Another 'is this a bad idea?' thread

[JonBeowulf]

I want to keep this short and generic 'cause you never know who's lurking. I put together a Kobayashi Maru (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru) scenario for a one-shot in-person session and I'd like feedback on if it's a douche move or acceptable in this circumstance.

The players know it will be high in social and exploration and low on combat.

Now, I'm not a novice DM. This group has been playing together online for over a year and this will be the first time all of us have gotten together. I expect to really ramp-up the RP since it's a live session (I suck at voices and now I'll get to act the NPCs). This is a low-level one-shot so the players shouldn't be in love with their characters. Also, the world isn't fair and the heroes don't always win... sometimes they have to choose the least crappy losing option.

This is no railroad; only the geography, the major NPCs, and the choice they face at the end are scripted. Everything else plays out based on what the players do. Heck, they may even come up with a way to beat it... who knows?

I don't want to tell them up front because knowing the ending ruins the story.

So, should I rethink the entire thing? Or should I trust myself to run a fair and fun game and trust my players to enjoy the story that unfolds?

[Waterdeep Merch]

Completely depends on your group. I've given my own players one-shot Bolivian Army endings before. What matters is that it's memorable and feels right for them, and doesn't feel too railroaded. Fighting against a likely doom is not the same thing as being forced into an absolute doom.

[Demonslayer666]

As long as they are on board for a one-shot, this should be fine, but it sounds like you are hiding that fact from them. I would wager that expectations will not be met by at least some of your players.

When I belly up to a gaming table to play D&D, 'one-shot' does not come to mind unless I am at a convention. Cthulhu, yes - D&D, no. I want multiple sessions with character advancement in personality, ability, and wealth. I want my choices to be impactful, risky, and matter. One-shots usually don't have either.

Even my low level characters get a lot of attention, and I put quite a bit into their background and personality. Making characters for me is a lot of fun. If i invested a lot into my character and was surprised with a one-shot, I'd be a little disappointed.

[JonBeowulf]

Everyone involved knows this is a one-shot... however I can see it turning into a full campaign depending on their reaction to it. "Losing" does not necessarily mean "dying". I can keep it running as an online game if they like the world and prefer "we didn't win yet".

[Unoriginal]

The Kobayashi Maru is a training exercise used to show officiers-in-training that they will face no-win scenarios, and how they deal with such. It is literally unwinnable: the simulation will adapt so that whatever the officier-in-training tries will fail.

But do note that the Starfleet cadets know they're in a training simulation with no actual risk to them.

If you're having players face a situation you have already written the ending choices, it is railroading. And you're going to make their characters fail, in a situation that IS real for said characters.

I can't see anyone liking being put through that. Even the players who prefer the DM giving few choices wouldn't like that.

Now if you meant "I'm going to present my players with a situation I think is unwinnable, but I'm not going to change things to make them fail", then that can be fun. But personally I'd still warn the players about how difficult you think the scenario will be.

[luuma]

I've been through a kobayashi maru oneshot while being unaware of its ending in advance, so here's my experience: your players' reactions will basically be an enhanced version of their reaction to the rest of the game. If they've had a good time, they'll love it, and if they've had a bad time, they won't. So as long as the session's fun up to that point, people will be fine with it. I did not enjoy it because I spent well over an hour of combat just failing wis saves

[Sigreid]

It's really hard to say. Not knowing the situation or your players I can't eve say they'll take the bait.

[JonBeowulf]

So what I'm taking away from this is that I need to pay close attention to how each player is enjoying things, make adjustments as necessary, and let it play out the way they make it play out. The end choices are still going to be (A) this bad thing and (B) this other bad thing, but I have no problem with them coming up with (C), (D), and (E).

[Witty Username]

I personally like letting my players get an idea of what is going on up front if I think it will be controversial.

Also, telling them that it is a scenario designed to be difficult won't necessarily ruin the ending.

[Waterdeep Merch]

You can be cryptic about it while still giving a warning. Something like "This game will be very difficult, and I don't plan to pull punches since it's just a one shot anyway. Give me all you've got!". I usually say this when I'm afraid a game I have in mind might be too hard for my players. They play better when I do, too.

[Contrast]

A lot is bearable as a one-shot (I assume they're aware its a one shot?). Even if they don't enjoy it, you can just chalk it up as a learning experience and move on.

That said, you at least seem to want to hype up this first session playing in person and I don't know if not having DM'd 'live' for a year when you're going to be concentrating on a lot of other things is the time to try and pull out something risky.

You know your table better than we do. If you're super into the idea, crack on. If you have some misgivings, maybe shelve the idea for another time when the pressure won't be so high (and see if you can have a casual conversation with the players between now and then about if it would be something they'd be interested in). You could even do a little survey asking people to rank some common tropes they'd like to see in a game and go raid TVTropes for some ideas you could base a one-shot around (for example, Chekovs Gun).

[Sigreid]

You can be cryptic about it while still giving a warning. Something like "This game will be very difficult, and I don't plan to pull punches since it's just a one shot anyway. Give me all you've got!". I usually say this when I'm afraid a game I have in mind might be too hard for my players. They play better when I do, too.

How about "While I'm not out to straight up murder your characters, I'm not going to pretend that this adventure is particularly fair. I think we can have some fun with it as a one off."

[da newt]

If the scenario is unwinnable then it could be very unsatisfying especially if it's pointless - but if there is a sense of purpose / accomplishment along the lines of 'our sacrifice / failure was justified because we allowed the people we were protecting to get away' or something like that, it is much easier to enjoy your PC's death.

Like the movie 300 - they didn't win, but their death / failure served a purpose and therefor was heroic. This can be fun / something the Players can be proud of. But if it's just a scenario where there is no chance to do anything that matters, it's just repeated kicks to the Jimmie followed by inevitable death, and it doesn't matter if you try your hardest or give up, then it can be disappointing.

[Sigreid]

If the scenario is unwinnable then it could be very unsatisfying especially if it's pointless - but if there is a sense of purpose / accomplishment along the lines of 'our sacrifice / failure was justified because we allowed the people we were protecting to get away' or something like that, it is much easier to enjoy your PC's death.

Like the movie 300 - they didn't win, but their death / failure served a purpose and therefor was heroic. This can be fun / something the Players can be proud of. But if it's just a scenario where there is no chance to do anything that matters, it's just repeated kicks to the Jimmie followed by inevitable death, and it doesn't matter if you try your hardest or give up, then it can be disappointing.

I'm actually warming to the idea of just telling them that since it's a one shot, I think it would be fun to see what you can/do attempt/manage with a wildly unfair setup.

[MaxWilson]

How about "While I'm not out to straight up murder your characters, I'm not going to pretend that this adventure is particularly fair. I think we can have some fun with it as a one off."

How about, "I think you guys are probably all gonna die before the end. That's my honest opinion. Want to give it a shot anyway with fresh PCs?"

[Sigreid]

How about, "I think you guys are probably all gonna die before the end. That's my honest opinion. Want to give it a shot anyway with fresh PCs?"

Yeah, however you word the sentiment, I'd take it as a challenge.

[Lord Vukodlak]

I'm planning something similar, its a one shot using 10th level characters. And they know a head of time that at the end they'll all die. But if they do well enough the next campaign each character will get a bonus feat from a limited list, containing mostly half-feats underutilized feats and feats that benefit the whole party. So while the final fight is completely hopeless they will get something out of it for a future character.