One of my biggest pet peeves when playing is when a GM that forces things to happen when it is the PCs that should be able to affect the outcome of the plot point. I'm not talking about events that happen on the other side of the world. I'm not talking about starting the players on whatever the quest is the GM has designed. GMs aren't omniscient and can't come up with a new adventure if the PCs are uncooperative. The specific forced-events I'm referring to are when a GM takes the normal flow of the game and out of the PCs hands. It frustrates players, and worse, it makes them feel like they are just along for the ride.
These "No-Nos" are not by any means things only 'bad' or 'inexperienced' GMs try. In fact, they are extremely common in published adventures by big game companies! Odds you are can pick up many published adventures and find lots of things they say must happen that are likely to utterly fail in an actual game.
These forced events almost always come in three scenarios:
Number 1: The PCs must be captured.
It’s a common plot point in books and movies. The hero is overpowered, or knocked out, or forced to surrender and winds up needing to escape. Escape plots can be exciting and fun, but forcing them on your PCs is often a huge pain for all involved!
Getting captured is a VERY BAD thing that can be worse than dying. Especially since a captive can easily be killed by the captors after whatever horrible things they want to do. Maybe they will tie your character up and force them to eat lutefisk while watching Teletubbies, for example. In an item-heavy game, even if players escape right away, they risk losing all their hard earned treasure and items, which can really hurt. Given this, the PCs will generally fight tooth and nail to avoid getting captured.
This makes it very hard to capture PCs! PCs can be very clever about defeating even superior foes, can make very reasonable escape attempts, and can generally surprise the heck out of the GM. Almost every "PCs get caught" plot I've been a victim of has the GM resort to outright ignoring of rolls and skills to do it.
What to do about it if you really want to capture the characters? Well, if you have an absolutely great escape story, don’t force it, just wait. Sooner or later most PCs get in over their heads. Let it happen naturally, and when it does, plop them into your capture adventure! You may have to wait a bit but it will be worth it for a painless segue to the plot.
Then build up your players trust that getting captured will be fun and exciting. If you happen to get some or all of the players, let them have an exciting escape. Let the villain let slip some of their plans. When players learn that getting captured isn't a bad thing, they will be a lot more willing to get caught. It’s not as easy as it sounds--building this kind of trust between players and GMs can be a slow process.
Finally, if you must have players captured, consider alternate ways of doing it. Get players to surrender to protect someone or something makes them feel like they have more control over the outcome. This is often much better than trying to pummel them unconscious. Even better is getting them into the situation willingly. ("We have no way of finding their lair in time...but we know they always take their captives there. What we need are some brave volunteers to get captured by the enemy and break out and strike at them from within!") So, give these things some thought before you just drop a rock on your characters heads and have them wake up in jail!
Number 2: The bad guy must NOT be captured.
If you’ve seen any action/adventure movie, odds are you’ve seen this plot point. It generally goes something like this:
1) Big important bad guy encounters and maybe fights the PCs.
2) Fight goes against bad guy.
3) Bad guy escapes, to return later as an even greater threat.
Having the bad guy escape sounds like a good idea, right? You want the PCs to get to know their opponent, to interact with the big bad more than once. You want recurring villains. It’s great when PCs find out the person behind the plot is their old nemesis . So why are villain escapes a bad idea?
Well, like getting captured, players don't WANT bad guys to escape. They try hard to stop them from escaping. So more often than not, a GM whose plan absolutely relies on the baddies escaping will force the escape, thwarting the player's plans no matter how good they are. Once again, this leads PCs into the mentality of "why bother, the GM already knows what will happen."
There are several things to help deal with the villain escape problem:
Have a REALLY GOOD escape plan. Don't just figure "the villain runs away" will be good enough. Plan distractions for the PCs. Give the villain getaway vehicles/mounts that are faster than what the players have. Give the villain backup escape plans for when the first one fails. Anything you can to make the escape work without having to crush a brilliant plan on the part of a player!
Or, have the villain leave early! If the big bad has to escape, have the escape happen while there are still lots of other threats to deal with. The more there is to keep the players attention, the harder it is for them to follow. If all of the henchman are down, the PCs have nothing else to focus on but catch the escaper. Leaving after only one or two blows and some witty dialogue is often the best time.
Consider letting the PCs catch up. In a superhero game, the PCs will probably turn the villain over to the appropriate authorities...from which they can promptly escape without the PCs around to interfere. Even in a fantasy game you may be able to play off honorable PCs to accept a surrender and give the villain a chance to escape. Have the villain trade information on a more potent threat, or release hostages in exchange for being set free can also work.
If you want to introduce a villain but don't want it to have to escape, consider having a meeting that's not a fight. They could meet at an important social function, or anywhere the PCs won't want to start a fight. In some games the villain could show up and talk to the PCs through an illusionary projection or holographic communication, or even just a phone call.
If you can't get your villain away, make sure no one really knows for sure he's dead. Big explosions, collapsing lairs, whatever you do, make sure the PCs need to get away quick and the "body" is well hidden. Then he can pop back up later, perhaps with some scars and a burning hatred of the PCs that almost killed him. If PCs insist on digging through rubble to find a body, that's more of a problem, but remind them that that's not in keeping with dramatic or heroic stories.
Finally, have contingency plans. If you plan a scene where the villain will try to escape, think about what will happen to your plot if the villain CAN'T escape and how you will handle it. By way of example, here were my plans for a recent game involving some vampires covertly operating in a city. I wanted the PCs to meet the master vampire (nicknamed "The Carver") and overhear him telling one of his lieutenants (Celine) about some plans. I figured the PCs would attack. There were 2 vampire lackeys there, and another 2 in close proximity. I planned for the Carver to say a few words then tell Celine to handle it and leave. With a small PC group and 5 bad guys I figured this would keep them busy enough that he could escape without any trouble, so my plan went something like this:
Best Option: The Carver escapes because the PCs are too busy to pursue fighting the minions.
Back Up: If the PCs go after him, he's tough enough that he may be able to drive them off and escape. He’s really too powerful for them to fight yet, but he isn’t interested in sticking around right now so he won’t be pulling out all the stops and wind up killing them.
Back Up 2: If the PCs go after him and manage to kill him, Celine won't stick around to help. She'll run for it, and will then pick up and continue with his plans.
Back Up 3: If the PCs manage to somehow take out both Celine and the Carver, another one of his minions will pick up with his plans. This minion won't be as skilled or experienced, so the PCs will have an edge, and there will be a period of confusion among the bad guys. The players get rewarded for managing to pull off a tough win, but the plot goes on.
In this case, everything went smoothly and the Carver got away without a hitch, but by having these contingency plans I assured myself I wouldn't have to force his escape to keep the plot going.
Number 3: Somebody must die.
Another classic staple of fiction that people love to put in their games goes something like this:
GM: “Blood staining his robes, your mentor the archmage gasps out, ‘My pupils! You must stop......he plans to...to.. .’ and then he slips away.”
Familiar scene? The only problem is that in an RPG it tends to be followed by:
PC: "Wait! I cast Cure Critical Wounds and save him!"
GM: "Umm...you can't"
PC: "Why not?"
GM: "Ummm...because he has to die since he knows too much! Plus it gives you motivation to avenge him!"
Ok, that last line isn't usually said, but it’s what the GM thinks. I call this "The Sacrifice." It usually gets planned one of three ways:
1) Someone lives long enough to gasp out a few critical facts but dies before he can reveal everything he knows.
2) Someone important to a PC dies to provide motivation for the player (think Uncle Ben in Spider-man).
3) An actual sacrifice, when the players arrive just as some evil wizard sacrifices someone for some terrible spell.
The problem with all of these scenarios is that the GM blatantly disregards the player's healing powers. But even in a game where PCs do not have magic or supertech, a GM is going to look like a dolt by insisting that the informant dies despite the PC rolling consecutive 20s a on knowledge check to know how to treat the injury, a heal check, and a luck roll for getting a healer (or paramedic) quickly.
As with capturing, have backup plans. Make sure the characters don't know everything. One good idea is to give the PCs some reward for their trouble. Let them get a little more info, or keep him alive long enough for a final exchange with a loved one. Maybe say the PCs saved him, but he's in a coma that takes a while to recover from. If this was a “get motivation death,” nearly killing someone you care about is still pretty bad!
GMs tend to run the "sacrifice" situations by having the PCs show up before the NPC gets hurt. For example, a GM running the Spider-Man movie as a game might, in typical GM fashion, have Peter show up just as the gunman prepares to shoot Ben. Then the PC interrupts with "I've got Superhuman dexterity and I'm using every action point I've got to web-sling that gun out of his hands before he can pull the trigger!" Can Spider-Man reasonably do that? Sure. Especially if he's willing to blow everything he's got on it.
If you don't want the PCs to have control over what happens, don't give them the chance! Make the event happen “off-stage.” Or, once again, consider alternatives. If your evil wizard needs a sacrifice to cast his spell, let him escape and try again. One great sacrifice method which is a little predictable but great fun is to let the PCs rescue the intended victim but in so doing they kill a henchman, who falls on the altar and powers the spell anyway. The players get the partial win of saving the innocent person, but the plot still goes on.
Well, that ends the three big No-Nos of GMing. The important thing to keep in mind is that players should always feel like they have free will and they can affect the plot. They shouldn't ever just be along for the ride. We've got movies and books for that sort of experience! Any time a GM assumes the players won't or can't do something - they are probably wrong.
The villain murdered his captives (or hatched whatever evil scheme he had) about a half an hour before the heroes arrive. Sure, they can still retrieve the corpse(s) off the Unholy Altar Of Unpleasantry and have their friends resurrected, but first they have to deal with the villain and whatever nasty boss-level outsider he conjured up.
One of my biggest pet peeves when playing is when a GM that forces things to happen when it is the PCs that should be able to affect the outcome of the plot point. I'm not talking about starting the players on whatever the quest is the GM has designed. GMs aren't omniscient and can't come up with a new adventure if the PCs are uncooperative. :
Number 1: The PCs must be captured.
It’s a common plot point in books and movies. The hero is overpowered, or knocked out, or forced to surrender and winds up needing to escape. Escape plots can be exciting and fun, but forcing them on your PCs is often a huge pain for all involved!
Getting captured is a VERY BAD thing that can be worse than dying. Especially since a captive can easily be killed by the captors after whatever horrible things they want to do.
Very right. But just to clarify, it's perfectly OK to start a campaign with the PCs all having been captured and needing to escape. So, if you as a DM really want one of these kinds of games, then make it the opening scene of the whole campaign.
Three Big No-Nos of GMing
GM: “Blood staining his robes, your mentor the archmage gasps out, ‘My pupils! You must stop......he plans to...to.. .’ and then he slips away.”
Familiar scene? The only problem is that in an RPG it tends to be followed by:
PC: "Wait! I cast Cure Critical Wounds and save him!"
GM: "Umm...you can't"
PC: "Why not?"
GM: "Ummm...because he has to die since he knows too much! Plus it gives you motivation to avenge him!"
Actually, cure spells won't do jack on a character who's already truly dead. If you want to run this scene, just say that the poor old mentor has been poisoned and fails a Fort save against ability damage that puts his hit points well below zero. Sure, he can be restored with resurrection spells, but not right away -- and, if killed by the right effects, not ever (special weapons that force a True Resurrection or Wish in order to restore a person, which may be out of reach of your PCs).
GM: Okay. Is everyone cool with adventure that consists of escaping from the hobgoblin fort?
Players agree.
GM: So, how do they capture you? Do you want to play it, knowing that you will be eventually caught?
Only Three?
Well, I never said it was "The Three..." or "The only three..." ;)
I agree, but sometimes a little bit of cinema (or fudged dice rolls) are necessary to keep things fun.
If you need one stray fudged roll that no one will catch to let something happen, that's probably fine. But if you go into one of these things with mindset of "this WILL happen, even if I have to fudge some rolls", you are setting yourself up to wind up with so much fudge the party can't eat it all.
Very right. But just to clarify, it's perfectly OK to start a campaign with the PCs all having been captured and needing to escape.
Since its pre "on screen" time, the players had no chance to effect it, so this is fine. Just be careful with it, in that depending on how its done it may not sit well with your players...but that applies to any way you start a game. (For example, if you are planning on starting the player's captured and without gear, tell them that before they spend an hour carefully picking out all their equipment).
You want the real big no no? It's the word "must" in connection with any topic whereby, regardless of what is common sense, the DM decides to impose his own artificial order on the system.
I completely agree. These are just some examples of that overall principle.
Three Big No-Nos of GMing
Number 1: The PCs must be captured.
If you have to capture the PCs, do it 'fairly' or else start the entire adventure with them already captured. By 'Fairly' I mean by normal means whereby they are taken down in battle or drugged with whatever drug, with equal chances of escaping or dying. I started an adventure this way with them already seized - in fact it was the beginning of the campaign - and it worked pretty well.
Number 2: The bad guy must NOT be captured.
The bad guy has escape plans, which have a chance of failure, as you have pointed out. The variations in the plot you suggest are apt ...
Number 3: Somebody must die.
Somebody must die does not really work in the D&D system, better to turn up once they are dead to find a note scrawled in blood, usually ending "Beware the ...."
The idea of the sacrifice on the blood-stained alter is a good one. How about the BBEG sacrificing themselves once the rite is done if the rescue has succeeded? "I will have my revenge! Mwahahahaha! Urk!"
Of course, a smart party can blow this one for you as well .... Sometimes you just have to shrug and bear it (one DM had to do that with me when I shot his BBEG halfway through the monologue and criticalled with the words: "Bored now." ... well he turned his back, what was I to do?)
I played through the single player version first, where you get knocked out, kidnapped, and locked up in the wizard's dungeon with nary a die rolled--which sucked because I had really high ability scores and probably could've taken that gang of thugs--especially with that basilisk I was delivering. Pick it up, tear the hood off it's head--instant tommygun of petrifaction! :P
Then I wake up in the dungeon, and can't overpower the pathetically weak hobgoblin guard to escape until the next scene because it's not in the story... then I do escape, fight the wizard in a hallway--and land a hit that would've killed him (did I mention I rolled high ability scores? :D ) but the story says he teleports away after the first time you hit him so he can attack you later at the exit with reinforcements under the cover of a darkness spell. Except, you know, he's dead--so no teleporting or returning to dramatically block my escape.
Still, it was fun looting the dead wizard’s dungeon.
I've found keeping up to date with what my PCs can and cant do is a great help to keeping "must" things happening. An example of this is the poisoned dying friend as ArcTan put forth you can pre roll the result using PC's heal checks.
As for fair, I think every PCs needs to remember the world is not fair from time to time. This is something PCs who tend to win most encounters need to be reminded. Capture is one way but not the only way. It is fair to throw ten to one odds against them for them to work out what to do.
With action points any villain can have his speech with out the “bored now” comments being anything to worry about unless they are willing to match an unknown number of action points the villain just spent. This can also work for the dying friend using action points to stay alive.
As stated nothing should count only on a Must. Planning is just that planning anyone who has used a plan for anything knows that if everything goes to the plan you just didn't notice the something that didn't.
Three Big No-Nos of GMing
One of my biggest pet peeves when playing is when a GM that forces things to happen when it is the PCs that should be able to affect the outcome of the plot point.
I agree that no effect scenarios are very frustrating as a player, but also as a DM. If players are more cunning and proactive than yourself, you can find DMs using the 'I'm a God' wand to prevent players from walking over their stories. If anyone has read Knights of the Dinner Table, they would see what happens as a DM writes a story and the players create their own.
Example:
Story Written: Players meet the beautiful Princess and she gets captured. The PCs must go rescue her for reward and xp.
Actual Story: Players meet the Princess privately and decide they can make some quick cash by kidnapping and ransoming the Princess. Even worse, the players state that their actions are based upon their good alignment because their motivation is to teach the King to be more appreciative of his Daughter and protect her better in the future.
These forced events almost always come in three scenarios:
Number 1: The PCs must be captured.
Honestly, capturing PCs is not that difficult once you up a CR rating to +8-+10 over the party level. If a Stone Giant cannot knock out a 1st level character in a single blow even with the -4 to hit, you just have to state you didn't roll a 1 or enough damage.
That said, only a bad DM would do that to a mid/high level party and not return their possessions to them at some point in the story. Matter of fact, this tactic can work both ways. If a DM is really damaging the PCs, he could begin making his later attacks to be subdual damage, that way the party is captured rather than killed.
Personally, I fell the 'captured' scenario should only be done to low level PCs. It creates a villain the PCs hate right from the beginning. The PCs can grow and eventually face the villain many levels later.
Example: The King calls for all Humans to captured and perform slave labor because the Trade Guilds are raising their goods without reason. The Trade Guilds are too powerful to attack directly, so the King has to control the populace. At first, the players believe the King is a tyrant, but at later levels they discover this was a desperate act of a King about to lose control of his Kingdom from the evil and powerful Trade Guilds. If the players do manage to kill the King, then the villains are unchecked and are more powerful (CR +4 or higher encounters instead of CR +0-+2) when the players are fighting for their freedoms.
As far as a DM Don't with this type of encounter. Do not punish resourceful PCs. If one PC runs away and has good skills to avoid being tracked, don't punish that player. Find a way to include that player later on. If the group stops being captured, don't feel ashamed by sending a significantly more powerful force the second time.
Example: PCs manage to kill 20 1st level Fighters, so the next encounter you send a some wizards/clerics to use Hold Person/Sleep while their Goblins rogues hit them with saps. If that doesn't work, send in the Mind Flayer with his Gnoll Rangers to track the party.
It is realistic that if the villain’s band doesn't return, or returns with word of failure, the PCs will be regarded as a greater threat.
Number 2: The bad guy must NOT be captured.
If you’ve seen any action/adventure movie, odds are you’ve seen this plot point. It generally goes something like this:
1) Big important bad guy encounters and maybe fights the PCs.
2) Fight goes against bad guy.
3) Bad guy escapes, to return later as an even greater threat.
Having the bad guy escape sounds like a good idea, right? You want the PCs to get to know their opponent, to interact with the big bad more than once. You want recurring villains. It’s great when PCs find out the person behind the plot is their old nemesis . So why are villain escapes a bad idea?
Well, like getting captured, players don't WANT bad guys to escape. They try hard to stop them from escaping. So more often than not, a GM whose plan absolutely relies on the baddies escaping will force the escape, thwarting the player's plans no matter how good they are. Once again, this leads PCs into the mentality of "why bother, the GM already knows what will happen."
There are several things to help deal with the villain escape problem:
Have a REALLY GOOD escape plan. Don't just figure "the villain runs away" will be good enough. Plan distractions for the PCs. Give the villain getaway vehicles/mounts that are faster than what the players have. Give the villain backup escape plans for when the first one fails. Anything you can to make the escape work without having to crush a brilliant plan on the part of a player!
Or, have the villain leave early! If the big bad has to escape, have the escape happen while there are still lots of other threats to deal with. The more there is to keep the players attention, the harder it is for them to follow. If all of the henchman are down, the PCs have nothing else to focus on but catch the escaper. Leaving after only one or two blows and some witty dialogue is often the best time.
There is nothing inherently wrong with having your Villain escape. At early levels, their are many methods. At later levels, it becomes much easier with magic.
Examples: At early levels, Villain captures some commoners and each is being held by a skeleton that will kill them if the players advance. The Villain leaves out a secret door as the PCs try to contemplate how to overcome this scene. By later levels, Dimension Door, Teleport, and Plane Shift make it fairly easy to escape. Even lower level spells can help, such as Rope Trick. Players Track the escape to a point, then the tracks are GONE. Did they lose the tracks or did the villain teleport? No one knows.
Finally, have contingency plans. If you plan a scene where the villain will try to escape, think about what will happen to your plot if the villain CAN'T escape and how you will handle it. By way of example, here were my plans for a recent game involving some vampires covertly operating in a city. I wanted the PCs to meet the master vampire (nicknamed "The Carver") and overhear him telling one of his lieutenants (Celine) about some plans. I figured the PCs would attack. There were 2 vampire lackeys there, and another 2 in close proximity. I planned for the Carver to say a few words then tell Celine to handle it and leave. With a small PC group and 5 bad guys I figured this would keep them busy enough that he could escape without any trouble, so my plan went something like this:
Best Option: The Carver escapes because the PCs are too busy to pursue fighting the minions.
Back Up: If the PCs go after him, he's tough enough that he may be able to drive them off and escape. He’s really too powerful for them to fight yet, but he isn’t interested in sticking around right now so he won’t be pulling out all the stops and wind up killing them.
Back Up 2: If the PCs go after him and manage to kill him, Celine won't stick around to help. She'll run for it, and will then pick up and continue with his plans.
Back Up 3: If the PCs manage to somehow take out both Celine and the Carver, another one of his minions will pick up with his plans. This minion won't be as skilled or experienced, so the PCs will have an edge, and there will be a period of confusion among the bad guys. The players get rewarded for managing to pull off a tough win, but the plot goes on.
In this case, everything went smoothly and the Carver got away without a hitch, but by having these contingency plans I assured myself I wouldn't have to force his escape to keep the plot going.
I have to agree that a GOOD Dm must have options available. I personally hate pre-made adventures. I use a very different method top create my adventures.
First, I write a story idea. Usually a one paragraph idea of what I want to happen. Then I write a list of encounter types for that level. Then, I tell the story. During the story, I drop in some of the encounters I WANT to occur, but how they occur is entirely based upon the PCs.
Example: Players are mid level and are tracking one of the Slave Masters, a LE Fighter who is an unarmed specialist who thinks himself stronger than any Monk. He likes to grapples the strongest opponent while his underlings either grapple, subdue, or use magic to paralyze opponents. One encounter is written 12 4th level Fighters with Improved Unarmed, Improved Grapple, Weapon Focus Unarmed, and Weapon Specialization Unarmed. In game, the players decide to roam the city streets and I decide that a press gang of 12 Fighter would be perfect. Now I insert this Challenge. The players decided what their actions would be, I reacted and decided what would be their first Challenge. If the PCs instead decided to go out into the Wilderness and try to find some Slavers, I could also drop this encounter in as some arrogant slavers in a camp. Either way, I am prepared with an adventure while still maintaining the illusion that the players are in control of their actions.
Number 3: Somebody must die.
Another classic staple of fiction that people love to put in their games goes something like this:
GM: “Blood staining his robes, your mentor the archmage gasps out, ‘My pupils! You must stop......he plans to...to.. .’ and then he slips away.”
Familiar scene? The only problem is that in an RPG it tends to be followed by:
PC: "Wait! I cast Cure Critical Wounds and save him!"
GM: "Umm...you can't"
PC: "Why not?"
GM: "Ummm...because he has to die since he knows too much! Plus it gives you motivation to avenge him!"
Ok, that last line isn't usually said, but it’s what the GM thinks. I call this "The Sacrifice." It usually gets planned one of three ways:
This is probably the hardest thing to do, but there are easy methods for each.
1) Someone lives long enough to gasp out a few critical facts but dies before he can reveal everything he knows.
Instead of dying form damage, die from Poison or Old Age. It takes more than a round to save someone form Poison, and when they die, it is too late to reverse the effect. So if a person is lying there with a dagger wound, but dies from Poison, that initial reaction to just cast a Cure spell won't save them.
2) Someone important to a PC dies to provide motivation for the player (think Uncle Ben in Spider-man).
The Uncle Ben story is very easy to do. Solution: Have Uncle Ben die when PC is away. He comes back to find him already dead. Motivation speech came before he was dead and PC is still emotionally effected because they could have listened to the advice and saved him.
3) An actual sacrifice, when the players arrive just as some evil wizard sacrifices someone for some terrible spell.
This is really the toughest scenario. If the Villain is doing a Coup De Grace, stopping him is fairly easy, but if the Villain is casting a Death Knell spell, the PCs MUST win initiative, disrupt spell, and save the dying victim. If the Villain just dropped the victim into a swarm of rats in a pit, this also creates unique problem solving, as the PCs must split up into two groups. One to save the victim, while the other faces the Villain. This is a more 'classic' method of the scenario. One PC faces the Villain, two face the henchman while the last saves the victim and protects them from harm.
Well, that ends the three big No-Nos of GMing. The important thing to keep in mind is that players should always feel like they have free will and they can affect the plot. They shouldn't ever just be along for the ride. We've got movies and books for that sort of experience! Any time a GM assumes the players won't or can't do something - they are probably wrong.
Personally, I don't think of these as DM no-nos. They are more good versus bad ways of handling this types of encounters.
DM No-Nos #1: Never tell a player he can't do that.
The player has free will, just as the character would. If the action is early in the campaign, pause the action to confirm alignment. If you feel the action is out of alignment, ask the player if he would like to change the action (because it is out of alignment) or change his alignment (so the player can perform the action, and you know what to expect from the player from then on). Most mature players will stop the action once he understands how you view Alignment versus how he does. Most immature players will tell you they will remain their alignment and perform the action anyway. Unless that player is in an alignment restricted class (such as cleric or paladin), just note behind the screen that the player's alignment is ACTUALLY and deal with him based upon that. Example: If the player performs evil actions but believes he is playing good, if someone uses a Holy weapon against him, add the 2d6 additional damage. If he personally identifies the item, call it an Unholy weapon. If someone else does, they may lie to him since he is negatively effected by this Holy weapon.
DM No-Nos #2: Don't come unprepared for an players' action.
If you cannot say no, they you must be prepared to say this is what happens. Having some basic archetypes of commoners and experts written, plus some basic archetypes such as a Scout, Wizard, or Pickpocket, you save yourself a lot of time. I usually begin a campaign with each archetype at 3 levels, 3rd, 6th, and 9th. The common person, the noteworthy person, and the single expert. By having 3 commoners, 3 experts, 3 scouts, 3 guards/fighter, 3 rogues, and 3 wizards/cleric pre written prior to any campaign, I have created response adventures to anything my players do. The only choice I have to make is how many do I have to produce to face the players. One pickpocket is a nice low level adventure, but multiple ones are a gang. I many only need one Expert, but Scouts/Wizard/Cleric/Guards could also be around for support.
I usually go further and design my encounters using this method changing just basic details. Example: Players run into Hobgoblin Rangers. They ambush and kill them. Later on, a different group of Hobgoblin Rangers ambush the party. The CR is exactly the same, but the actual encounter is tactically different. The players are not even surprised most of the time because it makes sense that there would be more than one patrol about. You may even be able to use this same encounter 4-5 times without it becoming boring for the PCs especially if you swap out one or two Hobgoblin Rangers for another class.
I actually had this occur in one game session. The DM made a dungeon with a single track with branches off to the sides. I was party leader and said let's go straight down the middle and ignore the side chambers as to be at our strongest when facing the leader. The DM never note anything past the end of the tunnel and assumed we would just explore first to gather loot. He underestimated that he did a wonderful job at creating a villain that we wanted to kill very badly. The party agreed whole heartedly. After apologizing for saying some bad things to me, and for not designing the adventure better to prevent such a choice, we just did the adventure as he wrote it. For me, I felt terrible for upsetting the DM, but I felt worse because my roleplaying and tactics were denied because of an unprepared DM.
DM No-Nos #3: Don't break the rules. OR Use Rule Zero sparingly.
Another action occurred in an adventure with the same DM. I successfully performed a Diplomacy roll versus a Balor and the DM decided the Balor would move to me, grapple me, and then a Gate would open and he would take me away to be killed, no save.
On one hand, the DM was correct to decide to have the Balor take me away, but to have me killed was unfair. If the roll was unsuccessful, I would understand. Also, Balors cannot Gate, so some other being was casting Gate for the Balor. Third, the Balor was allowed to move, grapple, then move through Gate without the other players having a chance to respond. While it was unlikely I could get away next action, or even the party killing the Balor before his next action, it wasn't even allowed.
While it created a good story, not only did I lose my character, I was polymorphed into a Vampire without a save. When the players did finally rescue me, they had to destroy me and resurrect me because they did not know I was polymorphed (but I easily could have been killed by vampires so I didn't complain about that point). This took my character out of play for many game sessions. Most of the players went up 4 levels when that occurred. At that point, without equipment and 4 levels lower than the party, I rose to the challenge and actually saved 3 players from dying from a Wail of the Banshee spell thanks to Countersong.
Breaking the rules is almost like breaking rules one and two simultaneously because if the player did that, you would say they couldn't (breaking rule #1) and breaking rule two by appearing lazy or unprepared by not following the rules to create your effect, you have effectively cheated.
They are some magical effects that are not covered by the rules, but most of those should be limited to the outer planes (like renewing fountains of potent magical acid). If you make something to cool or powerful, the player may want to take this place over for themselves. (So if you come up with the great idea that the effect is dispelled when the villain is killed, the players may surprise you by using Imprisonment or Trap the Soul). Usually you are better off not using such an 'interesting' effect. Also, don't forget to reward players for overcoming difficult effects, such as a no air environment which doesn't effect the undead, but will effect the players (especially if you plan to neutralize any devices/spells the players will use to overcome this dangerous environment).
Breaking the rules can be either a creative expression or a lazy DM tool. Just because you determine what happens and it is 'your game', it is also your players’ game. If they weren't there, you are just a novelist. A DM (or storyteller) needs someone there. Work with your players so everyone has fun.
(For example, if you are planning on starting the player's captured and without gear, tell them that before they spend an hour carefully picking out all their equipment).
I would tell my players to choose some general equipment, so you can make them happy when they finally gain weapons and stuff. Also, it might be important when starting a campaign like this to ask that the players not make characters that can function well without equipment (especially monks).
Once I did run a fun little adventure where the PCs were captured, they walked into the dungeon and immediately fell through a trapdoor. No one objected, and it was all pretty cool.
If you want somebody to die/escape, and you know your players, you can try to make it so the players can't succeed. (i.e. make the damage too serious to be cured, have the villain teleport out when you know none of the party have Dimension Lock, etc.)
I agree, but sometimes a little bit of cinema (or fudged dice rolls) are necessary to keep things fun. Like once in a while I might fudge a dice roll for the players or the bad guys if it's absolutely necessary to keep him or her alive. But always do it subtly or else it's stupid and never make a habit out of it.
I personally don't use a DM screen. I've never been big on fudged rolls. I run at higher levels of game play, so if I want the villain to get away, I normally can. And guess what, players tend to die before surrendering (I'm 1 and 1). Even if it's not life threatening to surrender. That's their choice. As for somebody dying, I've had my players contact the dead from beyond the grave for questioning. I have resourceful players. (Now to sound arrogant "Ask me a hard question now?"
Three Big No-Nos of GMing
One of my biggest pet peeves when playing is when a GM that forces things to happen when it is the PCs that should be able to affect the outcome of the plot point.
I agree that no effect scenarios are very frustrating as a player, but also as a DM. If players are more cunning and proactive than yourself, you can find DMs using the 'I'm a God' wand to prevent players from walking over their stories. If anyone has read Knights of the Dinner Table, they would see what happens as a DM writes a story and the players create their own.
Example:
Story Written: Players meet the beautiful Princess and she gets captured. The PCs must go rescue her for reward and xp.
Actual Story: Players meet the Princess privately and decide they can make some quick cash by kidnapping and ransoming the Princess. Even worse, the players state that their actions are based upon their good alignment because their motivation is to teach the King to be more appreciative of his Daughter and protect her better in the future.
These forced events almost always come in three scenarios:
Number 1: The PCs must be captured.
Honestly, capturing PCs is not that difficult once you up a CR rating to +8-+10 over the party level. If a Stone Giant cannot knock out a 1st level character in a single blow even with the -4 to hit, you just have to state you didn't roll a 1 or enough damage. That said, only a bad DM would do that to a mid/high level party and not return their possessions to them at some point in the story. Matter of fact, this tactic can work both ways. If a DM is really damaging the PCs, he could begin making his later attacks to be subdual damage, that way the party is captured rather than killed.
Personally, I fell the 'captured' scenario should only be done to low level PCs. It creates a villain the PCs hate right from the beginning. The PCs can grow and eventually face the villain many levels later.
Example: The King calls for all Humans to captured and perform slave labor because the Trade Guilds are raising their goods without reason. The Trade Guilds are too powerful to attack directly, so the King has to control the populace. At first, the players believe the King is a tyrant, but at later levels they discover this was a desperate act of a King about to lose control of his Kingdom from the evil and powerful Trade Guilds. If the players do manage to kill the King, then the villains are unchecked and are more powerful (CR +4 or higher encounters instead of CR +0-+2) when the players are fighting for their freedoms.
As far as a DM Don't with this type of encounter. Do not punish resourceful PCs. If one PC runs away and has good skills to avoid being tracked, don't punish that player. Find a way to include that player later on. If the group stops being captured, don't feel ashamed by sending a significantly more powerful force the second time.
Example: PCs manage to kill 20 1st level Fighters, so the next encounter you send a some wizards/clerics to use Hold Person/Sleep while their Goblins rogues hit them with saps. If that doesn't work, send in the Mind Flayer with his Gnoll Rangers to track the party.
It is realistic that if the villain’s band doesn't return, or returns with word of failure, the PCs will be regarded as a greater threat.
Number 2: The bad guy must NOT be captured..
There is nothing inherently wrong with having your Villain escape. At early levels, there are many methods. At later levels, it becomes much easier with magic.
Examples: At early levels, Villain captures some commoners and each is being held by a skeleton that will kill them if the players advance. The Villain leaves out a secret door as the PCs try to contemplate how to overcome this scene. By later levels, Dimension Door, Teleport, and Plane Shift make it fairly easy to escape. Even lower level spells can help, such as Rope Trick. Players Track the escape to a point, then the tracks are GONE. Did they lose the tracks or did the villain teleport? No one knows.
Finally, have contingency plans.
I have to agree that a GOOD Dm must have options available. I personally hate pre-made adventures. I use a very different method top create my adventures. First, I write a story idea. Usually a one paragraph idea of what I want to happen. Then I write a list of encounter types for that level. Then, I tell the story. During the story, I drop in some of the encounters I WANT to occur, but how they occur is entirely based upon the PCs.
Example: Players are mid level and are tracking one of the Slave Masters, a LE Fighter who is an unarmed specialist who thinks himself stronger than any Monk. He likes to grapples the strongest opponent while his underlings either grapple, subdue, or use magic to paralyze opponents. One encounter is written 12 4th level Fighters with Improved Unarmed, Improved Grapple, Weapon Focus Unarmed, and Weapon Specialization Unarmed. In game, the players decide to roam the city streets and I decide that a press gang of 12 Fighter would be perfect. Now I insert this Challenge. The players decided what their actions would be, I reacted and decided what would be their first Challenge. If the PCs instead decided to go out into the Wilderness and try to find some Slavers, I could also drop this encounter in as some arrogant slavers in a camp. Either way, I am prepared with an adventure while still maintaining the illusion that the players are in control of their actions.
Number 3: Somebody must die. I call this "The Sacrifice." It usually gets planned one of three ways:
This is probably the hardest thing to do, but there are easy methods for each.
1) Someone lives long enough to gasp out a few critical facts but dies before he can reveal everything he knows.
Instead of dying form damage, die from Poison or Old Age. It takes more than a round to save someone form Poison, and when they die, it is too late to reverse the effect. So if a person is lying there with a dagger wound, but dies from Poison, that initial reaction to just cast a Cure spell won't save them.
2) Someone important to a PC dies to provide motivation for the player (think Uncle Ben in Spider-man).
The Uncle Ben story is very easy to do. Solution: Have Uncle Ben die when PC is away. He comes back to find him already dead. Motivation speech came before he was dead and PC is still emotionally effected because they could have listened to the advice and saved him.
3) An actual sacrifice, when the players arrive just as some evil wizard sacrifices someone for some terrible spell.
This is really the toughest scenario. If the Villain is doing a Coup De Grace, stopping him is fairly easy, but if the Villain is casting a Death Knell spell, the PCs MUST win initiative, disrupt spell, and save the dying victim. If the Villain just dropped the victim into a swarm of rats in a pit, this also creates unique problem solving, as the PCs must split up into two groups. One to save the victim, while the other faces the Villain. This is a more 'classic' method of the scenario. One PC faces the Villain, two face the henchman while the last saves the victim and protects them from harm.
Well, that ends the three big No-Nos of GMing. The important thing to keep in mind is that players should always feel like they have free will and they can affect the plot. They shouldn't ever just be along for the ride. We've got movies and books for that sort of experience! Any time a GM assumes the players won't or can't do something - they are probably wrong.
Personally, I don't think of these as DM no-nos. They are more good versus bad ways of handling this types of encounters.
DM No-Nos #1: Never tell a player he can't do that.
The player has free will, just as the character would. If the action is early in the campaign, pause the action to confirm alignment. If you feel the action is out of alignment, ask the player if he would like to change the action (because it is out of alignment) or change his alignment (so the player can perform the action, and you know what to expect from the player from then on). Most mature players will stop the action once he understands how you view Alignment versus how he does. Most immature players will tell you they will remain their alignment and perform the action anyway. Unless that player is in an alignment restricted class (such as cleric or paladin), just note behind the screen that the player's alignment is ACTUALLY and deal with him based upon that. Example: If the player performs evil actions but believes he is playing good, if someone uses a Holy weapon against him, add the 2d6 additional damage. If he personally identifies the item, call it an Unholy weapon. If someone else does, they may lie to him since he is negatively effected by this Holy weapon.
DM No-Nos #2: Don't come unprepared for an players' action.
If you cannot say no, they you must be prepared to say this is what happens. Having some basic archetypes of commoners and experts written, plus some basic archetypes such as a Scout, Wizard, or Pickpocket, you save yourself a lot of time. I usually begin a campaign with each archetype at 3 levels, 3rd, 6th, and 9th. The common person, the noteworthy person, and the single expert. By having 3 commoners, 3 experts, 3 scouts, 3 guards/fighter, 3 rogues, and 3 wizards/cleric pre written prior to any campaign, I have created response adventures to anything my players do. The only choice I have to make is how many do I have to produce to face the players. One pickpocket is a nice low level adventure, but multiple ones are a gang. I many only need one Expert, but Scouts/Wizard/Cleric/Guards could also be around for support.
I usually go further and design my encounters using this method changing just basic details. Example: Players run into Hobgoblin Rangers. They ambush and kill them. Later on, a different group of Hobgoblin Rangers ambush the party. The CR is exactly the same, but the actual encounter is tactically different. The players are not even surprised most of the time because it makes sense that there would be more than one patrol about. You may even be able to use this same encounter 4-5 times without it becoming boring for the PCs especially if you swap out one or two Hobgoblin Rangers for another class.
I actually had this occur in one game session. The DM made a dungeon with a single track with branches off to the sides. I was party leader and said let's go straight down the middle and ignore the side chambers as to be at our strongest when facing the leader. The DM never note anything past the end of the tunnel and assumed we would just explore first to gather loot. He underestimated that he did a wonderful job at creating a villain that we wanted to kill very badly. The party agreed whole heartedly. After apologizing for saying some bad things to me, and for not designing the adventure better to prevent such a choice, we just did the adventure as he wrote it. For me, I felt terrible for upsetting the DM, but I felt worse because my roleplaying and tactics were denied because of an unprepared DM.
DM No-Nos #3: Don't break the rules. OR Use Rule Zero sparingly.
Another action occurred in an adventure with the same DM. I successfully performed a Diplomacy roll versus a Balor and the DM decided the Balor would move to me, grapple me, and then a Gate would open and he would take me away to be killed, no save. On one hand, the DM was correct to decide to have the Balor take me away, but to have me killed was unfair. If the roll was unsuccessful, I would understand. Also, Balors cannot Gate, so some other being was casting Gate for the Balor. Third, the Balor was allowed to move, grapple, then move through Gate without the other players having a chance to respond. While it was unlikely I could get away next action, or even the party killing the Balor before his next action, it wasn't even allowed.
While it created a good story, not only did I lose my character, I was polymorphed into a Vampire without a save. When the players did finally rescue me, they had to destroy me and resurrect me because they did not know I was polymorphed (but I easily could have been killed by vampires so I didn't complain about that point). This took my character out of play for many game sessions. Most of the players went up 4 levels when that occurred. At that point, without equipment and 4 levels lower than the party, I rose to the challenge and actually saved 3 players from dying from a Wail of the Banshee spell thanks to Countersong.
Breaking the rules is almost like breaking rules one and two simultaneously because if the player did that, you would say they couldn't (breaking rule #1) and breaking rule two by appearing lazy or unprepared by not following the rules to create your effect, you have effectively cheated.
They are some magical effects that are not covered by the rules, but most of those should be limited to the outer planes (like renewing fountains of potent magical acid). If you make something too cool or powerful, the player may want to take this place over for themselves. (So if you come up with the great idea that the effect is dispelled when the villain is killed, the players may surprise you by using Imprisonment or Trap the Soul). Usually you are better off not using such an 'interesting' effect. Also, don't forget to reward players for overcoming difficult effects, such as a no air environment which doesn't effect the undead, but will effect the players (especially if you plan to neutralize any devices/spells the players will use to overcome this dangerous environment).
Breaking the rules can be either a creative expression or a lazy DM tool. Just because you determine what happens and it is 'your game', it is also your players game. If they weren't there, you are just a novelist. A DM (or storyteller) needs someone there. Work with your players so everyone has fun.
When players try something, you should give it a fair chance of success. If it is hard, make the roll hard. If it is easy, just let it work.
The ship of my heroes is going to be attacked by a Kraken who manages to destroy the ship (after the PCs have weakened it by cutting some arms). Then the Kraken captures them and brings them in his undersea cave. ...maybe I should let them make swim checks (with a big penalty due to the stormy sea) and let them fight against the Kraken's grapple attempts.
