Results 31 to 60 of 86
-
2021-11-17, 02:29 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2019
-
2021-11-17, 07:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2015
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
In my view she was in error for having rails to begin with. But I realise that’s a rather extreme position. If you disagree with it then I guess my response to this is just that she should accept that this will happen sometimes, no harm no foul. You said she had run this campaign successfully so it’s not like the work that went into it was wasted.
I don’t think my last post was directed at you, no. And I broadly agree here. I try to think of deceptive NPCs the same way I try to think of everything I put in my campaigns: I’m throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks. If we reach a point where an NPC might betray the PCs, then maybe they attempt to. If an NPC is deceiving them from the start then I’ll include some kind of clue towards that and at least give the players the opportunity to figure it out. My only real point here is that I don’t like the idea of saying “this NPC WILL successfully deceive the PCs”. And it’s just a specific case of the fact that I don’t like saying that anything at all WILL happen. I don’t want to know what’s going to happen any more than the players do.
Yeah that’s my point, the deception thing is really a particularly sensitive case of the general no railroading rule, for me. And in principle I agree it’s fine to have an idea of likely outcomes, but personally I try to avoid even that since for me it’s a slippery slope from there to railroading. I’ve improved my games so much by adhering to “hold on lightly” and “play to find out” through cast iron discipline, that now I’m paranoid about it. Again, completely idiosyncratic point about my personal style, not a prescription.
-
2021-11-17, 05:56 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
I think the key thing in that sentence is "from levels 1". I think it's fine for anyone to be potentially deceptive, if it's also fine for the players to refuse any quest and/or refuse to trust any person, including the very first hook that starts the campaign.
Personally, I've played in campaigns like that, and it sucked. We spent multiple sessions just getting most (not all) of the party working together, and even then there was a lot of carefully probing NPCs for information (which mostly wasn't shared with the other PCs) and very little taking any action, because we didn't know who could be trusted or whether any info we had was correct.
So now I prefer: "You can trust your fellow PCs and you can trust the initial hook, and neither of those will bite you in the ass IC. After that, maybe choose more carefully." Because then at least we build up some momentum and connections before slowing down.Last edited by icefractal; 2021-11-17 at 05:59 PM.
-
2021-11-17, 06:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2018
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
That's also why I prefer non-hostile deceptions. Just because you're initially a pawn in a greater game, and that the NPCs are hiding their true motives, doesn't mean that this will bite you eventually. In general, any campaign that includes climbing ranks in a secret society of some sort will start with a currently deceptive NPC which will most likely be a future ally (unless the PCs decide to play double agent for another organisation).
-
2021-11-17, 07:29 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
-
2021-11-17, 08:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
I like the idea of running that in reverse (might not be the best word for it). Yeah, the villain is the guy giving the quests. But he's not betraying you, he's trying to recruit you. These mission are all about fulfilling his evil plan and yeah, you might be pawns. But you're valuable pawns.
And then the 'reveal' isn't so much a sudden betrayal, but him testing you to see if you are truly loyal and ready to be promoted to evil LT. And you turning against him is the real betrayal here.
Of course the usual caveats of giving the PCs opportunities to figure this all out beforehand, and letting them spring their betrayal early, or even letting them come up with an elaborate plot to overthrow the BBEG at the last second. You know, however they want to play it out.Spoiler: I'm a writer!Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"here[/URL]
]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha
I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP
Procrastination: MLP
Spoiler: Original FictionThe Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.
-
2021-11-17, 08:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- Italy
- Gender
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
on the other hand, if i have a good idea of what's likely to happen, i can prepare for that and make better material than i could if i was improvising. i mean, i have a pretty clear idea of how the world is made, which are the powerful factions, what kind of resources they have, and which of them have some nefarious plan secretly going. I am good with the big picture.
but the small scale eludes me. I learned to improvise decently well, and I am lucky to have good players that will help me by asking the right questions, but I'm much better if i can prepare in advance.
Last time, with the party uncovering the final villain too early, I had to call the session to an early stop to prepare. I knew the villain, being discovered, would move up her timetable and attack the main city that served as the pcs base of operation, and steamroll it. But I needed to prepare some good narration, because introducing a major villain must be done properly to make the villain memorable, and I knew there were a lot of details I had to convey and I would forget some if improvising. And I had the villain statted in advance, but i didn't have her minions statted. and finally, i wanted to provide opportunities for the party to run around the invaded city, fighting monsters at the outskirt of the major fights, to save their friends and their stuff. again, a lot of miniquest i had to prepare.
on the plus side, it was a memorable session and everyone was happy with the result.In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.
Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you
my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert
-
2021-11-17, 08:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Australia
-
2021-11-17, 08:49 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2019
-
2021-11-17, 08:59 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Australia
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
Those are not at all equivalent. If PCs don't accept the hook, the adventure doesn't happen. This isn't a moral or rules thing. This is entirely practical.
Not trusting the first quest giver is entirely appropriate. Even good roleplaying. Take the job, but also, cast detect alignment/do some research/keep the emails
"A well established patron has to deal fairly and honestly with the party" is a table rule you should probably check if you ever join a game at a table you don't know.
Especially if the GM has ever played Shadowrun
-
2021-11-17, 09:02 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
Spoiler: I'm a writer!Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"here[/URL]
]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha
I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP
Procrastination: MLP
Spoiler: Original FictionThe Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.
-
2021-11-17, 11:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Location
- Calgary, AB
- Gender
-
2021-11-18, 02:03 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2019
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
I don't really see the point of this sort of meta-reasoning. Yes, the players should be able to trust the GM not to screw them over but that doesn't mean the characters need to be able to trust their patron not to do it. Just look at Glorthindel's story – the characters were probably very upset about their employeer using and tricking them but the players seems to have been completely okay with the situation.
That's fine, but I still don't understand why the GM having NPCs attack the PCs isn't adversarial but having the NPCs lie to them is.
-
2021-11-18, 03:06 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
-
2021-11-18, 03:23 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2013
- Location
- Slovakia
- Gender
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
This is actually a good point for many GMs. If you spend time setting up this big goofy good mentor friend and then pull the rug from under the players' collective feet, you are basically inviting them not to trust anyone.
There need to be countless small hints.
Big hints.
Folks that are afraid of the "good mentor".
Allies that will try to warn them not to trust him.
People who actually say something bad will disappear.
Basically, a rugpull is no good unless the players have a solid chance to figure it out before you do it, and unless they trust you, as a GM.
And even then it can backfire. Also, it should not be the end of the campaign: getting revenge should be the end.Call me Laco or Ladislav (if you need to be formal). Avatar comes from the talented linklele.
Formerly GMing: Riddle of Steel: Soldiers of Fortune
-
2021-11-18, 03:27 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2019
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
Right, I understand what's happening, just not why it'd be such a big no-no. Granted, pulling off such a reveal takes some skill and probably planning (compare the ending of the Sixth Sense to some of Shyamalan's later mandatory big twists, for example) but I suspect that's not what you're referring to. Again, I agree that the GM must absolutely play fair, the NPCs can lie to the PCs, but GM can't lie about what they are experiencing.
-
2021-11-19, 06:40 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2017
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
Oh absolutely, the session when it all came out is possibly the best session I have ever been involved in, and is probably the only time I've had absolutely no idea how something was going to play out. At one point the party were in a full mexican standoff with each other, and the players were checking with each other that there would be no hard feelings if they just started shooting.
I will admit, the session could have definitely gone the wrong way with a different group of players, but our group is about 20 years old at this point, have been close friends away from the table for as long, and we don't carry grudges away from the table with us. With a less solid group of friends, it might have gone differently.
Agreed. I made sure to never have my Inquisitor be the parties friend. He was always a looming presence who was focussed on "his mission", and treated the party like expendable underlings who should be treated like mushrooms. In hindsight, my big mistake was doing this in the Warhammer 40k setting, as the players interpreted this as normal good guy behavoir for that setting (and I suppose they aren't wrong there...).
-
2021-11-19, 06:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2019
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
Sounds like fun. One of my own more memorable RPG experiences also involve the party in a Mexican stand-off. We had some disagreements over whether to kill a prisoner or not, if I remember correctly it ended with the prisoner dead and one party member (non-fatally) shot. That was a fun party, my PC was the self-appointed party leader and it was like herding cats. Murderous, impulsive cats with no regard for their own or anyone else's safety... If the GM did have a plan for that campaign, it was probably derailed within the first ten minutes.
-
2021-11-19, 07:21 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2015
- Location
- South Korea
- Gender
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
A minor case in my (as of now) only 5E campaign ever played, though not a Session 1 scenario.
1. My DM unleashed a solo devil combat encounter (late T2).
2. My GOO Warlock fires a banish spell as the very first action.
3. It's super effective! The supposedly impressive devil popped away...
While I, the DM and everyone in the group were (most probably) reasonable adults so let the mess-up pass for that time, the shell shock was clear enough that for all other banishable future encounters, the DM had pointed out excuses in form of hints why this was not repeatable and I obliged for the group's shared fun...
----
Edit: Not the 1st session, actually, but I think this would have been a minor derail if either me or the DM were not a polite person...Last edited by Lucas Yew; 2021-11-19 at 07:23 AM.
Below are the things I personally care when rating whether I consider a RPG rule as a favorite or not, in order;
- Legally guraranteed for free commercial redistribution (ORC, CC-BY-SA, etc.)
- All game entities (PC, NPC, monsters, etc.) generally follow the same creation structure and gameplay rules (with some obvious exceptions)
- Martial and Magical character archetypes do not completely overshadow each other in common situations (combat, exploration, socialization, etc.)
-
2021-11-19, 07:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2015
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
I suppose I just value the organic, flexible quality that comes from being as improvisational as possible over the detail, consistency etc that comes from planning for a specific eventuality. When I used to do the latter I often found that the cool moments I had planned fell flat, and I’ve had that experience as a player with other people’s cool moments too. I think it’s because, for me, what makes an RPG moment truly cool is precisely that it wasn’t planned, that we all just ended up there together.
I’m not saying I don’t prep at all, btw. I just stick to prepping modular elements that I can wheel out or combine with what the players give me as needed.
-
2021-11-19, 12:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Location
- Wyoming
-
2021-11-19, 01:50 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
Instead of banning the spell by proxy the better solution was for the DM to learn the lesson of not having a solo devil encounter and instead have multiple foes encounters and let everyone feel good when you banish one of the stronger enemies to make the combat easier for everyone. That's why the iconic UberBBEG monsters have Legendary Resistance. It's to allow them to be solo fights without one spell ending the fight on Round One. Lair actions and Legendary actions are so the players don't defeat them in Round Two due to action economy.
-
2021-11-20, 11:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
Only time I remember ever intending something, I intended a character to act as the BBEG. Party took them as an ally / quest-giver.
Building a complex plot that requires a session to go a particular way is a rookie mistake.
Even if that way is "oppose (rather than join) the BBEG".
-
2021-11-21, 06:08 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2015
-
2021-11-21, 11:32 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- 61.2° N, 149.9° W
- Gender
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
-
2021-11-22, 12:34 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
The only time that happened to me was at a gaming convention, but I was inexperienced to know what was happening at the time and they were doing it on purpose. It was a group of friends who arrived. One would leave without me realizing it until 30 minutes into the game. The rest just started a combat for the sake of having one. They fought until their characters' died then congratulated themselves on ruining the game and left the table. The game wasn't ruined because what they fought wasn't important, and I continued the game fine with everyone else who were there to play and weren't even in the fight. I would learn later they did the same thing to another DM at a miniatures wargaming table. The DM went to the bathroom, and when he returned half his players were gone preventing the game from being played. Nothing was stolen.
Sometimes people are just donkey cavities.
-
2021-11-22, 07:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2018
- Location
- Louth, Lincolnshire, UK
-
2021-11-23, 01:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2017
- Gender
-
2021-11-23, 03:51 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Location
- Wyoming
-
2021-11-24, 12:03 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2019
- Location
- Wyoming
- Gender
Re: Derailing the campaign in session one
The GM's issue wasn't one of overplanning.
I'd argue, it was in fact, a lack of planning.
Session 1, above all others, will contain the highest number of probable outcomes. From there on out, planning far ahead is fairly simple. You've got an idea of what hooks the characters, what hooks the players, and where they're going. Since they're interested in these elements, they're more likely to see them to completion, rather than just bounce all over the board. So you can plan out what they're interested in, instead of guessing at what might catch their attention.
Once you know where the party wants to go, planning far ahead is easy, and you won't even have to railroad, because the party WANTS to do this thing.Knowledge brings the sting of disillusionment, but the pain teaches perspective.
"You know it's all fake right?"
"...yeah, but it makes me feel better."