PDA

View Full Version : DM Help Line between awe and frustration



Pinjata
2016-03-10, 02:13 PM
Party fights a group of enemies and there is also a character, they can not defeat. Maybe it is meant to survive, to push the plot on, maybe it is there due to some other reason.

But the result is ofter one of the other: "this enemy is amazing/we want to take him down later" or "why is DM tossing this OP bs at us?(tantrum)"

How can DM make things challenging, yet not frustrate the players?

Surpriser
2016-03-10, 02:32 PM
Give them something else to accomplish that is not "Defeat this undefeatable NPC".

It's as easy as that.

obryn
2016-03-10, 02:37 PM
Yeah. The key is to keep them out of direct conflict.

You want to avoid a straight-up fight where it's nothing more than demonstrating how cool the bad guy/NPC is. Even if your goal is to set it up so the players can feel a sense of accomplishment later ... there's just better ways to handle it.

Lvl 2 Expert
2016-03-10, 02:52 PM
Make him help the party like he's some sort of DMPC, showing off and killing half the enemy's, then let him have a short speech about how he's the villain and he was just pricking with them. See? They already want to strangle him! :smallbiggrin:

Darth Ultron
2016-03-10, 07:11 PM
First, as a DM, you need to accept some players will never, ever, ever be happy. Some people are just like that. Accept it an move on.

Second everyone reads their own bias into everything. So if an event happens, you will get a different option from each person. And again, the unhappy for life person will still be unhappy....again.

There is no ''sweet spot'' where everyone will just say ''that was good''. There will always be at least one That One Guy.

The only real thing a DM can do, is attempt to fool the players into thinking they ''did their best''. If you really want to go down that road.

Knaight
2016-03-10, 07:26 PM
Don't establish the rest of the campaign as a bunch of enemies to beat down. If things that can't be fought directly are routine, and they actually make sense in that role, players tend to get that about the setting and be fine with it. There is some subtlety here - a campaign where there's a bunch of foes that can't be directly fought because they're something like reasonably large bands of people, significantly larger warships or star ships, and other things like that are generally fine, a campaign where there's a bunch of foes that can't be directly fought because every third person is a master warrior who could beat down the entire fighting focused party is just irritating.

In this case, we're talking about one character. That's totally fine, but it will generally be better if the players are used to things like negotiating against superior forces, running away, etc. If they aren't, I'd suggest communicating the idea to them pretty overtly in this case. I'd also suggest not having a whole bunch of characters all of whom are better than an entire group; it erodes the game and it tens not to make all that much sense from a setting plausibility standpoint.

Also, I wouldn't expect awe regardless. Acknowledgement that a particular enemy is highly competent, sure. The establishment of an MO for dealing with them that is some variety of escape, sure. Awe, not so much.

Telok
2016-03-10, 10:13 PM
The reat of my group is too firmly rooted in d&d-murderhobo-scorched-earth to back down from almost anything. In superhero games they let people die trapped in burning cars or risk full sports stadiums getting blown up just so they can hit a bad guy one more time. Two imperial star cruisers pulling them over for a customs check (Traveller) and they shot the inspectors and then tried to attack the 300 ton cruisers with their one laser, 100 ton trading ship. Prisoners are never taken, foes who surrender are executed, npcs are insulted and any npc that talks back or shows a spine is attacked (or at least deeply resented).

You can't win with some people.

goto124
2016-03-11, 12:11 AM
I don't really see why it's a case of "fine line". It's not like you can dial back on certain aspects and turn frustration into awe. Well, you should dial back on certain frustrating aspects because frustration isn't fun, but you're not getting awe that way, nor should you actually try to 'awe' your players.


See? They already want to strangle him! :smallbiggrin:

NichG
2016-03-11, 02:50 AM
Awe is good, but it's different than respect or submission, which is what it seems DMs are often confusing for awe.

Awe isn't something that happens in the air between the DM and players, it's something that goes on in the players' heads. So it can't be forced, it has to be coaxed out.

A classic example is the eureka moment, the point where things just click for someone. That's similar to what you need for awe. The player's imagination must be simulated, so that the thing that actually impresses the player is the mental image they themselves have built, not the words the DM is saying.

If the DM says 'this guy is powerful', the first reaction from the players will be doubt. If the DM acts to prove it, the response will be to take it personally as a demonstration of the DM's control. So that's the wrong way. Better is to indirectly hint at things where the implication could be surprising or monumental. Let the players reach their own conclusions, and they'll feel ownership over those ideas - 'such and such villain is awesome because I decided to think so without being told to'.

Ikitavi
2016-03-11, 04:19 AM
If you don't want the players to kill a particular villain, give them a reason not to. Maybe there are factions within the enemy camp, and that particular villain is playing one side against the other, and will keep the enemy faction busy for a while to their own advantage.

Or maybe it is a matter of honor, somehow.

Another option is to simply let the players kill that instance of the villain, but there is a whole school of similarly trained villains. They will then get to face a similar villain, who perhaps won't know as much about the party, but has different resources. So the players drew and quartered the first necromancer they saw, burnt the body, and scattered the ashes, and then consulted a library for other stuff they could do to make necromancer death extra permanent.

But they already knew the guy corresponded with and got funds from a "philosopher" that by implication, was funding other similar necromancers.

If you want them to not obsess over killing the villain, have the villain talk with them, or give them a gift. Perhaps he does something nasty to his rivals, sabotaging their escape, and giving a note to the PCs. "Here is a little extra reward for your hard work. Fear not, the Red Viper gang hierarchy will believe this was all you. And this note will self-destruct in 5 minutes. Approximately. Alchemy is not an exact science."

Of course, part of the threat is that the party only gets paid if they have destroyed the leadership of the Red Viper gang. If they admit one got away, they don't get as big a reward.

Another possibility is to make it clear the particular villain was just a mercenary, and they could be similarly bribed in the future.

Basically, if you don't want the players to take the villain personally, don't have it do anything personal. And also make it clear that said villain isn't going to be endlessly plotting against the PCs. If the villain in question comes out ahead, like perhaps they got their long-sought vengeance achieved, or recovered a family possession or a spellbook or anything else that the players hadn't really lusted for themselves, they may feel that while the villain is DANGEROUS, they do not necessarily require the PCs' attention at this time.

Gastronomie
2016-03-12, 05:53 AM
Make him help the party like he's some sort of DMPC, showing off and killing half the enemy's, then let him have a short speech about how he's the villain and he was just pricking with them. See? They already want to strangle him! :smallbiggrin:

This sounds like an amazing introduction for a troll-ish villian (no, not the regenerating one that you burn with fire, I mean troll as in the internet slang). I think I will be using this someday, if you're okay with it.

OT: Making sure it doesn't look like the DM isn't showing off his powers? I dunno.

Lvl 2 Expert
2016-03-13, 05:32 PM
I think I will be using this someday, if you're okay with it.

:smallbiggrin:

Lorsa
2016-03-14, 03:04 PM
Party fights a group of enemies and there is also a character, they can not defeat. Maybe it is meant to survive, to push the plot on, maybe it is there due to some other reason.

But the result is ofter one of the other: "this enemy is amazing/we want to take him down later" or "why is DM tossing this OP bs at us?(tantrum)"

How can DM make things challenging, yet not frustrate the players?

A character that is undefeatable is not a challenge. A challenge is something that can be overcome.

If it's undefeatable due to plot reasons, that is a clear sign of railroading, which is okay if the players know that's the game they're playing.

However, if they get frustrated, could be that's not what they are looking for and/or you weren't clear with it from the beginning.