PDA

View Full Version : DM Advice - When to Step In Between PCs



Dire Cohort
2007-11-05, 02:31 PM
First of all, since I know some of my group are big OOTS fans: If you're from Columbus, OH, USA, stop reading.

Anywho,

I'm DMing a campaign in which there's a good chance one of the PCs is about to cast Geas/Quest on another PC. Should I allow this?

One of my PCs is a brash, shoot-from-the-hip, not always too subtle Dervish. His blunt behavior has gottent the party into combat several times. He's an unstoppable killing machine, so it usually doesn't matter, but last session he attracted the attention of the nearby wizard-ruled empire and their fearsome military. This is likely to have repercussions.

Another of my PCs is a law-and-order, former military, meticulous Cleric from the empire that the wizard-ruled empire hates. He's always been perturbed by the Dervish's shenanigans, but risking an international incident is one step too far. Later that session, when for various reasons is became clear that the Dervish would be unconcious the next day, the Cleric apparently decided enough was enough. The Cleric's player very thoughtfully warned me that he intended to prepare the Geas/Quest spell, presumably to give the Dervish an incentive to no longer act so, let's say, unilaterally.

Both these players are excellent sports, while at the same time always acting the way they believe their characters would act. It seems entirely plausible to me that this spell would be legitimate and appropriate from a roleplaying standpoint. But it's still a game, and even in the hands of concientious players, giving one PC power over another PC seems to put the campaign at risk.

I believe I could very easily prevent the spell from being cast by a slight adjustment to my plans for next session. But should I? Would I be taking a necessary step to ensure balance and enjoyment in my group? Or would I be inappropriately interfering in favor of a PC who's just getting what's coming to him? And maybe the Geas would be good for the players as well, as an excuse for the player to reel in his CN-Gone-Wild PC.

Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Sir Iguejo
2007-11-05, 02:56 PM
thats a very difficult question you made here, not only by the circumstances, but the problem with the quest spell.

in order not to take a side in that discussion, you should just step out and let your players decide what is best for the group. If the CN-gone-wild member is annoying the other PC's, just tell him either to stop or slow down.

If the cleric is being too dictatorial and trying control the other party members, via spell or via conversation, you should tell him to stop and pay attention to his own cleric.

If the problem is not solved until then, or an argument starts because a geas/quest spell, just stop the current session and bring your friends to reason. The object of D&D is to have fun playing, not to fight (off-game) with your friends.

Just say them what you've written in this thread and im sure they will understand.

Ultimate measures should be expelling the PC from the party or intentionally killing him im some bar brawl, for example, in order to make your friend to create another character

EDIT: several grammar and spelling mistakes, im sure there are more of them out there, but sorry :smallbiggrin:

TSGames
2007-11-05, 03:03 PM
If it can easily be avoided(and it sounds like it can), then I would make the slight adjustment to prevent the necessity of the spell being cast. It's not usually fun to have a character that is in part controlled by another player. However, I would not worry if the slight adjustment does not work and the spell is cast anyway, as long as the players are having fun and getting along, then it seems like everything is going well.

MrNexx
2007-11-05, 03:05 PM
One of our best campaigns resulted from a Cleric of Ilmater (my younger brother) being heavy-handed.

To be fair, they killed him first. Killed him and dumped his body in the wilderness. He was brought back to life by a superior.

He then got heavy-handed. He had Heal cast on two of the PCs whose alignments were CN because, in their backstories, they had head injuries. No head injury, no brain damage, no CN. Alignment change.

He then enforced an absolutely dictatorial party contract (http://www.editors-wastebasket.org/nexx/tsr/contract.html) on the group in order to make them conform. And it worked. He was the one with the plans, the backing of the Paladin King of the Bloodstone Lands (technically, they all had it... he was just the only one who actually met up to his moral standards), and he had the party wizard on his side (who was actually a dual-classed fighter/thief/mage, with only mage active... lucky high-stat *******).

I came in later as sort of an adjunct.

Azerian Kelimon
2007-11-05, 03:06 PM
If this is because the player who plays Cleric is annoyed with the Dervish player, there's no excuse. Geas fails because Pun-Pun intervened.

Now, if this is in-character, I'd wholeheartedly encourage the geas. What I'd do, however, is work with the Cleric to word the Geas well, in such a way that it stops the Dervish from playing Chaotic Idiotandjackass, but it doesn't stop him from being in character.

AKA_Bait
2007-11-05, 03:08 PM
Take both players aside one at a time. First ask the player about to have a quested character how they (not their PC) would feel about having that happen. From your description of the Dervish's player, that player may well just be like 'cool. That will be interesting.'

Then pull the Cleric's player aside. If the Dervish's player would be ticked ask the Cleric's player not to do it and let them prepare another spell for the day. If the Dervish's player says they are ok about it, still tell the Cleric's player to perpare a 'backup' spell for that slot. If the Dervish's player metagames a bunch in ways that are clearly devised to avoid the Gaesing then have some signal set up by which you can call off the Cleric's player and have them use the backup spell. This is because some folks might say they are ok with it in the interest of seeming cool but not really be so; their behavior when the time is near to it happening will clue you in to their actual feelings. If the Dervish's player still seems fine with it and is not metagaming a way out then let it happen and good luck.

Hope that's helpful.

Blanks
2007-11-05, 03:39 PM
Baits post is very much my view too, so i will just offer a general point:

Ooc conflict = very bad
IC conflict = yay fun!

The only problem is knowing when they overlap :)

Logos7
2007-11-05, 03:42 PM
I would stop it,

while they are all friends and everyone is friendly and acting IC and such, I think a preety reasonble responce to someone who just tried to take away your free will via threat of wasting disease is a fight to death, lest he try that shizzle again tomarrow. Unless you want to run the dual arena...


:

Somebloke
2007-11-05, 03:42 PM
Personally, I allow a certain degree of friction between characters- but if it turns into a player vs player kill situation, I will make sure that the surviving character's career is very short and painful.

Shishnarfne
2007-11-05, 03:48 PM
Really, I think that these are times to remember why we play RPGs. If the suggested action is going to interfere significantly with the ability of your group (include yourself) to enjoy the game, it's probably time to step in.

If not, allow the players to role-play a bit. Of course, I tend to have a bit less patience for "Chaotic Stupid" characters, so I tend, as a player, to fade to the background during the arguments about whether to trust the "nice ladies" who just happened to be inhabiting a dungeon... and as a DM, my players really don't try this very often.

CabbageTheif
2007-11-05, 03:49 PM
what i did in a similar situation (barbarian vs pali) was take both players aside and talk to them individually, telling them that there is no rules in my game about roleplaying as long as it fits the pre-created character. i then reminded them that every action not only has repricution in game, with me, but also with each other as players and friends. i concluded with saying that it was their call how to play their character, and i would do what i could if things became out of hand.

then, for the next game i built in an incident that was plot-related and plausable which i could implement whenever i wanted. at the time of casting, as soon as it was announced, i announced that an earthquake began. i told him to make a concentration check, then without telling him whether he made it or not, i asked the pali what the limits of the geas was. he was fine and i told him that he made the check, but that gave me the opportunity to tell him that it either failed or only half-worked. call me a cheater, but i didnt have a set dc ready. the dc was whether i agreed with the rules of the geas or not.

some might call that underhand, and it wont work if you cant think fast on your feet, but the "i'm dm and the dc is decided after you roll' move has saved our campaign more times than i care to count.

another thing i only thought of now that you could do is the same as the above, except ask the cleric for the rules of the geas beforehand, decide on your own in privacey what changes you want to make, then cause the incident which alters the casting in game.

Kurald Galain
2007-11-05, 03:56 PM
Depends.

If these are mature players, go for it. It's in-character and will enhance gameplay one way or another, and it's not at all the DM's job to intervene between players.

If the players are immature, put a stop to it. It's a control maneuver that is certainly going to piss off one player, who will then work to piss off the other, and it's very much the DM's job to try and make the game fun for everyone.

PlatinumJester
2007-11-05, 03:58 PM
No don't let him use it even if it is in character.

One time in our group 2 players got killed by our Dwarven Binder in the space of 2 hours because he thought it was in character for his dwarf to do it. It ruined that session and was crap for the 2 players who got their characters killed. Letting PCs have any type of power over other PCs ruins the game.

tempusjtk
2007-11-06, 02:43 AM
Let's face it, some players will claim that they're acting in character, even their actions are for the sheer purpose of annoying the rest of the party. RP'ing is supposed to be fun and yes, allow players to tap into different parts of their personality, but that shouldn't be done to the detriment of other characters/players in the party as that pretty much ruins their gaming experience. The DM's role is both story teller and arbiter of overall "fairness" and enjoyment of the story telling being provided, which in this case, a PC v. PC conflict can ruin.

I would urge some caution in letting either the cleric having his way of casting the geas/quest spell I think it would probably mess up the inter-party (and player-player) dynamic if you allow for a behavioral correction through means of the cleric using his spell. Sit down and talk with the dervish and go over his character concept, if his alter ego is indeed this reckless id driven character... you as the DM have to decide whether this makes sense, not only in the context of your game, but whether this will ruin the experience for everyone. So, in this case... I have to argue that the greater good of the group (overall enjoyment of gaming) should be the critical decision as a DM in your position.

Goumindong
2007-11-06, 03:22 AM
No don't let him use it even if it is in character.

One time in our group 2 players got killed by our Dwarven Binder in the space of 2 hours because he thought it was in character for his dwarf to do it. It ruined that session and was crap for the 2 players who got their characters killed. Letting PCs have any type of power over other PCs ruins the game.
The dervish already has power over the cleric.

The entire adventuring dynamic works on trust. Your friend gets knocked into negative hit points do you

A: Heal him

B: Coup-de-grace him

C: leave him to die

What if it is the prince of a possibly friendly nation?

You cant have a game where players dont have power over the others, it doesnt work.

So long as your players are mature, go for it.

Temp
2007-11-06, 03:51 AM
One time in our group 2 players got killed by our Dwarven Binder in the space of 2 hours because he thought it was in character for his dwarf to do it. It ruined that session and was crap for the 2 players who got their characters killed. Letting PCs have any type of power over other PCs ruins the game.
No, he ruined the session because he wanted to do so. He has control over his character and thus has control over what actions are "in-character."

This is merely a fault with an immature player, not the notion of giving PCs power over one another.

[edit:]Ninja-ed by half an hour. Shows me to leave windows open too long.

daggaz
2007-11-06, 06:45 AM
Sounds to me like the whole thing is definitely IC.

On top of that, it sounds intriguing and indepth. I think you would be a fool to step in and stop the players. Smacks of railroading, as well.

serpentcross
2007-11-06, 08:03 AM
I don't really know.
When I'm DMing anything goes.
Sometimes Players refrain themselves but I don't really like that.

Pc are not different from any random monster or villains.
If a monster or an enemy can kill you, charme you, enslave you in some sort of way I don't see why a pc can't.

Dire Cohort
2007-11-06, 02:58 PM
Thanks for all the advice everyone. You've given me lots of good things to think about. I'm still not sure what I'm going to do, but now I have a much better idea of the potential repercussions.

If this thread is still around by the end of my next gaming session, I'll let you know what happened.

valadil
2007-11-06, 03:42 PM
I agree that it depends on your players. My groups lately have been mature enough to handle something like that, but I would still double check with the potential victim. I really like it as a storyline, just so long as the cleric doesn't go and Geas the whole party. I'd also inform the cleric that the rest of the party is free to retaliate if he goes along with it and they don't appreciate this sort of behavior. Oh yeah, I'd also make sure that the Geas gets broken over the curse of the game (maybe if they're getting healing services in a temple they'll get hit with remove curse or some such) so that the player can react to it.

EldritchExMachina
2007-11-06, 03:58 PM
I'm wholeheartedly against DM interventions. However, the groups I game with and DM for are generally mature (and those who are not very swiftly pick up on the fact that the group runs games where actions have IC consequences).

That said, IC conflict can be the bread and butter of a party's character development. There isn't some mystical "PC" aura around people that says they have to be together. Groups are quite fine exiling/killing PCs, PCs are fully within their rights to leave the group, and some PCs get imprisoned/killed/horribly maimed when the circumstances lead to it (I don't have this happen to PCs who aren't stupid as a general rule of thumb, good plot reasons excepted).

The above approach is best with experienced and/or mature roleplayers. However, I and my group play the game for the storytelling aspects, not the stat-building (though I really do love the tactical combat and the stats are a nice way to represent character growth).

Azaul
2007-11-06, 07:19 PM
Contact the dervish player (e-mail, phone call, whatever you're comfortable with). Imply that there has been talk from other members in the group about how his character is taking away from their enjoyment of the game. Reassure him that they don't dislike him and that even his character isn't bad, just that he takes it a bit too far. Is there some way he can take it down a notch?

If he's mature about it, ask the cleric to hold off on the Geas, the dervish player sees that he took it too far. If he's really immature about it, tell the cleric he can't Geas or the problem will get much worse, and then think about sitting everyone down to discuss their feelings on the matter. If the dervish player is just going with the flow, the Geas sounds like a great opportunity for character development.