Player deadset on Tippyverse in an incompatible setting

[Talakeal]

I am starting a new campaign and was trying to ask the players what their characters wanted to accomplish over their careers and what their goals and motivations where, trying to use player feedback to shape the storyline to come.

The party mage's only goal, aside from amassing personal arcane power, is to establish something resembling your typical Tippyverse, a world where everyone is a spell caster, magic has replaced technology, all problems both big and small are solved with spells, and social status is directly equivalent to arcane power.

The problem is, we are not playing D&D. We are playing my homebrew system where magic is limited and dangerous. Only about one in 10,000 people are born with any natural magical talent, and learning to became a wizard if you aren't a natural sorcerer requires something akin to the eastern concept of enlightenment. This is in addition to learning to control your powers, which requires years of hard study and practice.

Furthermore it is a system which requires mages roll to cast, and if the fail the results are both dangerous and unpredictable. There is a finite amount of magic, within people, objects, and places. Trying to create something like chain gating, self resetting magical traps, or the ring gates rail gun would, best case scenario, simply run out of power and shut down, but could potentially warp or destroy the surrounding area with uncontained magical energy or create a permanent dead magic zone.

Also, the campaign takes place in a Conanesque Sword and Sorcery setting. The predominant civilization was founded by survivors of Atlantis, a utopian civilization that was destroyed by reckless use of magic, and their fear of it happening again has permeated the society. Most kingdoms outlaw magic and employ witch hunters to burn those suspected of sorcery at the stake.
There are very few wizard academies or mage's guilds in the world. Most mages are either hermits hiding in the wilderness, undercover mystery cults who have magic and religion intertwined, or evil overlords who use their power to lord over their land and are not keen on sharing it with those who cannot be implicitly trusted to obey.



So yeah, I have all these reasons (and more) explaining why it is not a realistic goal, but when I tried talking to the player about this he got upset and said that he plays games for magic and both in and out of character all he wants to do is spread it. When I pushed the issue he got really mad and told me that by trying to logically defeat his opinions I was doing the mental equivalent of bashing his religion, using my views and logic to tear down his personal beliefs.

So, does anyone have any advice for resolving this situation that does not involve kicking out the player or drastically altering both the rules and setting of my campaign?

[Saph]

So, does anyone have any advice for resolving this situation that does not involve kicking out the player or drastically altering both the rules and setting of my campaign?

Tell him something like this:

"From the way you've described your character's goal, it sounds basically impossible. You can try and do it if you like and you might have some limited success, but you have no realistic chance of changing the world to the degree you want because magic in this setting doesn't work that way. If you don't like that then I'm sorry, but this is the setting we're using."

If after that he doesn't want to play, then he doesn't want to play. You can't force him to take part in a game he isn't interested in, and you shouldn't try to.

(Though quite frankly, if someone played the "You're bashing my religion!" card when I tried to explain how the setting worked, then I'd consider that a major red flag as regards their maturity and capacity to work co-operatively in a group. If they dropped out afterwards I wouldn't make much effort to get them back. But YMMV.)

[HorseCover]

I agree with Saph, this really boils down to a maturity issue. However, if I were to try and resolve this, I might make it possible for him to achieve his goal. Why the heck not? It's going to be difficult, sure, but if he wants to try and use magic to fundamentally alter the way the universe works, there should be a path open for that.

Make it very clear from the start that attempts to do it in the past have failed, maybe write a cataclysm into the history where a wizard tried to make magic more "available". I don't presume to know how the physics of magic work in your universe, so you'll have to refluff based on that.

So, unless he is really an idiot, he will want to take time to accumulate knowledge and resources to try and avoid the same fate. And if he goes for it too early, then he deserves to have his character killed. I think that fairly gives him a disincentive to wreck the flavor of your game outright, while still allowing him to work towards a goal. Perhaps make it very unpopular, due to the cataclysm, to even try and attempt an experiment like that, so he will have to do work in secret.

[Morghen]

...he plays games for magic and both in and out of character all he wants to do is spread it.

what

When I pushed the issue he got really mad and told me that by trying to logically defeat his opinions I was doing the mental equivalent of bashing his religion, using my views and logic to tear down his personal beliefs.

what

So, does anyone have any advice for resolving this situation that does not involve kicking out the player?

No.

This will end badly.

[Frozen_Feet]

...Trying to create something like chain gating, self resetting magical traps, or the ring gates rail gun would, best case scenario, simply run out of power and shut down, but could potentially warp or destroy the surrounding area with uncontained magical energy or create a permanent dead magic zone.

You know, there's this Finnish setting called Praedor where exactly this happened. You could also read up on STALKER.

My suggestion is: let him try. Then laugh epicaricaciously as he fails. That's what I'd do.

But really, the character fits the setting just fine - his role is just going to be "crazy cultist" instead of "benevolent dictator".

[Kelb_Panthera]

First, smack the taste out of his mouth for comparing a game to religion. Even if you're not religious that's a wholly inappropriate comparison for anyone to make. Noone ever launched a crusade over a game.

Then tell him flat, "this is how the setting works, if you don't like it you know where the door is." Any other way you might try to handle this simply isn't going to end well.

[Frozen_Feet]

Noone ever launched a crusade over a game.

You'd be surprised.

[Kelb_Panthera]

You'd be surprised.

That was a political war, not a crusade, and the game only provided the spark to a powder keg that was ready to explode anyway.

[kamikasei]

When I pushed the issue he got really mad and told me that by trying to logically defeat his opinions I was doing the mental equivalent of bashing his religion, using my views and logic to tear down his personal beliefs.

So, does anyone have any advice for resolving this situation that does not involve kicking out the player or drastically altering both the rules and setting of my campaign?

How do you see any future dispute with this guy playing out? Do you actually want to have this person in your group?

From what you describe, it looks like the player himself has limited the outcomes to "you capitulate" or "you tell him whatever you decide without explanation or rationale", with the latter case seeming to carry good odds of turning in to "you kick him out" anyway.

[Frozen_Feet]

That was a political war, not a crusade, and the game only provided the spark to a powder keg that was ready to explode anyway.

Funny how I keep hearing the crusades were mostly about politics as well.

But seriously, wars have been started for pettiest of reasons. I recall several starting because someone stole someone's wife. I'd not be surprised if there were few over chess, or couple more over soccer, somewhere in history.

[Talakeal]

Well, worst case scenario I do nothing and the player is simply bored and not invested in the campaign. This hardly seems a situation which will erupt into the end of the game or a real life friendhip. I am just looking for ways to draw the player into the storyline without being inconsistent to the setting or the system.

Also, he only used religion as an analogy for why it is rude to argue with someone just because they have different beliefs than you; lets not dwell on it too much lest this discussion wander away from the game and into areas which are forbidden.

[kamikasei]

Also, he only used religion as an analogy for why it is rude to argue with someone just because they have different beliefs than you; lets not dwell on it too much lest this discussion wander away from the game and into areas which are forbidden.

Unless you're leaving something out, what he's talking about is not "arguing with someone just because they have different beliefs than you", it's arguing with him at all, even to point out how what he wants to do won't work (when you are the best judge and final arbiter of whether it'll work). He's telling you you're not allowed tell him he's wrong. That should be something that erupts into, at the very least, not playing a game where he'll be obliged to accept your judgement calls.

[Talakeal]

Unless you're leaving something out, what he's talking about is not "arguing with someone just because they have different beliefs than you", it's arguing with him at all, even to point out how what he wants to do won't work (when you are the best judge and final arbiter of whether it'll work). He's telling you you're not allowed tell him he's wrong. That should be something that erupts into, at the very least, not playing a game where he'll be obliged to accept your judgement calls.

I suppose I am leaving out some of the finer context. He said this when I explained "why" it wasn't a good idea and why the world was set up like it was.
I told them that in my oppinion ubiquitous and ultra reliable high magic made for a better sci-fi or super hero setting than Sword and Sorcery. You would have a situation where magic isn't "magical", it is just futuristic technology with a mystical coat of paint.
His argument was that fantasy and magic where synonymous, and that the more magic involved the more fun the game would be for everyone involved both in and out of character.
When I tried to debate this with him using arguments like those found in this article ( http://www.cracked.com/article_19667...-universe.html )he got really mad and brought up the belief thing.

So it was the debating specific points or the underlying motives behind he plans that set him off, not disagreeing in general.

[ArcturusV]

You know... there seems to be a somewhat logical answer to what he wants, and what your setting does, based on what I see.

Kill everyone who does not have innate magical talent.

Spread out humanity/other intelligent species over the world.

Less density, less chance for something to go wrong. Everyone would innately be magical anyway, it's everything he really wanted.

Except he'd have to genocide about 99.99% of life on the planet to be able to do it.

But those are just piddling details to the Arcane Madness Wizard with a lust for all things poofy and magical.

So yeah. Maybe give them the facts on what it would take to accomplish it, and let him decide if he REALLY wants to be that Evil. Complete with capital E.

Otherwise I second, or at this point is it tenth, the motion that he kinda sounds like someone you should kick to the curb. Or at the very least punch him in the arm and have a serious conversation with after you shock him out of his mindset.

[Scow2]

His argument was that fantasy and magic where synonymous, and that the more magic involved the more fun the game would be for everyone involved both in and out of character.

Tell him that he's wrong there, and that the magic of fantasy isn't always so overt. The strongest 'magic' in fantasy is often even just in the 'mundane' stuff.

[Sidmen]

Honestly, I wouldn't have mentioned anything meta-game to him. His character wants to try and create a kingdom of magical people who use magic to solve everything - awesome.

Now, set the scene of how magic works, and how it is viewed from the current perspective of the people living in the setting. Then let him work towards his goal, collecting magic-users and laying the paving stones to achieve his goal.

The odds of him achieving the stated goal over any reasonable time frame (i.e. his lifetime, or the campaign's duration) are incredibly low. But that doesn't stop people from trying.

You might let him even attain some of his goals - have a few magi working to teach other magic-sensitives how to control and harness their power with fewer negative effects. Maybe he'll even write a grimoire that helps people better prevent catastrophic consequences.

[Slipperychicken]

Such a small number of spellcasters will make such a revolution nigh-impossible. And even envisioning it requires such an extensive and intimate knowledge of the nature of the magic, that it's quite unreasonable for him to even know half the tricks (one or two boon-traps might come to him after decades of careful study, for instance). It sounds like the kind of thing only Boccob would really know, and he certainly isn't sharing.

If his character's goal is "bring magic to the people", sounds great, and there may be some good he can do (build some appliances to help some people), although they'll be quite limited in scope since magicians are so rare, and he may even be recognized as a saint for his work. If it's "hurr hurr Tippyverse OP", then you can let him know it's ultimately not going to work because there just aren't enough magic-users to sustain it on a large scale.

[Jacob.Tyr]

I mean, if he wants to try let him. People try to set up magical utopias here on Earth all the time, usually involving a lot of insanity and drugs but whatever.

Just, y'know, make it as hard as it should be in the setting. Every one who remembers Atlantis trying to kill him, people afraid of him, catastrophic damage to the environment because of what he's doing, needing to stretch himself further and further to get his magic to work. Maybe let him make some deals with devils to fuel his power, human sacrifice. It honestly sounds like it would be an awesome campaign if you let it "work".

[Chauncymancer]

First, smack the taste out of his mouth for comparing a game to religion. Even if you're not religious that's a wholly inappropriate comparison for anyone to make. Noone ever launched a crusade over a game.

As a totally off topic aside: While I'm not naming any examples

Spoiler

Show

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgment

there is a researcher (who we should all at least *read* it's the least you can do)

Spoiler

Show

http://www.amazon.com/The-Functions-Role-Playing-Games-Participants/dp/0786447109

who points out that role-playings games copy (probably unintentionally) the basic structure of many religious ceremonies.

Back on topic. Not naming any names (for the same reason) but if your player is using the trope that "magic=technology" in his preferred games...
Then his real-world religion may hold it a tenet that technology (=magic) must be spread everywhere
If this is the case, then what you really need is a conversation about a player who brings his real world religion into a game (which is fine) without telling anyone (which, IMO, is not )

[LibraryOgre]

But really, the character fits the setting just fine - his role is just going to be "crazy cultist" instead of "benevolent dictator".

Yep. It's like playing a technologist in Fading Suns. Yes, you may be able to make it work, and there's a lot your favorite things can do... but you're still the person saying "The thing that popular history says destroyed utopia is really neat."

[erikun]

Preventing him from Trippyversing everything should be reasonably simple: your setting has no resetting magical traps/chain gating/fabricate abuse, and so the general D&D silliness is avoided. You might want to consider how certain things, such at item creature, work in your setting. Other than that, he'd be free to try to "bring magic to the masses" as much as he'd like, although may not be ultimately successful.

That isn't to say that you should automatically let him, though. His whole comparison between his playstyle and his religion is not a good sign; I wasn't there to view the discussion unbiased, but anyone making that comparison is a warning sign in my mind. If you think he can be maturely disappointed, then by all means, it should be a fun time to have him play. If you think he'll start throwing a tantrum the first time he learns he cannot create a "Cure Minor Wounds resetting trap", then you might be best leaving him out of the game.

[Joe the Rat]

I agree that it makes a great character motivation to try and make it work. Somebody had to make Stygia.

Just so long as he's clear that 1) this doesn't exist now in the setting, and 2) how rare and volatile magic is in the setting, roll with it. He can't start in a Magocracy with high-energy ionizing lev-rails and radium dial clocks (or whatever the magic equivalent would be), but he can work towards that brighter thaumatomic future.

[Slipperychicken]

Perhaps after discovering the ancient lore, he can create Tippyverse appliances... for absurdly high prices to reflect their true value. Something like the CLW trap should clock in somewhere around 140k-300k (and may even be an Artifact!), considering the general pricing scheme of things like the Ring of Regeneration, which merely accelerates natural healing (HD/hour instead of per day) and is 90k.

[Dimers]

The player might take it as a personal insult if the OP runs the setting as presented. He thinks magic is supposed to be the Best Thing Evar ... if it keeps acting weak and dangerous to use, instead, then he might conclude that the DM is out to get him.

Oy.

I'd say "he's welcome to try", with the caveat that he doesn't get to flip his lid OOC when the IC effort fails. I'd also get it in writing.

[Alejandro]

How old is this player, vs the rest of the group?

[1337 b4k4]

Your description of your world, and the players stated goals do not, on the surface appear to be incompatible. An excellent example actually, might be the modern BBC series of Merlin, wherein magic while known and capable, is completely banned by law, it's practice is punishable by death, and while there are pockets and usurpers about, they remain hidden, banished or secretive, and most people (even those working with magic users) have no idea (though to be fair, sometimes this seems to require holding the idiot ball. If one of you has Netflix, it might be worth watching a few episodes to see if this setting agrees with both of you, as that would be how your setting would have to play out to work.

That said, your description of the player and their actions throws a lot of red flags. It may be simply that we don't have a full perspective or know what actually happened, but your player sounds like they're going to force you to submit to their interpretation of fantasy, and to shut down any discussion as to why that interpretation may be incompatible with the setting. This is a bad thing, because frankly, it's your game and you're the one putting effort into the setting and world every week. Admittedly you can't game if you don't have players, but you need to be enjoying the game if you're going to run the game, so never give up your enjoyment simply because one other player can't be mature enough to be cooperative.

[Ashtagon]

If you take teh Buffyverse as a "game example", this player is Buffy. And Buffy told the Gm she really really wanted to empower women worldwide. It took seven game years of campaigning before she was able to make that happen. And in game year eight (the comic book series), that was lost all over again.

Simply because that's not how magic works in that universe.

I'd explain to the player that this is how magic works. He is welcome to try to make a tippyverse in it, but he probably won't succeed because of the magical nature of things.

[Aux-Ash]

My first instinct would be to let him play that character that way. It could prove to be a very engaging and interesting story of idealism versus realism. As long as all he cares about is the belief and fighting for it, then all is well.

Naturally, in that case you both have to be clear about this. So you should probably ask him what he wants to get out of the story.

Offer to allow him to play that concept, but tell him that it will not be an easy task, at times possibly even impossible. You will toss him consequences and challenges where he might have to compromise his beliefs. Sometimes things will simply not work, sometimes they won't work as expected, sometimes it will be disasters and sometimes it'll work perfectly. Tell him the NPC will likely hate him for what he does.
If he's fine with all that and agrees to those premises. Then I don't think there's any hurdles.

If he is not fine with that however, then you should probably ask him what exactly he wishes you to provide for him. What he wants and how to marry that with what you and the other player's wants. Maybe even offer to run such a campaign for him in the future if he wishes to play ball in this one?

[Morty]

The problem here is that the player's expectations are fundamentally incompatibile with the setting. He might as well be playing a real-world campaign with the goal of turning Africa into a polar region. Have you tried presenting it to him this way?

[Hyena]

a real-world campaign with the goal of turning Africa into a polar region.

Not sure if you're correct with this metaphor. I would rather compare his goal with bringing to Africa decent health care, introducing it to human rights, ridding it of hunger and poverty, and bringing democracy in place of dictatorship.
Which is theoretically possible, but practically it will take some superman to actually make it happen.

On topic: If the player is basically offended by magic being not all-solving utopia-brining allpowerful... stuff, he really shouldn't play this campaign.