt was right, for all the wrong reasons and such...

Also, a suggestion- Don't let it be known that he has fallen. Live that as an open question. A good RPG is about two main things- answering questions, and choices. The party should find that he is struggling with some choice, struggling to find a decision that he can live with. The result should be the climax, when the party faces this question, and affect it directly. Which leads me to:

4) Don't have a scripted ending, and don't decide on that result: You have scripted a lot of the game. Some in the playground may call it "railroading". You see, this isn't a movie... You're not showing your work to the players, you are CREATING IT WITH THEM. You have decided that they have an accompanying paladin, what if the party doesn't want it to come? (I'll get to that later). You have decided it survives the crypt- it has some sort of a plot shield? You have decided that it engages the anti paladin in a conversation in the end. What if the party attacks before that? What if they don't like the paladin and shut him up? What if THEY decide to engage the antipaladin instead? And you have decided that the anti paladin is beyond redemption, and that it escapes without the party facing. If you have decided all of this, what is the party there for? Just to watch?

Thing is, you are not making a movie, you remaking a game. And the most important things in this game is that the player actions matter. They make a difference, they affect the world in more ways than just "Do we live to see the end of the story line or not". They make the story WITH you. The GM set the stage, for some question to be resolved. How it is resolved, and what is the final outcome, is the result of the players' decisions and actions.

Consider the following- The foe hasn't fallen yet, but he is on the verge to do so. He has come to this crypt in order to find some answer/ contemplate/ maybe perform the final deed. He is in between. As the party explroes him, and find out more about him and the dilemma, they finally meet him. And then, by their actions, decisions, and so on, the foe makes his final decision, and either falls, or doesn't fall, or a myriad of other options.

It tool me a loooooong time to understand something as a DM, a few years and a lot of maturity in fact- Don't control everything, let things evolve, responds to the players instead of trying to predict them and decide on n outcome. Let the game surprise you- you will enjoy it a hell of a lot more!

5) The accompanying paladin: With every feature you put in the game, you need to ask yourself "What is it's purpose? What goal does it serve?" If the paladin's entire goal is the speech at the end nd then getting killed, I say ditch him- don't include him at all. First of all- it's the scripted problem that I've talked about. Secondly- the game is about the PLAYERS AND CHARACTERS. Let THEM engage the anti paladin, It's the characters stage, not the one of an NPC. And lastly, he starts at a level higher, and from the feel of it is sort of an "authority figure", which players utterly despise... This feels like a character the GM wants to ply along with the party. Again- keep the PCs center stage. Whatever you do, whatever you plan, find a way to have the PCs in the center of it.

6) The Anti paladin's escape: I understand you plan to make it a long running villain? Even if you don't agree on my advice to let the question remain open, there are certain elements in foe making that are crucial. One of them is to make the party respect them. If the antagonist just disengages, for no good reason, when he could have killed them easily, then the players will think one of the two:
- You're trying to protect them. (Which is NOT good. It relieves the sense of danger, and makes them feel that they are alive only because "you allowed it to be so/ had pity on them/ been merciful". Which again- takes the choice out of the PCs hands.
- The antagonist is making crucial mistakes, and is therefore either a fool, a mockery villain, or both. They lose respect for the villain. It feels like not a rel threat.

Instead, how about the following: The anti paladin is in the crypt for some sort of reason, a plan, a goal. One that not involves killing the PCs directly. Perhaps it's some sort of a ritual, construction, understanding a puzzle or whatever... You decide. When the party meets him he is in the final stages of this endeavor, and as the party engages him (In talk, subterfuge or battle), he focuses his efforts mainly on achieving his goal. The encounter's focus turns from "Who kills the other first", to "can the PC's stop whatever he is doing before he accomplishes it?" which makes for a much more interesting and climatic encounter! Let them feel his power at times, but for the most part he tries to finish whatever he is doing. Again, I suggest to live the answer here open- the character can succeed, or they can fail, and it will affect something in the future. Either way- he has just achieved what he was after, or he has failed, and in both cases he has nothing left to do here.

I highly advise NOT to use some sort of a block between the party and him. Again, this takes the decision out of the party's hand and feels very heavy handed. Instead let them decide- whether to fight this superior power enemy, or withdraw, as he leaves them. (Maybe trapped, maybe to his minions, maybe just beaten and bloody). The party will feel the choices are theirs, nd that the danger is real. Aaaannnd, you get a bonus- the party now a vested interest in revenging the defeat. A good motive like no other! :smallbiggrin:

7) Last bit of emphasis: Players and characters, always, always think of them, and what could make it more appealing to them, and get them more engaged. You set the stage for the story, but it is their decisions, their actions, that MAKE the story.

Good luck to you. GMing is a never ending lesson. I keep learning new things, improving, and making better games. It's really a great part of what makes it fun, so don't let it discourage you. Welcome to the GM's set!

Thanks for the tips! Although I can't think of anything at this moment, ill try to add a bit more to the situation beforehand and try to appeal to the players. Looking back on it I do seem to be railroading quite a bit and as much as i do not want to railroad, I just want to get this one moment in the session to be precise. If the players want to fight him or taunt him, I am fairly good with improving and lettng many things go in the way that the others would want but past that, as long as the paladin dies, I am able to be very lenient.

[Daishain]

Might I suggest making it less clear that the paladin is in the wrong?

Don't have the paladin fall at the wedding. Instead have her be discovered, or better yet confess, at some point or another, with her claiming a change of heart, and a desire to at least escape the abyss for good. He is extremely disturbed, but in love, and can't find proof she is lying. In order to protect her while he figures this out, they flee to an old abandoned chapel in the wilderness.

The party fights various relatively wild beasties on the way to the chapel, perhaps flavored as the reason it is no longer in use. They arrive in time to see the two paladins arguing. B draws his weapon and attempts to kill the succubus, a brief fight ensues, and A kills B, partly by accident. It is at this point that A falls and becomes an antipaladin.

Paladin A has no desire to harm the party, but won't allow them to harm his love either. If they attack, have him and the succubus endeavor to simply subdue.

Whenever they talk, either before or after the pair beats the everloving crap out of them, the paladin asks for the party's help in trying to figure out if this change of heart is genuine. If they disagree, the paladin and his wife disappear into the wilderness.

You can take the story in two directions from here, and I would suggest tailoring it to how the party reacts to the previous scene:

Option 1 is more similar to what you already have. The succubus is lying, as usual, and the paladin keeps being drawn into more and more questionable acts, until he becomes a formidable avatar of evil himself. Just make sure the descent is reasonably slow and fairly logical. If the party agrees to help him, they get a chance to get him to realize the truth, while fending off the succubus' attempts to get rid of them. If they fail, or are opposed to helping from the start, go back to the default option of him as BBEG.

Option 2 is quite unlikely, and technically goes against the lore. But is much more thematically interesting in my opinion. The succubus is not lying, but the married couple have a very long and difficult path ahead of them to earn redemption, much less get anyone else to accept it. The gods are staying out of this mess, there is ongoing conflict between the lawful stupid types who want to execute the pair at almost any cost, the demons who want to punish her betrayal, and whatever support the couple is able to dredge up. The party gets drawn into supporting a side and/or dealing with the side effects of the conflict (Ie, hobgoblins taking advantage of the chaos to pursue their goals unhindered, a crisis of faith threatening a civil war, etc.)

Bear in mind that while you probably don't want to abandon them entirely, the couple doesn't have to be directly involved in everything the party does.You could not mention the couple again for years of in game time and still have their actions affect the party, or vice versa.

[jjcrpntr]

Kol Korran and Daishain have some great advice.

Welcome to DMing it can be fun and incredibly annoying at the same time.

I'd echo what the others have said. I have nothing to add to this conversation other than to say this is a pretty good place to ask for advice, most of the people here know what they are talking about.

[Trasilor]

I am assuming that this is not the first time for the players, and you have played along side them before, correct?

Knowing what type of game (kick in the door, strict role playing, etc) goes a long way in how you create your stories.

Lots of good advice on improving the story.

Welcome to the club!




1) Involve your players. Cannot stress this enough

2) Write stuff down! As a DM, you may find yourself flying by the seat of your pants despite all the preparedness. Things you say on the fly you might want to revisit later.

3) Write down house rules and print them out. This avoids confusion later on.

4) Adjudicate then reference. If you are unfamiliar with a rule (be it esoteric or someone argues) just state: "For the remainder of the session, it will function as follows." Then look it up after.

5) Reward for what you want to promote. If you want more role playing - give more bonuses when characters role play.

6) Create cheat sheets. Lots of DMs have lots of various tools at their disposal. I saw one DM use Face Cards (from paizo) and post-it notes with their names for various people you meet around town. Another trick is to use pre-rolled d20's. Keep a list for "silent rolling" and cross them off as they are used.

For me, I use cards with the player's name on it as well as enemy cards (index cards). Most of my encounters are planned (event the "random" ones). So I have them roll initiative at the start of the session and place the cards in order (face down). Then when combat begins, no dice rolling, just action.

[HighWater]

Thanks for the tips! Although I can't think of anything at this moment, ill try to add a bit more to the situation beforehand and try to appeal to the players. Looking back on it I do seem to be railroading quite a bit and as much as i do not want to railroad, I just want to get this one moment in the session to be precise. If the players want to fight him or taunt him, I am fairly good with improving and lettng many things go in the way that the others would want but past that, as long as the paladin dies, I am able to be very lenient.

Daishan's suggestion is a nice step forward. It displays the layers of plot you can have that make a "simple kill the baddie quest" into an "what's going on...?" You can even make it so it is unknown that the woman is a succubus: an aging and trusted Seer has accused her of being Vile and hiding her true nature and that is why they fled, but is this true?
Another tip Daishan almost accidentally reveals: sometimes it pays to have multiple versions of the 'truth' prepared and then choose "in the moment" which storyline is the most promising (sometimes the players will accidentally give you an even better idea as they try to come up with explanations for what happens around them). Don't let the players know this though...

I would also suggest to avoid the "good paladin" attacking first. Instead he should accidentally provoke the "falling paladin" into attacking him.

For instance:
They find PaladinE almost done packing the couple's belongings, his wife can be revealed by the perceptioncheck as mounted on a horse behind the treeline, watching, but PaladinG will be blind to her unless the PCs specifically point her out. He tries to reason with his former master PaladinE. He accuses the woman of being evil (it's nice if PaladinG doesn't know she's actually a succubus, you can save that reveal for later!) and having poisoned his mind. His master (PaladinE) rebukes him for insulting his wife and spreading gossip, but PaladinG doesn't shut up and reveals that this evil woman (he still doesn't know her true nature) has once offered to bed him in exchange for his loyalties. His master has not married a woman pure of heart, but exchanged vows with a tained concubine! (The lofty language is intentional, they are Paladins after all.) PaladinE, blinded with a love that made him turn his back on his calling, explodes in rage and strikes PaladinG down (PaladinG did not try to attack): his first murder of an innocent, enough to Fall from Grace and the first step to true Anti-paladinhood! He quickly mounts his steed and with guilt in his eyes besieges the PCs: "Please, leave this place and tell the Grandmaster what has happened here. Tell him and my former collegues to not come after us, for I cannot vouch for my own actions or their safety. I do not wish to kill them, nor kill you. Leave now before I change my mind..." and then spurs off...

So, has the Paladin been truly turned? He still seems to have some honour and goodness left... And what is the status of his woman? She has been accused by an aging and trusted Seer of being evil and hiding her true nature, but the PCs will not have seen any evidence other than the strange behaviour of her man.

Foreshadowing:
The "good paladin" can have mentioned (if prompted by the PCs) that she has offered herself to him once and confess to the difficulty involved in denying her offer. He can also express confusion as to why his detect evil on her did not work, and wonder aloud how the Seer established her evilness...
The Churchleader can warn the PCs of the Falling paladin's strength: they should bring him back peacefully, if he refuses to come they should not engage but simply retreat and report back.
Gossip in the town can have accusations of the woman ranging from witchcraft or dark magic, to being a shapeshifting demon or even a succubus! It's nice if the PCs hear these rumours even before they are officially appointed for the task of finding the Fallen Paladin and his wife.

[Threadnaught]

Since it was your first time DMing, the railroading is excusable.

I won't offer much in the way of advice, since most of it has been said already, however, I believe in dropping hints for even the most inconsequential of quests whenever possible. Even in the middle of an epic save the world quest, you could have some nobody Commoner offer the party riches in exchange for their help beating the Ogre tribe in the yearly tourney.
And if the players want to abandon their quest, let them. Just start dropping reminders that the end of the world thing is super important. :smallamused:

[KindOfGoodGuy]

Might I suggest making it less clear that the paladin is in the wrong?

Don't have the paladin fall at the wedding. Instead have her be discovered, or better yet confess, at some point or another, with her claiming a change of heart, and a desire to at least escape the abyss for good. He is extremely disturbed, but in love, and can't find proof she is lying. In order to protect her while he figures this out, they flee to an old abandoned chapel in the wilderness.

The party fights various relatively wild beasties on the way to the chapel, perhaps flavored as the reason it is no longer in use. They arrive in time to see the two paladins arguing. B draws his weapon and attempts to kill the succubus, a brief fight ensues, and A kills B, partly by accident. It is at this point that A falls and becomes an antipaladin.

Paladin A has no desire to harm the party, but won't allow them to harm his love either. If they attack, have him and the succubus endeavor to simply subdue.

Whenever they talk, either before or after the pair beats the everloving crap out of them, the paladin asks for the party's help in trying to figure out if this change of heart is genuine. If they disagree, the paladin and his wife disappear into the wilderness.

You can take the story in two directions from here, and I would suggest tailoring it to how the party reacts to the previous scene:

Option 1 is more similar to what you already have. The succubus is lying, as usual, and the paladin keeps being drawn into more and more questionable acts, until he becomes a formidable avatar of evil himself. Just make sure the descent is reasonably slow and fairly logical. If the party agrees to help him, they get a chance to get him to realize the truth, while fending off the succubus' attempts to get rid of them. If they fail, or are opposed to helping from the start, go back to the default option of him as BBEG.

Option 2 is quite unlikely, and technically goes against the lore. But is much more thematically interesting in my opinion. The succubus is not lying, but the married couple have a very long and difficult path ahead of them to earn redemption, much less get anyone else to accept it. The gods are staying out of this mess, there is ongoing conflict between the lawful stupid types who want to execute the pair at almost any cost, the demons who want to punish her betrayal, and whatever support the couple is able to dredge up. The party gets drawn into supporting a side and/or dealing with the side effects of the conflict (Ie, hobgoblins taking advantage of the chaos to pursue their goals unhindered, a crisis of faith threatening a civil war, etc.)

Bear in mind that while you probably don't want to abandon them entirely, the couple doesn't have to be directly involved in everything the party does.You could not mention the couple again for years of in game time and still have their actions affect the party, or vice versa.

WOW. That really helps me to get better idea of how this could be layed out for the players. Thanks!

[Theomniadept]

Here's an idea; don't force the players into starting this quest. Try this;

Have some problem that needs solving, have said paladin be swamped with problems and reach out to the PCs for help. This could be anything from a goblin raid to scouting an orc camp, something that's doable by capable people. Have his reward them somewhat generously. Have him offer them more work, but when they go to 'turn in the quest', so to speak, he's always at a different location; the church, a guardhouse, his own house - describe these places a little bit. Give him some character, nothing too over the top, just enough so the PCs remember him as the guy who gives them stuff in exchange for dead goblins.

Then turn him antipaladin.