how to deal with player paranoia when you're not planning to...y'know?

[Prince Zahn]

As a DM, the foundation of my game approach is to award player curiosity over safety. my ideal players are those who see where I'm going with a particular lead and follow me anyway. the players in my Available Friend Circle (AFC), however, see things in the opposite direction, and I don't know how to explain to them that things are very much different at my table than in others they have played.

It happens time and time again in my games, that I plant important, enriching details in my scenes that the players miss entirely because they are convinced that if they interact with a particularly unusual object, it'll turn out to be a trap or something. they are convinced that there's a monster behind this secret doorway, or are certain that a harmless NPC is going to betray them. these are leads that I haven't done, and don't intend to use lightheartedly.

Now, I'm sure some DMs would be thrilled by the idea that the savvy players' paranoia leads them to take every precaution, but from my perspective, it bogs the game down significantly, and they end up missing valuable details in my story that I want them to look for, and useful treasures that could help them significantly later.

When I spoke to my AFC about this, they pinned the blame on past experiences in 3.5 or pathfinder (usually from one or two DMs which will remain anonymous); And/or they say that it is a hard habit to shake off.

A part of me wishes that previous DMs haven't conditioned them to such poisonous habits, it takes part of the joy away from me as a DM because their part of the adventure feels very unnatural to me, and leaves holes open in my story. What could I do (for my next game) to get the players I take from my AFC to put aside those paranoid preconceptions and explore the details that could ultimately reward them?

[PanosIs]

Well, this does not exactly deal with your particular problem. But instead of thinking "how can I make my players less paranoid about everything" maybe you need to balance the gain with the danger. The gain of finding minor plot points is there, but the danger of a trap is greater. You should maybe introduce something worth taking a risk for, and then slowly work your way down as your players learn to fit in a lower "danger" environment.

[gfishfunk]

Say "make a perception check." And then, as they roll, but before the dive stop, say "You find that there is nothing dangerous. It's perfectly safe.

Or role insight.

Or role investigation. Whatever.

[Prince Zahn]

Well, this does not exactly deal with your particular problem. But instead of thinking "how can I make my players less paranoid about everything" maybe you need to balance the gain with the danger. The gain of finding minor plot points is there, but the danger of a trap is greater. You should maybe introduce something worth taking a risk for, and then slowly work your way down as your players learn to fit in a lower "danger" environment.

Don't misunderstand, my campaigns are dangerous enough without having to resort to making them question everything. there's more than one way to skin a cat.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Sounds like a normal case of combat-as-sport DM with combat-as-war players. First thing would be to talk to them, which you did :thumbsup:, so maybe just let it take time.

I think it's pretty common for DMs to get annoyed with paranoid players, because the DM knows there's usually nothing to be especially paranoid about and just wants to get on with it; and when there is something to be paranoid about, it's because the DM cooked up some premise for a surprise or trap or battle they think is cool and different and challenging, and would hate for the whole scenario to just fizzle even if that's "optimal" from the standpoint of the players/characters.

One possible thing that might help: give out fate points that can effectively be used to bail a character out of a deadly situation. That way your players might feel they have a safety net built into the game if you turn out to be evil after all.

[Prince Zahn]

Sounds like a normal case of combat-as-sport DM with combat-as-war players. First thing would be to talk to them, which you did :thumbsup:, so maybe just let it take time.

I think it's pretty common for DMs to get annoyed with paranoid players, because the DM knows there's usually nothing to be especially paranoid about and just wants to get on with it; and when there is something to be paranoid about, it's because the DM cooked up some premise for a surprise or trap or battle they think is cool and different and challenging, and would hate for the whole scenario to just fizzle even if that's "optimal" from the standpoint of the players/characters.

One possible thing that might help: give out fate points that can effectively be used to bail a character out of a deadly situation. That way your players might feel they have a safety net built into the game if you turn out to be evil after all.
You said it pretty well.
When something is wrong, I don't usually like to be subtle about it and prefer to drop it on my players like a rock. What other things do you propose these fate points could do?

[some guy]

I give xp for exploration (wilderness, social and of weird objects). Interact with, find out what the monster's/ npc's deal is, what the strange machinery's purpose is, get xp. Xp is in the game as the standard carrot. Tell them exploration is worth xp.
(I'm assuming you're not already giving xp for this.)

[Regwon]

I don't think that there's anything wrong with how your players are playing. As long as theyre having fun its fine. If you want to encourage exploration you need to make it worth the risk, even if the risk is imagined. You also need to give them the opportunity to fail. If they miss something because they dont explore, so be it. If they miss something super important to the plot or the game, you shouldnt have been hiding it anyway.

Dont expect your players to behave the way you want them to, or follow the paths you think they should. They will often do strange and unexpected things and you have to he accomodating of that. Dont hide anything from them that is crucial because if they miss it, or choose not to interact with it, your game will stall.

[Drackolus]

I give xp for exploration (wilderness, social and of weird objects). Interact with, find out what the monster's/ npc's deal is, what the strange machinery's purpose is, get xp. Xp is in the game as the standard carrot. Tell them exploration is worth xp.
(I'm assuming you're not already giving xp for this.)

And you can give it to them concise, too. "Side quests are rewarding and numerous, and boy howdy you're gonna need those rewards.

[Alejandro]

Ask the players if all the NPCs of your gameworld need to be paranoid zealots with 10' poles any time they want to interact with their PCs.

If the answer is 'of course not' (and I assume it is) then you have a good basis for encouraging them to treat their own actions the same way.

[Idkwhatmyscreen]

Reverse the paranoia.

Have them enter a room with 4-6 big piles of gold in the corners, in each pile of gold there is an ornate weapon, each pile of gold is also surrounded by magic runes.

Clearly, this is a trap. However it is not the trap they think it is . The runes won't turn the party to stone or call down lighting, but they will animate the gold, making it into a fearsome elemental. So if the party ignores the gold and continues down the dungeon, they will have to deal with these elementals later.

When they ask about the encounter, remind them that they did not examine runes, which would have revealed the purpose of the runes, and how to beat the gold monsters without a single attack roll.

The best way is to deal with paranoia of examining things will get you killed, is to make traps and encounters where not examine things will make life harder. the name of the game is rewarding behavior you want.

[BW022]

Prince Zahn,

My advice is actually different.

Your ultimate goal as a DM is to ensure that the players have fun. Sure, you want to push them somewhat, expand their game play, and give them different experiences... but sometimes it is better to look at your group, determine what they like, and alter your game so that they'll like it. If your group is paranoid and it is slowing the game down... don't put in so many clues or plots devices which require a lot of 'curiosity'. Realize that the group is paranoid and go with it. Put the clue on top of the chest if you have to, use a person to deliver the message, etc.

Some paranoia might be due to their levels, play style, previous DMs, other campaigns, classes, backgrounds, lack of certain classes, etc. Maybe it will ease up over time when they either realize that everything isn't deadly or that you reward curiosity.

However, my advice... realize that they are ultra careful and adjust your campaign to accommodate them. Allow them to take precautions and don't punish them too much for doing so. If someone is bold or curious, then... sure... reward them -- some minor magical item, a treasure map, etc. -- just don't put clues or plot forwarding devices behind 'curiosity walls'. Keep the forwarding devices simple and easy to find. Have an NPC mentor guide them through if necessary.

[Prince Zahn]

I give xp for exploration (wilderness, social and of weird objects). Interact with, find out what the monster's/ npc's deal is, what the strange machinery's purpose is, get xp. Xp is in the game as the standard carrot. Tell them exploration is worth xp.
(I'm assuming you're not already giving xp for this.) i certainly would reward them if they did. One player did, and got rewarded for it.


I don't think that there's anything wrong with how your players are playing. As long as theyre having fun its fine. If you want to encourage exploration you need to make it worth the risk, even if the risk is imagined. You also need to give them the opportunity to fail. If they miss something because they dont explore, so be it. If they miss something super important to the plot or the game, you shouldnt have been hiding it anyway.

Dont expect your players to behave the way you want them to, or follow the paths you think they should. They will often do strange and unexpected things and you have to he accomodating of that. Dont hide anything from them that is crucial because if they miss it, or choose not to interact with it, your game will stall.there is very little that is considered objectively bad playing, but if it's a problem for me as a DM, I don't want to make my peace with it. I certainly don't intend to encourage paranoia. My table is not like their other GM's table, and it bugs me that they think that what's smart in his Campaign is smart in mine, too.


And you can give it to them concise, too. "Side quests are rewarding and numerous, and boy howdy you're gonna need those rewards.I'm not sure they'll take that hint to heart, but I'll definitely keep that on in mind.


Ask the players if all the NPCs of your gameworld need to be paranoid zealots with 10' poles any time they want to interact with their PCs.

If the answer is 'of course not' (and I assume it is) then you have a good basis for encouraging them to treat their own actions the same way.that's a good question, but what if they say "yes"? :O


Reverse the paranoia.

Have them enter a room with 4-6 big piles of gold in the corners, in each pile of gold there is an ornate weapon, each pile of gold is also surrounded by magic runes.

Clearly, this is a trap. However it is not the trap they think it is . The runes won't turn the party to stone or call down lighting, but they will animate the gold, making it into a fearsome elemental. So if the party ignores the gold and continues down the dungeon, they will have to deal with these elementals later.

When they ask about the encounter, remind them that they did not examine runes, which would have revealed the purpose of the runes, and how to beat the gold monsters without a single attack roll.

The best way is to deal with paranoia of examining things will get you killed, is to make traps and encounters where not examine things will make life harder. the name of the game is rewarding behavior you want.Punishment for not being curious ≠ reward for being curious.

Besides, I don't think I have it in me to be THAT convoluted.


Prince Zahn,

My advice is actually different.

Your ultimate goal as a DM is to ensure that the players have fun. Sure, you want to push them somewhat, expand their game play, and give them different experiences... but sometimes it is better to look at your group, determine what they like, and alter your game so that they'll like it. If your group is paranoid and it is slowing the game down... don't put in so many clues or plots devices which require a lot of 'curiosity'. Realize that the group is paranoid and go with it. Put the clue on top of the chest if you have to, use a person to deliver the message, etc.

Some paranoia might be due to their levels, play style, previous DMs, other campaigns, classes, backgrounds, lack of certain classes, etc. Maybe it will ease up over time when they either realize that everything isn't deadly or that you reward curiosity.

However, my advice... realize that they are ultra careful and adjust your campaign to accommodate them. Allow them to take precautions and don't punish them too much for doing so. If someone is bold or curious, then... sure... reward them -- some minor magical item, a treasure map, etc. -- just don't put clues or plot forwarding devices behind 'curiosity walls'. Keep the forwarding devices simple and easy to find. Have an NPC mentor guide them through if necessary.the way I see it, by DMing, I'm just as much of a player as they are, albeit in a different role.

As a good rule of thumb: I'm not going to encourage the paranoid approach, or reward this sort od behavior. And moreover, I have no intentions to run a game that frustrates me, that's not fun for me, and if it's not fun for everyone involved, it's just not going to work out.

[Sigreid]

Encourage the paranoia. When nothing bad happens they may become complacent. Then the fun starts.

[Prince Zahn]

Encourage the paranoia. When nothing bad happens they may become complacent. Then the fun starts.
Not helping me at the moment, as you and I must have very different definitions of the word "fun", what you are implying is destructive to what I'm hoping to achieve (rewarding curiosity instead of paranoia. I don't want unnecessary paranoia.)

[Potato_Priest]

Sounds like my playstyle would match yours pretty well. When I don't see anything dangerous, I don't assume there is anything dangerous. I suppose that one thing you could ask them about is the persona of their characters? Are their characters all paranoid doomsday preppers? Do some of them play confident, bragging warriors? If they do, those players should probably not be poking every tile with a ten foot pole before they walk across it.

[Sigreid]

Not helping me at the moment, as you and I must have very different definitions of the word "fun", especially if it requires them to drop their guard, which is what i want to reward.

For that, I recommend applying logic to your deviltry. Traps should be a defensive parameter and sensitive location thing. Characters don't get attacked in town without knowing that they are doing something to encourage attack (such as slumming ). Even if you tell them this is your operating principal, it'll take time for them to buy into it.

[Prince Zahn]

For that, I recommend applying logic to your deviltry. Traps should be a defensive parameter and sensitive location thing. Characters don't get attacked in town without knowing that they are doing something to encourage attack (such as slumming ). Even if you tell them this is your operating principal, it'll take time for them to buy into it.
:smallconfused: deviltry? Me? You must be mistaken. I'm not looking to screw my players over, when I put a challenge in front of them, it is only so they can think of a viable solution to overcome it.
When I put up a hint, or a lead, or a hook, it is because they will benefit from investigating it. My players are not idiots, but they are simply to cautious to experience the game I have to offer.

I. e. One of my player's solutions to gambling his treasure on a fight between a gangster and the group's Barbarian was to rig the battlefield with a billion traps for like half the session. In minute detail, he did not know that the battle would be a piece of cake anywa for someone like the bsrbarian. he just "really wanted to make sure he kept his stuff". Which he did in the least interesting way ever. If he would have left it to fate, it would have happened anyway, but the opposing bandit would at least make it look like a fight.

[Idkwhatmyscreen]

Punishment for not being curious ≠ reward for being curious.

Besides, I don't think I have it in me to be THAT convoluted.

I guess that what I was trying to say was make traps that are clearly traps, but are disabled though observation and investigation. That way when they find something that they think is a trap they will look closer and see that it is really just a forgotten pile of gold in corner, no darts, no boulders, and no ambushes for picking it up.

The goal is to have the party look at the runes on the door, rather then choosing a different door without runes. The way to do this is to make sure that the party knows that looking at mystic runes won't cause them to turn into trees, but will let them know what to expect when the door is opened.


Make sure to use clear language when describing successes and failures on traps. Rather then saying "You don't notice anything dangerous about the lever" Say "The lever is safe" (no need to leave them guessing about what the lever does if it only does what it logically is supposed to) Or " Something is off about the lever, but you don't know what" ( this lets them know that they have missed a key detail about the lever, but it makes sure that they now the lever is dangerous)

[Sigreid]

:smallconfused: deviltry? Me? You must be mistaken. I'm not looking to screw my players over, when I put a challenge in front of them, it is only so they can think of a viable solution to overcome it.
When I put up a hint, or a lead, or a hook, it is because they will benefit from investigating it. My players are not idiots, but they are simply to cautious to experience the game I have to offer.

I. e. One of my player's solutions to gambling his treasure on a fight between a gangster and the group's Barbarian was to rig the battlefield with a billion traps for like half the session. In minute detail, he did not know that the battle would be a piece of cake anywa for someone like the bsrbarian. he just "really wanted to make sure he kept his stuff". Which he did in the least interesting way ever. If he would have left it to fate, it would have happened anyway, but the opposing bandit would at least make it look like a fight.

Don't read too much into the deviltry word. My advice boI led down to yell the players you won't screw them out of the blue, and then dont.

Or find a player like me. Chains hanging from the celing? What happens if I pull one? A chain devil fell down? Wonder if they all do that?

[Prince Zahn]

Don't read too much into the deviltry word. My advice boI led down to yell the players you won't screw them out of the blue, and then dont.

Or find a player like me. Chains hanging from the celing? What happens if I pull one? A chain devil fell down? Wonder if they all do that?I wish I had players like you and Potato_Priest. But that is fair enough advice. If they would be paranoid, it should be out of necessity—and because it's justified, not due to PTSD they took with them from some other DM.


I guess that what I was trying to say was make traps that are clearly traps, but are disabled though observation and investigation. That way when they find something that they think is a trap they will look closer and see that it is really just a forgotten pile of gold in corner, no darts, no boulders, and no ambushes for picking it up.

The goal is to have the party look at the runes on the door, rather then choosing a different door without runes. The way to do this is to make sure that the party knows that looking at mystic runes won't cause them to turn into trees, but will let them know what to expect when the door is opened.


Make sure to use clear language when describing successes and failures on traps. Rather then saying "You don't notice anything dangerous about the lever" Say "The lever is safe" (no need to leave them guessing about what the lever does if it only does what it logically is supposed to) Or " Something is off about the lever, but you don't know what" ( this lets them know that they have missed a key detail about the lever, but it makes sure that they now the lever is dangerous)
This is good advice, now that i understand where you're coming from. I might act on it. Subtlety isn't my strong suit anyway :smalltongue:

[Sigreid]

Sorry for the bad typing. Using a smartphone from work doesn't give the best results.

[Larpus]

It might actually pay off to feed their paranoia some.

Whenever I DM, I always like to use deception, with NPCs that often appear harmless and worthy of pity that attack them when their guard is down or shape-shifters.

As a direct result, one my players has become paranoid whenever I introduce new NPCs, this is mostly because he sometimes DM and his style is the polar opposite of mine.

However, I've found out that he really relaxes and lowers his guard if I feed his paranoia and show something wrong about that one NPC or whatever he's super suspicious about, even if it's nothing really that great, just a simple "he bribes the cops" for the inn keeper or "the mayor secretly visits the brothel" did the trick for me.

[Prince Zahn]

It might actually pay off to feed their paranoia some.

Whenever I DM, I always like to use deception, with NPCs that often appear harmless and worthy of pity that attack them when their guard is down or shape-shifters.

As a direct result, one my players has become paranoid whenever I introduce new NPCs, this is mostly because he sometimes DM and his style is the polar opposite of mine.

However, I've found out that he really relaxes and lowers his guard if I feed his paranoia and show something wrong about that one NPC or whatever he's super suspicious about, even if it's nothing really that great, just a simple "he bribes the cops" for the inn keeper or "the mayor secretly visits the brothel" did the trick for me.
I can see the benefit of that, and that is an interesting trick to indulge them with a lesser wrong to lower their guard. that is something I will certainly try next time. I tend to favor dropping the mike unsettling truth before them rather than play the deception game, but it not always.

One particular instance that I built an adventure around was the beginning of my last adventure. I gave them a deliberately eerie environment, I told them stories of a boogeyman, they meet a lumberjack who offers to lead them where they wanted to go. when they asked him his name, he did not even try to hide the fact that he is the Oni. (he's literally called Oni) they came close to beating him, even though they weren't supposed to (wayyy out of their CR). He put them to sleep, and decided to spare their lives, and blackmailed them into being his minions instead of eating them. it's a bit cruel, I wasn't subtle about it at all, but breaking free from the Oni's clutches became exactly what this campaign was about for them. which is what I wanted. there was a degree of paranoia in the sense that the Oni might be watching their every move, but that paranoia is more relevant and beneficial to my story than whether a particular place is trapped, whether those stalactites are pierces, whether this crystal in the middle of the room is a trap because it's yellow.

[Contrast]

A couple of people I play with love using lava when they DM. They love designing maps which require us fighting while jumping from pillar to pillar while lava oozes below. They also make lava instant death causing and don't understand why I hate such encounters with a passion. They don't get why I hug the walls and refuse to heroically leap around despite their encouragement about how cool it would be.

What I'm saying is - make really sure you're not giving your players justification for being cautious. Just because you think you're being reasonable and above board doesn't necessarily make it so from their point of view. If you're happy on that front then all I can suggest is showing them caution doesn't always pay off - have them racing against another group who got there first because they didn't take 3 hours discussing if they should open a door or not. They refused to explore a spooky cave? Have them encounter a guy in the bar showing off his new magic weapon he found in the cave. Have a guy from the group they didn't ask for help because they thought they were suspicious turn up to help anyway but explain he couldn't convince anyone else to come because they didn't know them.

Obviously moderation is the key as you don't want the NPCs rubbing their faces in it but combined with you speaking directly to the players hopefully that'll help get it across.

[Larpus]

I can see the benefit of that, and that is an interesting trick to indulge them with a lesser wrong to lower their guard. that is something I will certainly try next time. I tend to favor dropping the mike unsettling truth before them rather than play the deception game, but it not always.

One particular instance that I built an adventure around was the beginning of my last adventure. I gave them a deliberately eerie environment, I told them stories of a boogeyman, they meet a lumberjack who offers to lead them where they wanted to go. when they asked him his name, he did not even try to hide the fact that he is the Oni. (he's literally called Oni) they came close to beating him, even though they weren't supposed to (wayyy out of their CR). He put them to sleep, and decided to spare their lives, and blackmailed them into being his minions instead of eating them. it's a bit cruel, I wasn't subtle about it at all, but breaking free from the Oni's clutches became exactly what this campaign was about for them. which is what I wanted. there was a degree of paranoia in the sense that the Oni might be watching their every move, but that paranoia is more relevant and beneficial to my story than whether a particular place is trapped, whether those stalactites are pierces, whether this crystal in the middle of the room is a trap because it's yellow.

Yes, there are times a paranoia can certainly be good and add to the situation.

I only give them reason to relax and trust my NPCs every now and them, so they don't get too paranoid and also to lure them in a sense of security so I can at some point pull a backstab that could've easily been prevented with a simple "I want to roll my insight".

In your specific case, you might create a situation where they are forced to interact with an object, such as an uber-hard Will save on a certain magical item that forces a PC to interact with it, springing a trap.....except, the trap is so ancient that the trap mostly crumbles to dust, instead giving them the trap trigger, which holds high value or even is a spell storing something, which in better day would mean that the trap needed to be manually reset by the place's wizard once sprung.

Alternatively, make your traps big and obvious, with the trigger/mechanism being the hard part to find or place clues for whenever a trap is present, I absolutely love to populate my dungeons with the bodies of fallen adventurers, commoners and creatures who ventured in the dungeon before my PCs, only to find death at some trap.

A bunch of crushed bodies/skeletons against a specific wall clearly flags a massive wall crush trap, handheld possessions like quarterstaves and old weapons near a door with body remains on the opposite wall to that door flag a battering-ram sort of trap, etc. They might even find a room with a trap already sprung.

And always reward them for going through such dangers, even if you had to force them to interact in the first place (such as making a door automatically slam shut behind them, being part of the whole room trap).

Hopefully in time this'll teach them that, yes, there are deadly traps and the such, but they won't just be coming out of nowhere and that it does pay off to put themselves in danger, as long as it's done intelligently.

[Prince Zahn]

A couple of people I play with love using lava when they DM. They love designing maps which require us fighting while jumping from pillar to pillar while lava oozes below. They also make lava instant death causing and don't understand why I hate such encounters with a passion. They don't get why I hug the walls and refuse to heroically leap around despite their encouragement about how cool it would be.

What I'm saying is - make really sure you're not giving your players justification for being cautious. Just because you think you're being reasonable and above board doesn't necessarily make it so from their point of view. If you're happy on that front then all I can suggest is showing them caution doesn't always pay off - have them racing against another group who got there first because they didn't take 3 hours discussing if they should open a door or not. They refused to explore a spooky cave? Have them encounter a guy in the bar showing off his new magic weapon he found in the cave. Have a guy from the group they didn't ask for help because they thought they were suspicious turn up to help anyway but explain he couldn't convince anyone else to come because they didn't know them.

Obviously moderation is the key as you don't want the NPCs rubbing their faces in it but combined with you speaking directly to the players hopefully that'll help get it across.I'll keep an eye out for that, but for now I don't think the things I do particularly attract paranoia. at best there was one time last adventure where trees in the forest were attacking them, that were mostly indistinguishable from normal trees. I know in retrospect this was counter-intuitive though it was before i realized that this was an issue. At the time, I mostly focused on making a place they would never want to return to. it wasn't an extreme aftermath though.

I suppose that's also an interesting tactic or principle - prove to them what it means to miss an opportunity. players don't want to do the quest? someone else would do it anyway. also the idea of adding time pressure (and sticking to it) would probably have them be a lot less cautious at every turn.


Yes, there are times a paranoia can certainly be good and add to the situation.

I only give them reason to relax and trust my NPCs every now and them, so they don't get too paranoid and also to lure them in a sense of security so I can at some point pull a backstab that could've easily been prevented with a simple "I want to roll my insight". I want to get to a point where they could trust me not to screw them over unfairly. the backstab would need to be the exception here, because that sends messages that I don't want to encourage.


In your specific case, you might create a situation where they are forced to interact with an object, such as an uber-hard Will save on a certain magical item that forces a PC to interact with it, springing a trap.....except, the trap is so ancient that the trap mostly crumbles to dust, instead giving them the trap trigger, which holds high value or even is a spell storing something, which in better day would mean that the trap needed to be manually reset by the place's wizard once sprung. my AFC gets pretty touchy about their DM dictating their actions or railroading them in broad daylight, but I'm certain if I describe it as a sensation rather than "forcing them" bluntly, they'll be more likely to cooperate.


Alternatively, make your traps big and obvious, with the trigger/mechanism being the hard part to find or place clues for whenever a trap is present, I absolutely love to populate my dungeons with the bodies of fallen adventurers, commoners and creatures who ventured in the dungeon before my PCs, only to find death at some trap.

A bunch of crushed bodies/skeletons against a specific wall clearly flags a massive wall crush trap, handheld possessions like quarterstaves and old weapons near a door with body remains on the opposite wall to that door flag a battering-ram sort of trap, etc. They might even find a room with a trap already sprung. interesting proposition. however, if the traps are too obvious, they might be more likely to take great strains to avoid them entirely, or complain later that I am railroading them...


And always reward them for going through such dangers, even if you had to force them to interact in the first place (such as making a door automatically slam shut behind them, being part of the whole room trap).

Hopefully in time this'll teach them that, yes, there are deadly traps and the such, but they won't just be coming out of nowhere and that it does pay off to put themselves in danger, as long as it's done intelligently. One thing I was thinking about doing after reading into the thread is to rip off a mechanic from Numenera, where whenever I add a complication I can give them this point that can help them later, +1 point for a friend. or they forgo these points to avoid the complication. do you guys think this is an applicable houserule?

[Thrudd]

This has to deal with the character motives and player expectations. What are they trying to do, what are their goals? If they see something that looks suspicious or magical to them, what would make them want to check it out?
It sounds like they might have created character backgrounds/motives inappropriate for the game you're trying to run. Or, the things you want them to check out aren't actually things their characters would want to interact with. They need to get XP somehow, right? What do they do, instead of doing the things you want them to do? And why/how are they getting XP if they aren't engaging with the adventures?

Introduce the things you want them to investigate in a way that they can't ignore or that will be obviously rewarding. I mean, do they just give up on an adventure when they see something that looks dangerous? Make sure the things before them are things that would interest their characters and help them accomplish their goals. If it's just a random, apparently unrelated mysterious thing that they see on the way to fulfilling whatever quest or mission they're on, there's no reason to think those characters would divert their resources away from the mission. If they've gone out looking for the mysterious thing, because they have heard rumors about treasure and magic, then they're going to interact with it.

Feed them information, through role playing, about the various plots and locations you want them to engage with. If they see a big glowing egg on their way to scout out an orc camp, there's a good chance they'll leave it alone. If they see a big glowing egg after they've heard about wish-granting magic eggs that fell from heaven - they might be more inclined to give a look. The rumors and information they hear from people shouldn't all be accurate or complete, either. They can hear different rumors, sometimes they aren't true, but they should get something tantalizing enough to overcome the completely healthy and normal adventurer paranoia. I think that if your players aren't paranoid, you aren't challenging them enough - but the rewards for taking risks should be enough that they are willing to go for it, with planning and consideration.

[Honest Tiefling]

1) Make it VERY CLEAR they get exploration EXP. Maybe your first attempt was too subtle?

2) Give them a super paranoid NPC, driven crazy by his own obsession. He's trying to repeatedly test an artifact to see what magic it contains. It is NOT an artifact, just a large ruby as clear as water and as large as a man's fist. NPC can be easily convinced to part with giant ruby, especially if convinced it is cursed. If they don't respond to that amount of wealth, I just don't know.

3) If you think your party will react well to adorable animals, give them a treasure-sniffer! As in, an adorable little animal that has a magical ability to find magical/valuable items. Magic doesn't have to make sense. Model it after a favorite animal of one of the players. Then they'll know there's a VERY good chance there is treasure in the area, so the reward is definite. (I would not let the first three, maybe five, attempts be false no matter what.)

4. If the timing is right, go for a social situation. The noble's dinner party PROBABLY doesn't have traps. But there's still a chance of failure/success, and buttering up nobles could potentially reveal rewards. Have at least one very helpful NPC...Perhaps one who is giving hints to the party because he's working against his will for the big bad. By helping them, he hopes to get free and would be moderately hard to turn hostile.

[Grimjudgment]

Honestly, this remindse of how I acted like a complete idiot with a character for fun. Actually, not only did I have fun, I got an epic level bard.

It was dependent on me controlling my danger levels properly, making sure I had the ball in my court every time.

"You find a pouch of equivalent exchange throw something into it and get something equal out"

While we're in the middle of combat:

"I throw my dark soul gem into the pouch and a few alchemist fires, and how about a severed head?"

"A flameskull appears out of the bag"
"Oh, okay. I still have my fire resistance up."


"You find a chest"
"I find my unseen servant and open the chest with him"

"There's a 10 foot gap between you and your objective"
"I tie a 15 foot long rope and jump. Worse comes to worse, I'm going to dangle a bit."

"The man offers to give you a massage"
"Only if I can massage him first. Bards are dextrous."

"The shadow moves towards you, draining the life out of the plants nearby"
"I light myself on fire and run at the shadow"

It threw the entire party and DM for a loop and they actually started taking my lead. Now of course, went I went overboard, I got punished, but of course I would. My character became a semi comic relief character, but what wound up happening, was that I was the one that walked away from that campaign with no permanent injuries and my life and humanity still intact.

[Gizmogidget]

To deal with paranoia, I would redirect it. Right now it seems like your players just avoid everything, right? Well if you have a situation, say with a sword surrounded in statues, a possible trap then your players could avoid it. But if you stress the importance of collecting that sword for a future obstacle, say an adult green dragon or what have you then they might be more likely to go after the sword. If they feel that whatever they may gain through exploration of the threat in front of them will help them fight more dangerous threats later than it might be far more appeasing to go after that sword. This takes advantage of the paranoia, because now their paranoia isn't focused on whether the statues will kill them, but of what lies in the room beyond.

[Larpus]

I want to get to a point where they could trust me not to screw them over unfairly. the backstab would need to be the exception here, because that sends messages that I don't want to encourage.

I'm still not 100% in control and yes, sometimes I do screw them over unfairly, but I try to make things as fair as possible.

Untrustworthy NPCs are always introduced in bizarre or otherwise rather implausible circumstances, like an overall healthy infant drow chained and crying for her dad deep inside a dungeon, despite the fact that the dungeon had been empty for a few decades now.

There was a drow PC present, and I pulled her player's strings correctly to make him take the infant's side to the point the player never even asked to make an insight check; there were also other clues, like massive holes in her story, specifically that whoever they were talking to had literally no idea how drow society works.

Later on, when the backstab occurred (the child was possessed by a dead god's will), the player actually asked me "this could've totally been avoided if I just asked for an insight check back then, right?", he was actually impressed rather than pissed or anything else.

That said, yes, I can see why that'd be a problem for your players, as I mentioned, the one super paranoid player that I have I almost never use this sort of betrayal tactics, I make his plot hooks a bit more "open", not only to disincentive his overly paranoid behavior, but also because the player himself dislikes this sort of thing.

Also, I make the effort to not overuse this, out of all NPCs they interact with, only about 1/10 at most turn out to be problematic (though I still have a random "what's my secret?" table in case they get suspicious of a random NPC that meant nothing).


my AFC gets pretty touchy about their DM dictating their actions or railroading them in broad daylight, but I'm certain if I describe it as a sensation rather than "forcing them" bluntly, they'll be more likely to cooperate.

interesting proposition. however, if the traps are too obvious, they might be more likely to take great strains to avoid them entirely, or complain later that I am railroading them...

Well, unavoidable traps can be explained as they're always present to prevent access from someone to something, it'd make very little sense to place a trap on an avoidable section of a dungeon or castle.

That said, I also like to try and think of multiple ways to avoid or otherwise invalidate a trap, other than the rogue disarming it, like having maintenance corridors that give access to its inner mechanisms or littering nearby rooms with furniture and other items so they can jam the trap with them.

I even change what I had in mind in case they arrive to an interesting conclusion of what the trap does and take measures to counter it, like placing supports to prevent what they think is a battering ram trap from being deadly.


One thing I was thinking about doing after reading into the thread is to rip off a mechanic from Numenera, where whenever I add a complication I can give them this point that can help them later, +1 point for a friend. or they forgo these points to avoid the complication. do you guys think this is an applicable houserule?

That can actually work, sometimes it might feel that in-game rewards aren't meaningful at all because...well, not only they don't exist, sometimes they're not immediately useful or the player has the feeling they can get it later/easier on a different situation.

Giving them a new mechanic that is instantly useful and they can't have otherwise sounds like a good incentive to a less overly paranoid behavior.

[Vogonjeltz]

As a DM, the foundation of my game approach is to award player curiosity over safety. my ideal players are those who see where I'm going with a particular lead and follow me anyway. the players in my Available Friend Circle (AFC), however, see things in the opposite direction, and I don't know how to explain to them that things are very much different at my table than in others they have played.

It happens time and time again in my games, that I plant important, enriching details in my scenes that the players miss entirely because they are convinced that if they interact with a particularly unusual object, it'll turn out to be a trap or something. they are convinced that there's a monster behind this secret doorway, or are certain that a harmless NPC is going to betray them. these are leads that I haven't done, and don't intend to use lightheartedly.

Now, I'm sure some DMs would be thrilled by the idea that the savvy players' paranoia leads them to take every precaution, but from my perspective, it bogs the game down significantly, and they end up missing valuable details in my story that I want them to look for, and useful treasures that could help them significantly later.

When I spoke to my AFC about this, they pinned the blame on past experiences in 3.5 or pathfinder (usually from one or two DMs which will remain anonymous); And/or they say that it is a hard habit to shake off.

A part of me wishes that previous DMs haven't conditioned them to such poisonous habits, it takes part of the joy away from me as a DM because their part of the adventure feels very unnatural to me, and leaves holes open in my story. What could I do (for my next game) to get the players I take from my AFC to put aside those paranoid preconceptions and explore the details that could ultimately reward them?

It's unfortunate, but you could always introduce a PC who plays much like I do: With a total disregard for common sense. Once they see how regularly the NPC gets away with exploring areas that they deem suspicious, maybe they'll loosen up a bit.

After all, what's the worst that can happen?