So my last session seems to have gone pretty far south, and left my players frustrated and irritated. I asked them about for clues as to why, but the answers have been largely unhelpful. Things went wrong, and everyone blames something different. I would love to hear any advice you guys might have, or where you think things started going wrong, and what I could have done about it. (It’s a bit long, sorry!)
Here is the scenario as it was planned: The party (6 Level 3 characters) had saved a village from a large group of marauding Gnolls and a force of Kobolds they had enslaved. After fighting through their ranks, and retaking the village, they are ready to take the fight to the gnoll encampment. This was to be the most difficult fight yet, going up against a massive force. However, the majority of the enemies were across 4 rope and wooden bridges over a deep cliff, with only a forward base on the village’s side. If they could destroy the bridges, they could halt the Gnolls assault, and set back any counter-attack by many, many months. The fight would consist of enemies, gradually funneling over the cliff, while the players try to reach and destroy the bridges before they get too many across.
What actually happened: Instead of planning to approach the bridges, they decided the best course was to try and set them ablaze from a distance, via soaking arrows in oil and lighting them on fire brefore shooting. The village, having a deep running military heritage, possessed semi capable fighters. One of our players made the case that they should be sending people to help. This idea put me off a bit, but I could not think of a realistic reason why the village would refuse, since they would be totally lost without the players help. They loaded up a cart with oil (for said flaming arrows), and sent 25 soldiers along side the players to the battle. Somewhat short on supplies, each soldier only carried a longsword, and a hand crossbow.
I wanted to really build up to this, as some grand final combat with the Gnolls, so the first enemy they encountered was a patrol. 3 Gnolls, mounted on trained Dire Wolves, and wielding heavy crossbows. I figured the Gnolls would just pepper the convoy with arrows, while they chased after their mounted attackers. Unfortunately, the party decided, since they have no way to catch them, they may as well just keep walking, and dodge every turn until they were out of arrows. (With only light foliage, there was not much cover, and they did not want to risk the oil cart) The Gnolls, not wanting to close the distance to 31 armed fighters kept their distance, just firing back shots. Now, the fight became a boring 2 on 3, with our 2 rangers trading disadvantaged shots at 300+ feet until the Gnolls ran out of ammo.
Now combat starts with the encampment itself. Cages to Kobold cages swing open and out come several waves of them. The players wade in, and the troops they brought lit torches and pulled the cart of oil some 60ft away from the players, trying to get the bridges in range of their crossbows. Being a new bridge, I figure a 1 out of 3 chance each round to deal significant fire damage to the bridge and make it unusable. After 2 rounds of failing to light the first of 4 bridges, the Gnolls move to counter. The remaining riders grab bits of lit wood from their own fire pit and charge the soldiers. The players being almost too spread out to help, a single Gnoll Wolf rider manges to get close, and tosses the burning log into the open oil of the cart. (Making the attack at disadvantage, and rolling a successful 3 on a 1d3 to set the blaze.) Now, I know that the players can still easily drive into the village, and slice the ropes that hold the bridges, but by now they are so frustrated by their initial attacks ineffectiveness, and that their enemy is focusing fire on what it thinks is the ‘real’ threat, i.e. the archers trying to burn the bridges. Now the NPC soldiers have taken heavy losses, the cart is on fire, all the bridges still stand, and everyone at the table switches to “I don’t even care anymore” mode. They all still have close to full HP, but with the NPCs tasked with accomplishing the primary objective, the players were almost a side note in their own fight, spending their time fighting what amounts to mooks. (Kobolds in this case)
We broke the session there, since it was getting late, but I want to know what you guys think. My player feedback was mixed. The Ranger’s complaint that he was expecting longbow-men, not just guys with hand crossbows, so he could shell the village at maximum range (600ft). The barbarian said he wanted to rush the town and slice the bridges by hand, but without support that would be suicide, so he feels like his point was buried. Another player mentioned that once the oil cart was set on fire, they had no more plan, so it’s all been a wasted effort and they may as well retreat. How could I have handled this situation better, or where do you think I could have improved the setting/battle/session? Any input would be greatly appreciated. I don't like people walking away from the table irritated. :/
Blow up the oil cart - spectacularly.
A fireball and pieces of the wagon rush a hundred feet in the air, then start spreading out in a mushroom-cloud form. Some of the blazing pieces have to be dodged, some land in the gnolls' Forward Base and catch tents aflame, some land on the bridges. Roll a d6 or d4 for how long it takes one or more bridges to catch fire. If there is a woods nearby, it catches alight. The gnolls "lose it" and suffer confusion; the kobolds break instantly and flee in all directions. On Turn One and Turn Two, a few kobolds actually jump off the cliff, lemming-like. The defenders standing too close to the cart are all dead, shredded by splinters &c and burnt. The fighters between the PCs and the bridges dissolve into a panicked mob trying to retreat / flee the scene. Maybe the gnolls protect bridge #1, so the survivors can escape / retreat; after a few minutes a Gnoll Officer sees the escaping gnolls are spreading panic in his own ranks and cuts the ropes Indiana Jones style. (This is the Barb's chance to yell "FOLLOW ME!" and take down the unprotected bridges, if he thinks to take it.) Make it clear - the only people who have kept their heads are the PCs. "What are you going to do?"
Poor tactics - in your case scattering all over the map - leads to lousy outcomes. I'm not saying this just to gloat: my HotDQ group had our native guide be eaten by a Random Encounter. That is the last time I tell a group in canoes to stop rowing and shoot at the slow-moving monster. We (the characters) decided to find a campsite for the night because we (the players) needed time to discuss how to proceed. As you might imagine, we were all pretty deflated, too.
That fireball will not go unobserved, on both sides. Have a tough Scout force from the village show up to help organize whatever is left / be reinforcements. The PCs see the real Gnoll Boss and his bodyguard come up and demand answers out of his troops. Maybe he yells a few threats at the PCs, maybe not. They can watch while he executes an officer for letting his forces be trapped on the wrong side of the chasm.
Talk to your players away-from-table. After they've had a night to think it over, ask how they think their character would proceed. Then ask them as a group. They may think of something cooler than what I did.
I think the main point of it was that the PCs didn't organize themselves properly, and you gave them resources that basically turned the entire plan into a "Well, let's flail miserably at them and hope it works." tactic. If it were me and my friends, we would have asked for rags and a few lanterns. Then just drain the oil from the lanterns onto the rags, tied them to our arrows/Javelins, and just sniped the bridges. No NPCs necessary, no cart to slow the party down, no reason for the combat to be so disappointing. Also, I'm not exactly sure why the bridge wasn't igniting. I realize you wanted to make it more climactic, but what reason did the bridge have to not burn? New or not, it's all wood and rope, it'll light up if you throw some oil and fire at it. Also, I appologize for my satire. The whole situation just seemed like you were working against the players; which is fine, but this was a bit much.
In situations like these, especially when a combat gets drawn out and it turns into a battle of attrition, I steal a page from Star Wars RPG and just narrate a cut scene. When things start to drag, just shift from combat to narrative. Tell them that their bowmen wound a number of foes and keep the Gnolls from advancing. Then suddenly the Gnolls stop firing back. Perhaps they are changing tactics. What do you do now?
This speeds through boring combat and it also sets up a new decision point so the players can change tactics if they feel they might have made a mistake. You could add more to the narrative to encourage the players to try new tactics too. If one of the party members sees the Gnolls more clearly (ask for wisdom perception check or just pick the pc with the highest passive perception) you can tell him that it looks as if most of the Gnolls are backing off ducking into tents, or finding more secure cover. Now might be a safer time to try to make it to one of the bridges.
I am confused by their plan....
Once spotted by a gnoll patrol, there should have been a mad dash to kill them before they could go back and report. There should have been a butt-ton of gnolls waiting for them by the time they got to the bridges.
I also can't see the 'flaming arrows' approach doing anything useful. The chance of hitting a rope seems pretty microscopic, and hitting the wood won't really do anything. Maybe if they hit many times, and no one every bothers to deal with them at all. They would need to get oil onto the bridge to have any luck.... and keep the gnolls from putting any fires out.
It is possible that you were sending mixed messages about what would or wouldn't work; but it seems more like they wanted an EZ-I-Win button for the encounter.
Longbows are martial weapons, I would not expect 25 villagers to have such training**, but either way, It seems unlikely for village militia to be able to do much of anything useful from 500' away.
**The same could be said for a handbow, I would expect shorbows and light crossbows.
More likely, would be to use the villagers for a 'frontal assault' as a diversion, so the PCs can flank around and hit the bridges directly. Either by cutting rope, or dumping oil.
Hindsight is 20/20, so keep that in mind when reading my responses.
Fiend-Factory wrote:
I have a general guideline, based on observation: too many NPCs spoils the fun for the players.
Players want to be the center of attention. They want to be the heroes, using their combat abilities and spells to great affect.
Players often say things like "let's recruit the army!" and then the army, once recruited and engaging the enemy, saps all the joy out of the game. It becomes a game of "Let's watch the DM roll dice against himself." I've seen DMs who enjoy doing that, but for players it's instant boredom, even if it's their idea.
If a lot of ally or neutral NPCs do get involved, do whatever you can to limit them from joining the actual dice-rolling part of combat at all. Leave combat to the players.
This is not to say "railroad the PCs by finding excuses to keep them from recruiting the army", instead it's about finding a way to use the army but still let the players have the combat.
In your example, perhaps the army could have provided a distraction by engaging the gnolls archer-to-archer while the party snuck around to burn the rope bridges. You can effectively ignore what the army is doing while the players engage in their own mission. Reward them for recruiting the army by making resistance light (all the archer gnolls are off engaging the army) but there's no reason to roll any of the army's combat results at all, just make something up. Focus all the dice rolling on the players' actions and any enemies the party is actually facing.
Keep ally NPCs out of combats. The players want to play, they don't want to watch the DM play.
Good notes from Coredump00.
It seems to me that you can benefit from narrating more outcomes and sticking less to the rules and dice.
If they decide to stay in cover and let the gnolls pepper them, that sounds like a fair solution to me, which would end up in some soldiers getting hit and wounded, and the gnolls expending their ammo and getting run off 'western' style. I would just narrate how that plays out. With howling wolves and wounded soldiers being carried by their comrades while they try to shield them.
At the bridge don't rely on dice to adjucate if it catches fire or not. It should be a dramatic moment, and the players plan should basically work - if you hadn't clearly indicated as a DM why it might not. And then as mentioned, throw in a complication they have to solve - perhaps after the first two have caught fire.
But now I would probably go with the big explosion, let a couple of townsfolk heroically ignite two bridges and let the group have to deal with the other two while a huge gnoll chief tries to cross and a shaman summoning demons to distract them - or something. And I would clearly tell them that their plan is unravelling and they have to achieve x and z to get the fun back on track.
RasmusNord wrote:
Fiend-Factory wrote:
The only things I can think of that I would have done differently:
When you saw that the group was not going to be chasing after your mounted Gnolls, have them retreat or have them send one of their numbers to warn the gnoll camp of the incoming fighters. At that point the gnolls can either decide to prepare for them or send an attack force to the now unprotected village which makes things more interesting.
When 25 warriors focus fire a bridge with oil covered fire arrows, it shouldn't take multiple volleys of arrows to -start- doing damage. What I would have done is make the attacks work for the most part and have the gnolls put the fires out as best they could to preserve the bridges. Promoting that going there in person would work better but that the current plan can work, given enough time. Oil fires aren't impossible to control, especially given the number of gnolls around and continuously crossing the bridges. I mean they could even form a wall on the bridge with raised shields to absorb some of the incoming volleys and protect their allies while going across. My point is, it's ok to make the gnoll controller bridges hard to destroy by creating a situation the party has to overcome, but doing it by having a 1d3 determine how effective their plan is doesn't feel right. Having the gnolls defend themselves against the plan feels much better.
BRJN wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Fiend-Factory wrote:
If you ask me you guys just played throgh a real dramatic fubar DRAMA! GOOD!. I would't recon and play on. The PCs and allies are in retreat. I would have the gnolls andvanced in force. See what happens? Players are frustrated, that reflects PCs frustration with a failed plan. I would play through and give a chance for the pcs to turn things arround. It happens in the movies all the time. The main characters start to loose, thier lans go awry, allies fall. Then the they rally, improvise and snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Far more satisfying and dramatic than everything goes the pcs way.
So some believe that any negative emotion on the game table is a big faliure. I disagree, those emotions of sadness, frustration, anger, loss, uncertainty can be a part of a positive overall rpg experience. In a good novel the main characters can through a gambit of emotional highs and LOWS. I blelieve Pcs can go through such an emotional roller coaster bringing players along. Failure, regrouping then success is common theme in many fantasy and adventure stories of all types. It's the bread and butter for martial arts movies. That said that type of gaming is not for everyone. You should discuss with your players if they will be into that.
If your looking for advice on a retcon for the situation, I would have gnolls advance over the bridge. Thier gnolls facing puny retreating humans why would they not advance? they claim both sides of the bridge they open the way for others to invade.
PS iserith breaks it down really well and gives some great advice. heed iserith.
@ Fiend-Factory: The trend I'm seeing in your posts is that you want things to go a particular way and you don't want your DM prep to be in vain. This concern can lead to many a pitfall for the DM. Remember that our role as DMs is to present problems, not to create solutions. That's what players do while we adjudicate fairly with an eye toward the goals of play. I would suggest you make your prep light yet robust so as to minimize these feelings and to give your players room to do as they like while you do your best to make it interesting and challenging.
In my view, characters feeling bored, frustrated, or angry is good. Players feeling that way is not good.
For the soldiers, consider creating a "swarm" type monster to represent them rather than have them act as individuals.
Fiend-Factory wrote:
iserith wrote:
Fiend-Factory wrote:
As a Dm if your in a situation between keeping it real or making it fun, always go for fun.
The first problem you had was improvising to a new situation. It's clear the encounters at the bridge was originally intended for just the players. And then the players turned that setup upside down when they started recruiting help. Players have a habit of doing that, and reacting to it correctly can be a hassle. It seems you didn't know what to do with your planned encounter with the gnolls on dire wolves. In hindsight you should have just let the gnolls make a few shots, realise they weren't going to stop such a large force by themselves, and run off to their camp to report. With that you could have explained why the big fight was beefed up, the gnolls were warned. With the big fight itself, you did alright improvising. A few more gnolls and kobolds, and them reacting to the new plan.
The second problem is how to make the players feel a significant part of a large battle. What I find works best is toning down on rolls for npc's and giving the players their own things to do. I don't make rolls for npc's on either side, but I include a moment on count 0 of the initiative to narrate what's going on around the players. I also give the players their own encounters within the greater battle. For example an orc fireshaman shows up, but all the combatants around the players are caught up in their own fights with orcs, leaving the players to deal with the new threat.
The gnoll with the torch could have made a great seperate encounter for the players. The guards near the oil-wagon are set upon by kobolds, but the players notice the gnoll with the torch and deduce what he's planning to do. Now it's up to them to stop the gnoll from reaching a spot where he can throw his torch onto the wagon.
Or when the bridges catch fire, narrate that a gnoll orders some kobolds onto that bridge to put out those fires. The archers are busy trying to set another bridge on fire, so it's up to the players to make sure the kobolds don't succeed.
Of course I like to map the encounters the players will face out beforehand. Improvising them on the fly would be harder.
For all the help everyone has given, I figured I would post a final follow-up on how it all played out. (Which was pretty awesome. The players have been raving about it all weekend.) I tried to fold in the various bits of feedback, and started layering combat into bursts of narrative and regular combat. The NPCS began fighting more reactively to the players, and the players started forming counter tactics of their own in turn. I also traded individual kobolds, for a single ‘swarm’ creature of their combined hitpoints. The half blind kobold mooks stopped being a joke, once they became a 20ft radius mob. Blind or not, getting surrounded and pummeled by 6 attacks per round made them into a miniboss all their own, and the perfect enemy for the lone surrounded barbarian. (Lots of small damage sources, each rounded down with his rage, and the ability to fell multiple kobolds per swing made the formerly annoying enemies into more of an exciting fight, rather than just work.) In the end, they took the fight into their own hands, and managed to pull off a really impressive combo to score a very powerful prize.I found out one of my players actually wrote up his perspective on how it played out to post on reddit, if anyone is curious:
http://www.reddit.com/r/gametales/comments/32bcvq/dnd_5e_not_as_planned_a_leaf_from_gandalfs_book/
In any case, thanks everyone for the feedback. This session definitely made a full 180.
Fiend-Factory wrote:
Congratulations on an amazing session 
Fantastic with a follow-up!