Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Salla 04-01-04, 11:54 AM	The subject outlines it, but I'll go into more details in a bit ... HOWEVER ... The subject matter of the game in question may offend some people, and risks bringing up some RL issues people may have. Consider this post to be spoiler-space ... you've been warned, you may not want to progress further.
Salla 04-01-04, 12:09 PM	Here's the deal ... in an FR game, we rescued some wizard-princess from a cult of Bane(?) who were trying to corrupt her. When we got her back, we had our Paladin use Detect Evil on her, just to make sure we were in time and that it wasn't a trap. Through a few trials and tribulations, we discovered that the princess was pregnant with a child that was evil (on the Pali-radar) in the womb. This, of course, is part of a prophecy which Mystra (?) told us about ... either he'll grow up to be a wicked tyrant who lays waste to the continent, or he'll be a great peacemaker who unites the continent. However, prophecies are tricky things. More than half the time, when you think you're working against it, you're actually helping it out. The DM's line towards the end of the game was 'Well, you have eight months to decide what to do' ... the prospect of killing the child upon birth was mentioned around the table and was not actively discouraged or encouraged by the GM, though neither was the counter-proposal of trying to raise it. Now, my character is a ninja. I lose either way ... if the continent is razed, I'm dead, and if everybody's getting along and there's a century of peace, I'm out of a job. Additionally, it is very hard to work around a prophecy since, as I said, there's no telling if you're helping or hurting along the way. So, I got ahold of a poison/chemical/whatever that would abort the pregnancy. Points of order: 1. Yes, I know this is an evil act. I'm not arguing that. If my alignment shifts, I'll do it without any backtalk. 2. No, I wasn't going to tell anybody anyway. 3. The child radiates evil in utero, which means it will be born evil, which leads one to the conclusion that it's a demon/devil, as opposed to a normal being which is born True Neutral and learns its morals and ethics. 4. The character's general attitude is based of the Scorpion Clan, who are more concerned about doing what's necessary, regardless of whether or not it makes them popular. I'm also freely willing to get caught and executed for this stunt if they can capture me. Now, on to the actual point. The DM said that, instead of terminating the pregnancy, she went into labor (at approximately 5 months). I shrugged and said that's just as well, the child's so premature it won't be viable; so he said it was born fully developed to nine months. At which point, I shrugged again and said I'd kill it the old fashioned way and leave (false) evidence that the cult of Bane had done it (if we can't have it, no one will kind of deal). The DM's next statement? "You can't do that, all my games are built around this." He seemed quite adamant that he was simply going to say, arbitrarily, that I couldn't do it solely because it would derail his plot (I use the word 'derail' intentionally). We adjourned early, as one of the players had to be up at 6am, but it is my intentions to inform the DM that my character is going to make the attempt. Now, who's being the bigger jerk here, me or him? Him, for his adamant refusal to let PC actions alter the course of his game, or me for being stubbornly fixated on free will?
Nagol 04-01-04, 01:08 PM	Ask him when the book is going to be published because you'd like to read about what your character is going to do. DMs should learn to provide the trappings of a story (setting, NPCs, and situations) and allow the players to construct the story from their actions. Either that or simply write the story they wish to tell and let others read it.
bclark_ca 04-01-04, 01:11 PM	This is always the concern. Do you act in character and foil the DM's plot? Or do you meta-game a little bit and allow certain events to go as planned so that the story can continue? I game with friends that say the latter. In fact, I got static from my DM for killing an NPC that he wanted used as a recurring bad guy. It was a fair fight and I refused to run away. I rendered him unconscious then CDG'd him to make sure he wouldn't come back. DM complained that I'd screwed up his plans for this character by killing him. If the DM has an NPC that must not die for the plot, then the DM needs to find a way of preventing the party from killing that NPC. In your case, it's as simple as the DM preventing you from finding a poision that will terminate the pregnancy w/o killing the princess, or kidnapping the mother to be as the time of birth approaches. The latter provides an adventure hook since the party then tries to rescue the princess and prevent the child from growing up to be the tyrant. Ultimately, the choice is up to your DM. If he doesn't put measures in place to prevent you from killing the newborn then there's literally nothing stopping you from doing so. {edit for clarity}
Krelios 04-01-04, 01:16 PM	Friggin' April Fools Ebonics...
Korhal IV 04-01-04, 01:17 PM	Children of destiny always have interesting powers. Immunity to poison might be the least of it. Remember Hercules, who strangled giant snakes while in the crib. A clever Scorpion might wait to see what powers the child has before pulling off a CDG on his sleeping mother to be. That's your in-game justification. You as a player have every right to haul aside your DM and bellow into his ears until he gives you a better IC reason not to initiate abortion with a greatsword.
bclark_ca 04-01-04, 01:18 PM	Originally posted by Krelios Friggin' April Fools Ebonics... I wondered about that.... thought one of the guys at work was playing a practical joke on me.
Naughty Druid 04-01-04, 01:20 PM	For Schizzle. Yo gots ta be changing da game. Word. You need to kick the Dm in the booty, you know, bust a cap in hiz azz. I prefer a more reality based D+D game, you know, drive by crossbow shootings from chariots. Potions of healing are 40 ouncers of Malt Liquor, make the game more gangsta rap like. Signed.. Naughty "my pimp hand is strong" Druid
StormKnight 04-01-04, 01:35 PM	If he wants this kid born unaffected by your players, he should have kept it all FAR FAR away from you. Its a game, not a story. Of course, your killing the demon-child will just send it back to its native plane, where it will learn the ways of evil and destruction and return to destroy the world, whereas had it lived it would have tempered its evil with the good around it and become a great peacemaker. Oops.
SmiloDan 04-01-04, 02:29 PM	Yeah, I think free will is very important. It's why I don't get to connected to my NPCs, or even my settings! At least my players are nice enough to tell me they are going to move across the ocean a few real months before it happens so I can work out their trip and destination ahead of time. I have one DM that sometimes tries to have his NPCs give these grand speeches before combat. It's really annoying my druid can't pin-cushion him with arrows while he blabs on and on. Oh, well. Last session, we killed the BBEGs (three hags) pretty much in one shot. Tonight's session is going to begin with their speech. The DM also once over-ruled one of my Diplomacy checks big time. I rolled like a 35 on Diplomacy, and the NPC was only Neutral or Unfriendly, not killem all. He still treated us poorly. He was an elf king, my dude is a human vow of poverty monk with strong Diplomacy build (max Diplo, 5 ranks of Sense Motive, Sacred Vow, Nymph's Kiss, Nimbus of Light, etc. etc. At 5th level with only a Cha 13, I have a +14 (+16 with Good) bonus on Diplomacy. I'm planning on putting my first Vow of Poverty ability boost in Cha, as well as my 8th level one. But to get back on track, I hate being on the railroad tracks.
Vaelan 04-02-04, 02:31 AM	I don't even have to read your post to answer this one(but I did): Free Will. Nagol's view and attitude are perfect for the situation. Who is to say killing the mother or child will not fufill the prophecy in some way? A good DM, upon letting the characters know everything about the prophecy and giving them free will to change it, would make a contingency plan for if someone decided to kill the child. Maybe its part demon/devil and can assume ethereal form, enabling it to possess others. Kill the physical body and it just speeds up the prophecy as the child is free to start sowing chaos now instead of when it matures physically. DM doesn't like the characters derailing the plot? He's probably playing the wrong game.
Thermanshs 04-02-04, 02:58 AM	I always try to be real in my games...no railroad campaigns...no inconsistent changes in the plot...no unprepeared escapes from my key-NPC's and no unwritten powers rising within them just to make them serve their purpose.If players manage to change the plot then it's going to be a very rewarding experience(not only in the form of XP) and they're probably going to receive the same award for preventing something to happen as they would if they faced the BBEG in his dark tower after many gaming sessions.Only if the task was challenging though,not by mere luck (hey! I broke the damp by mistake and the flow of the river washed away all secretly-corrupted treants in the forest!) So players should be rewarded if they did what they planned for not some unbelievble achievement fallen from the skies. So...I'm with you Salla...and tell your DM that there's also META-DM-GAMING and he's performing it to the best of his ability.
ImmortalBlueMage 04-02-04, 03:10 AM	I've had my carefully laid plans thrown off by PC unpredictablity many times. A good DM should always be able to salvage a story no matter what goes wrong. In my last campaign, when I planned to have my players travel to the Elemental Plane of Air, I instead had FIVE different PCs seperate and end up on FOUR different planes, only one of which was the Plane of Air. When I tried getting them back together, one of them STILL slipped through and ended up on the Material Plane when I had planned on him being on the Plane of Air with the others. Both times I had to rewrite the story, and ended up taking one full session longer than planned, but in the end, they still fought the BBEG like I'd planned, still saved the Grand Caliph of the Djinn like I'd planned, and still recovered the lost Archon's trumpet, just like I'd planned, and never once did I have to force them into any of it. I just gave them lots of options and they figured out what the best one was for themselves. If your DM did not want to risk the child dying, he shouldn't have given any of you the chance. And the very fact that he said "you have eight months to decide" (whether it lives or dies) should have GUARANTEED he was prepared for either eventuality. Bottom line, you're within your rights, your DM needs to get his act together.
Thermanshs 04-02-04, 03:12 AM	No..I disagree with you immortalBlue mage...no DM should be prepared for every occasion but NPC'S should...ONLY if it's within their mental and physical limits
Salla 04-02-04, 03:33 AM	I'm between Thermanshs and ImmortalBlueMage ... the DM should be prepared for as many contingencies as possible, but NOT all in the 'MUST ... MAINTAIN ... PLOT ... MUST ... HOSE ... PLAYERS!' line. If a plot can be reasonably salvaged, then fine. If not, then you roll with the punches and deal with it. You know ... "Let's see ... if they do this, this happens ... if they do that, that happens ... if they do this, well, I'm screwed." Heck, he's SEEN me do that. I ran a Champions game that hinged around a terrorist group finding three parts of the schematics to a city-busting weapon; if they found two of the three, they'd have a dangerous, but not THAT dangerous, weapon. The PCs successfully beat the terrorists to the punch at all three encounters, and I just said, aloud, "Congratulations, you won." I even awarded bonus XP for pulling it off. I probably could have come up with some cockamamie way for them to have built the weapon, but it would have cheapened the player's actions and made them spectators rather than participants. Of course, part of me thinks this is just some mental problem with the DM. We have a rotating DMming duty schedule; not all running the same game (not even all D&D), but everybody takes turns running something or otherwise providing entertainment. I can predict his character's actions with 99 percent accuracy, because all his characters are the same regardless of genre, class, level, or game; exactly ZERO subtlety involved. If it can't be shot, beaten up, or blasted, he can't deal with it. Thinking isn't really high on his list of RP priorities (though ironically, he's also a poor min/maxer).
TheRedRobedWizard 04-02-04, 10:13 AM	Do you live in Ohio? Is your DMs name Jason Vasko? If so, we must be in the same gaming group. Although I never remember playing Champions... Basically, I let another guy in my group DM because I had the dreaded burnout. He did exactly the same thing. His new nickname is amtrack, because he loves to railroad like a motherb****. It was always "you wake up in the morning and set out. you go down the trail for 4 hours." Then I'd interject "BULL****! I'm flying above the woods, looking for any ambushy things with my Trueseeing and Detect Evil." Then he'd say "Uh, there's magic here that doesn't let you do that." Which solicited a very "what the bleeding crap?" from the rest of the players. We played along though. UNTIL something kinda similar to what happened to you (from a "YOU CAN'T RUIN MY GRAND STORY!!!!" perspective) happened to us. Our mission was to "Bring Light to the Dark Continent". We got to a wide open field. I thought for a moment, and then cast Hallow on an area, followed by Consecrate. Then I channelled all the Positive energy I had in my clericy body to make SURE that this area was as awesome as possible. Then he screwed up. "A light parts the clouds and light shines on to the Dark Continent for the first time in 1400 years." Then of course, he had to nerf the duration of consecrate/hallow to "1 minute/level" because "the Dark Continent is EVIL" or somesuch nonsense. So I said "Well guys, we brought Light to the Dark Continent. I'm going home." My character promptly left the group, because well, my work was done. I could tell the other people wanted to do the same thing, but they just didn't want to "lose" their characters. Lord knows that even if we all left, he'd make us roll up NEW characters and keep going on his tardy storyline. That's why I DM again. To answer your question, a DM created story has to adapt to the players. If not, you're a Vasko. -TRRW
Arbitrary Aardvark 04-02-04, 01:05 PM	Originally posted by bclark_ca I game with friends that say the latter. In fact, I got static from my DM for killing an NPC that he wanted used as a recurring bad guy. It was a fair fight and I refused to run away. I rendered him unconscious then CDG'd him to make sure he wouldn't come back. DM complained that I'd screwed up his plans for this character by killing him. Boy, how uncreative. What did you do with the body? If there is any bit left, than a 13th level NPC cleric could have done a resurrection. If there was nothing left, than a 17th level could have performed true resurection. Unless this was a really low (below 7th) campaign, he might have had such evil friends. Maybe he now owes them a favor. Maybe they brought him back with some changes. As a GM, I never let the deaths of high-level bad guys prevent them from coming back. (On the other hand, if they do get resurrected they tend to think that it would be a bad idea to mess with the party. One of them actually gave protection money to the party to keep them from killing him again.) Usually, I just get bored running the same bad guy. (Plus, I've been in too many games with recurring bad guys.)
bclark_ca 04-02-04, 02:36 PM	Actually... I never said the bad guy didn't come back. It just didn't fall in line with the topic of my post. :) What actually happened is that I put him down, took his head (literally) and took off since his Troll buddy was just recovering from Tasha's Hedious Laughter and three more Minitours just rounding the corner down the street. Less than a day later, we ran in to the same Minitours sitting in the home of some NPCs we had some friendly history with. The one I killed was looking good. Especially since he was alive (head intact) and I still had his original head in my backpack. DM said OOC that one of his friends was carrying a wand of resurection or somthing to the effect.
Beamup 04-02-04, 02:51 PM	A DM should never just arbitrarily decide a PC's actions (unless something like dominate person is involved). The best way to look at DMing, IMO, is not as writing a plot and taking the PCs through it, but rather simply as setting up a situation and letting the PCs react to it. You can certainly set the situation up to guide their reactions, but just deal with whatever happens. They want to join up with your BBEG instead of fighting him? Deal with it. They all want to go home and stop adventuring? Deal with it. Saying "You can't do that because it would mess up my plot" is very bad DMing.
mojo_202 04-02-04, 03:00 PM	I too arrived at this problem, although from the DM's perspective. I had this great story that I wanted to tell and it started around a pivotal event in the history of the kingdom. And the players completly screwed it up. Fortuanatly we talked and I decided to DM only from session to session and not plan too far in advance, just in case the players took the adventuring another way. I also began to write the story I wanted to tell while DMing, which I'm quite happy with.
Thermanshs 04-02-04, 03:45 PM	Beamup I totally agree with you. So Salla...if there really is need to maintain a DM's plot that SHOULD BE DONE ON SECRET not in front of you...and the guy gave you the worst example of meta-DM gaming b telling you that you ruined his plans. For a clever DM it's child's play returning to the main story leaving the PC's unaware that it really happened...and by this I don't mean him to present Gods coming material and changing the universe or anything alike...there's always a smart and logical way to keep moving on your railroad that the PC's might already know it but haven't paid much attention ;)
coolhand37 04-02-04, 03:55 PM	Originally posted by Salla The DM said that, instead of terminating the pregnancy, she went into labor (at approximately 5 months). I shrugged and said that's just as well, the child's so premature it won't be viable; so he said it was born fully developed to nine months. At which point, I shrugged again and said I'd kill it the old fashioned way and leave (false) evidence that the cult of Bane had done it (if we can't have it, no one will kind of deal). The DM's next statement? "You can't do that, all my games are built around this." This DM is completely heading down the wrong track with this line of thinking...but there is an easy way out. Go ahead and kill the baby, but it ends up being the wrong baby anyway. PC actions still dominate, story flows on, suspension of disbelief is preserved. True, the DM may have to tweak his plans a bit...but if he can't do that, he shouldn't be DMing in the first place.
jafyfe 04-02-04, 04:03 PM	I usually make it virtually impossible to kill people I want to live. and if I was DM, i would pull the old HP (Harry Potter) act on the acting Ninja. BUT YES you should be allowed to make any move you want and be prepared to suffer any recourse within the realms of the world.
burning_blood 04-02-04, 04:45 PM	Hmm... I disagree somewhat with the general consensus of the thread thus far. I agree that Salla's DM was railroading them in a rather hamfisted fashion; however, railroading is not always a bad thing, and player freedom is not the be-all and end-all of roleplaying. (Some might even define a good DM as one who gives his players the illusion of freedom, yet all the while sends them down his chosen track. ImmortalBlueMage's campaign seems to be a good example of this.) Please note that I'm not saying the opposite, either -- that plot is paramount and freedom irrelevant. There is a balance to be found. A few have already drawn the DM as novelist analogy, in criticism of Salla's DM's plot manipulation. To me, D&D is just that: a story being written. The DM is the author, but is also in the unique position of having main characters that are independent from himself. So the game becomes a collaboration. The DM shouldn't dictate the plot the way a more conventional author does, because the characters in the story have wills of their own; but neither should the players, in the name of freedom, run roughshod over the plot and lay waste to a carefully planned out (and probably quite enjoyable) story. When they do, they're likely "cutting off their noses to spite their faces". Yes, the DM must learn to roll with the punches and deal with the players' unexpected decisions; not everything will go his way. The players, meanwhile, must also learn the same thing; not everything will go their way, either. It's a matter of co-operation, collaboration and balance. So to answer Salla's question: neither of you is being a jerk, really (though your DM could definitely stand some improvement). But each of you is too concerned with having your own way. Prophecies have a nasty habit of coming true no matter what anyone does to stop them. So really, there should be some way for your character to kill the child, and yet have the child fulfill the prophecy nonetheless. Perhaps some powerful cult member will resurrect (or reincarnate?) the child, or maybe the very act of killing it will somehow trigger the prophecy's fulfillment. There are ways around it.
Vaalingrade Ashland 04-02-04, 04:59 PM	Every DM should be prepared for the eventuality the some player will decide to destroy the game for 'roleplaying purposes'. Every player should at least try to avoid destroying the game for 'roleplaying purposes'. Neither of you did what you were supposed to do. Now this doesn't seem like the most difficult attempt at plot destruction to over come. Your character acted rashly without thought to how the child got this way or the processes involved in the attempted corruption. In short it's a change plot for free card because the PCs know nothing about the plot device. Also, he could have stopped it then and there by not allowing you to get the poison, rolled a Fort save vs. it, or had it just be ineffective. His mistake, he has to deal with it now. In the end, this is a really shameful player vs. Dm situation in which neither of you is showing much concern for each other's enjoyment of the game.
Thermanshs 04-03-04, 02:12 AM	Originally posted by burning_blood however, railroading is not always a bad thing, and player freedom is not the be-all and end-all of roleplaying. (Some might even define a good DM as one who gives his players the illusion of freedom, yet all the while sends them down his chosen track). :bow: That's it!Keeping a DM's plans in secret is the best way to go on railroading!I'm with you burning blood!
Crossover-Chronicler 04-03-04, 03:49 AM	:whatsthis Really, your Dm should have seen this one coming. I mean, you're playing a "Scorpion clan" ninja. Given that you're of a less-than-moral clan and of a class that's effectively a generalized assassin, he should have taken into account that the typical list of solutions for such a character are going to be "bribe it, steal it, or kill it; then blame someone else no matter which you did." Also, as your character is obviously of a mercenary bent , and (I assume), not good-aligned, he should not have relied so heaviliy on the possibility of an "era of peace" to stay your hand (especially considering the other possibility). IMO, such a pre-emptive strike should have factored into his plans somewhere. That being said, you now know that your course of action will hose the game as presented, and quite possibly leave the party foundering without adventure/plot hooks for some time; the campaign might even end on that note, if the DM is sufficiently upset. You should figure that possibility into how hard you want to push this. If you think that players' freedom of choice is more important than the stable continuation of this one campaign (keep in mind that this has an impact on the other players' enjoyment of the game as well!), then push as hard as you can. Otherwise, maybe you should put some effort into a compromise (e.g. now that he's looking at it, your character just can't bring himself to murder a baby; call it a moment of weakness. Later, if the kid does grow up to be a monster, it gives you a cool character point - you're driven to repair your past mistake - and cool lines: "I should have killed you when I had the chance"). Another option would be this: "If you don't want it to happen, then have something stop me; don't just tell me I can't do it." The DM could pitch in divine protection, baby-half-fiend abilities, some kind of guardian, or a remarkably tough and protective mother (she is a wizard, right?) who won't let you hurt her baby. edit: As it stands, there is an underlying issue: the game's credibility has been screwed, as now the PCs are bumping into "invisible walls" - barriers on their actions and decisions that have no rational explanation. I doubt even "It's magic!" would do for this one.
KHORG 04-03-04, 02:41 PM	That's some pretty harsh railroading... good on you for deciding to play your character. Vaal- I would feel more sympathy for Salla's DM, but it doesn't exactly sound like the guy is a Fixxxer in the making and had a massive amazingly intense campaign all planned out for the players, more like another DM who didn't plan for a very likely possiblity.
Vaalingrade Ashland 04-03-04, 04:03 PM	Still no reason go go 'tra-la-la-la-la I can screw over everyone's fun because I want to'. They both screwed up and need the application of a 'collar of gantle correction'. I like Crossover's guardian idea. Particularly if the guardian is anything like Tsukasa's guardian in .Hack//Sign. Remember kids, if your ego forces you to try to ruin a game -- bad things should happen.