PDA

View Full Version : pitting two players against each other - am I crazy



Elvenoutrider
2016-07-28, 01:27 PM
So I have two players, both relevantly new and both are huge military history buffs. One of them, player 1, is an existing player who has gotten off the rails. he heard that an enemy lord's keep is virtually empty and offered a rival lord to lead 30 men to go take the keep while they were unprepared - damn good plan except someone else had the same idea. I already had it written that a local merchant was able to trojan horse 20 men and ten untrained support staff in. I was already planning on adding a new player - player 2. I decided to have player 2 play the unlucky sap in charge of defending the keep. His character thinks the attack is coming by land on the opposite side of the castle and has given me all sorts of plans on how to keep an enemy coming from that direction at bay long enough for reinforcements to come (they are expected within a week). Player one however intends to take three war canoes full of men and take the castle from the water on the opposite side that player 2 is expecting.. Even with the surprise, attacking a keep that is manned will still not be easy. Player 1 has no idea he is being pitted against another player, player 2 knows player 1 is coming but expects him in a different way. Player two has been told of how I intend for the scene to end - just not how that is going to happen. The event that will get both players together is that there is a demon being summoned in the basement. end result of this will be the destruction of the keep and most of the men. I am excited to pit two military buffs against each other. Has anyone done this before and would you have any advice - pathfinder is the system.

Red Fel
2016-07-28, 01:59 PM
Came in expecting to hear about a GM who pitted two players against one another using homemade weapons to determine who paid for pizza. Saw that it involved pitting their characters against one another. Realized that once again semantics have ruined my bloodsport. Was disappointed.


Player 1 has no idea he is being pitted against another player, player 2 knows player 1 is coming but expects him in a different way. Player two has been told of how I intend for the scene to end - just not how that is going to happen. The event that will get both players together is that there is a demon being summoned in the basement. end result of this will be the destruction of the keep and most of the men. I am excited to pit two military buffs against each other. Has anyone done this before and would you have any advice - pathfinder is the system.

Here's my simple rule on PvP: It doesn't happen unless everyone is advised in advance. Why? Because it leads to salt. It's one of those before-game agreements, like "We're playing D&D, so no cyborgs, please," or "This is a horror campaign, so please try to keep the Monty Python references down," or "No, Chad, I told you, no catgirls."

PvP is like that. It deals with player expectations. In this case, one player has no idea he's being pitted in PvP, which means he could be angry when he finds out he's not fighting a bunch of mooks, but a real person who will try to thwart him. The other player knows, but has been given misinformation, which means he could be angry when he learns that the invading army snuck right past him.

Plus you're dealing with a certain problem of expectation. You anticipate that the PCs will have their little war, duel a bit, then unite to stop a demon in the basement. Player 1 anticipates that he will attempt to conquer this keep, likely putting everyone within (including, unbeknownst to him, Player 2) to the sword. Player 2 anticipates that Player 1 will attack, and that he will attempt to thwart that attack. Everyone anticipates something different, which means that at least one will be disappointed. Maybe P1's character fails in the attack without meeting P2, packs up and goes home, leaving P2 alone to deal with a demon. Maybe P2 thwarts the attack and P1 dies. Maybe P1 succeeds in the attack and P2 dies. Maybe they duel, and in the chaos decide to skip off and become itinerant friars, oblivious to the impending demonic incursion. There are any number of possibilities that don't jive with your planned scene.

I've seen characters introduced as rivals or antagonists, but usually in small, intimate scenes that can be resolved quickly, and always with the understanding that, if we do this, your character could die before joining the party, are you okay with that? This is not that. This is massive and chaotic, with a dozen moving pieces and a lot of chances for failure. So I put the question to you. If the characters don't join up, or one or both die, or they don't unite to stop the demon in the basement, are you okay with that?

xroads
2016-07-28, 02:25 PM
Yeah, I would at least tell player #1 that he's about to invade a keep defended by another player. Also, has player #2 ever met player #1? If not, then introducing player #2 into the game by using PvP doesn't seem like a good idea.

Jay R
2016-07-28, 05:26 PM
One of the rarely-mentioned consequences of PvP is that expectations are very different.

In a normal game, most people assume that they are in a battle that the players are expected to win, and are aggrieved when the DM gives their enemy an equal chance.

"That's not a CR-appropriate encounter" really means that the party doesn't have an extremely high chance of winning.

Some players even expect it to be impossible for their characters to die.

In a PvP situation, each side has (presumably) as much chance to win as the other side. One of them will lose the battle.

So, instead of having a situation the players expect to win, they have a situation that at least one player will definitely lose.

That can cause trouble, just because it doesn't match their expectations.

Vitruviansquid
2016-07-28, 05:57 PM
Step back for a second and ask yourself: Are my two players in question mature enough to handle losing, perhaps badly, a PvP matchup?

If no - immediately halt all plans and abort.

If yes - ensure that the ensuing battle with be fair by thinking of ways either players' plans can fail based on rolls, their choices, and potential intervention from other parties.

Jay R
2016-07-28, 08:25 PM
Step back for a second and ask yourself: Are my two players in question mature enough to handle losing, perhaps badly, a PvP matchup?

And do they want to do so?

"Maturity" is a poot excuse for setting me in a situation I don't want to play.

Cazero
2016-07-29, 04:26 AM
Came in expecting to hear about a GM who pitted two players against one another using homemade weapons to determine who paid for pizza. Saw that it involved pitting their characters against one another. Realized that once again semantics have ruined my bloodsport. Was disappointed.
Two men enter, one pays pizza ! Two men enter, one pays pizza !