Retroactive Decisions

[Potato_Priest]

What do you do about retroactive actions of the players?
This happens all the time. For example, the players, who have a cart for the purposes of carrying things, will generally say that they retroactively did whatever they had to to to protect said cart and its loot. Generally, this problem arises because I forget to ask them if they bring their cart on X adventure, and the players don't mention it either, and probably aren't thinking about it until it's important. So we get to the dungeon, with nobody thinking about whether they have their cart or not.

Situation 1: Let's say they have to cross a tightrope to get across a very deep chasm. I say, "you'll have to leave the cart behind to be able to cross this precariously strung single rope across a chasm. The players say "Oh, well we obviously, left the cart behind when we started this adventure."

Situation 2: If, instead of the tightrope example, the players encounter a large chamber and have to fight a dragon. They win, and I say "You finish off the dragon, and help yourselves to it's treasure hoard. Everyone figure out your carry weights, because there's a lot of treasure here for the taking." The players then say "Well let's see, my carry weight is 270 pounds, so with the cart I should be able to carry 1,080 pounds of loot."

Disclaimer: Neither of those situations is something that's really happened with my group, they are just the sort of things that do happen.

I don't think the players are actively trying to cheat by not mentioning their decision about the cart before hand, but it's just a lapse of memory, and they retroactively assume they did the smartest thing. These are only a couple of examples of tough retroactive decisions, but this sort of thing happens all the time, due to the fact that you can't possibly describe everything you are doing, or the flow of the game is interrupted by constant questions about what's happening with the cart.

So, what do you guys generally do about retroactive decisions?

[Sigreid]

I think the simple answer is you tell them that from now on they only bring the cart if they tell you they do before they leave so you don't have to guess whether it's with them or not.

[JoeJ]

You might try writing "Cart!" on a post-it note and stick it on the back of your DM screen to remind you to ask about the cart at the beginning of the next adventure. After a few times doing this, the cart will likely remain in your awareness to the point that the note can go away.

Also, if you use minis you should definitely have one for the cart. Not only does it take up space on a battlefield, but seeing the mini sitting there on the table will help remind you and the other players that it needs to be considered.

[MrStabby]

Well there is the specific and the general. With the cart specifically, just reminding them and asking makes sense.

Then there is the unforseeable. Players cannot describe every action and there are a lot of legitimate assumptions that may be important later. These are harder. I think some broad sweeping rules that cover more situations are needed: "unless mentioned it is assumed that..." type rules.


Some examples of other rules:
Everything that can be carried will be carried
If you behave like you can see in the dark and don't have dark vision you have lit a torch
If you are discussing tactics with other characters you are not being stealthy
You are assumed to eat one day's worth or rations every day
Your weapons are sheathed
You take your armour off to sleep

[JellyPooga]

This discussion reminds me of Dm of the Rings (http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1273) :smallbiggrin:

As for retroactive decisions in the general sense; I'm pretty permissive. I don't need every player to explain every little detail. As MrStabby says, there's a lot of things that can be assumed, so if they give me an explanation that makes sense, I'll let them have their cake and eat it. To go with the cart example;

"We knew we were going to be going into a forest; why would we bring the cart somewhere we knew it wouldn't fit? Of course it's back in town; we were hardly just going to leave it on the edge of the forest in Bandit Country." Is acceptable. The tightrope thing in the OP? Not so much!

[Coffee_Dragon]

As always, talking is a good idea. Tell your players what you think the issue is. Ask them about their own thoughts and concerns. Don't try to trick them or punish them. Maybe tell them you reserve the right to assume that any practical arrangements will remain the same unless they tell you otherwise.

[Temperjoke]

Sometimes these sort of things are on both the players and the DM. Yes, the players should think about some of the details, like the cart example, but at the same time, the DM should also remember to ask them about some of the details like this, with questions like "So, who's bringing what from town? Are you bringing the cart with you, or are you leaving it here?" For both sides, this is why it's important to keep ongoing notes regarding decisions like that.

"Oh yeah, we totally have the cart with us."
"According to my notes, you left it on the other side of the crevice because you couldn't think of a way to get it across."

On the other hand, small details can be glossed over. A traveling individual is likely going to be wearing their armor while sleeping (if they have it), for example, and while they might not wear their sword belt, or at least might not have it tight on their waist, they are going to have it at hand. That means it's safe to assume they've got basic combat equipment ready. Now, if you've asked them if they remove their equipment for the night, and they said yes, then that is a different matter. Are they drinking water as they're traveling? More than likely, unless specific circumstances caused you to ask them (traveling in a desert requires a balance of drinking and conserving water supplies for example), then their answer should dictate.

[War_lord]

On the other hand, small details can be glossed over. A traveling individual is likely going to be wearing their armor while sleeping (if they have it)

Speaking personally, if a player wanted to sleep with anything heavier then light armor on, I wouldn't give them the full benefits of a long rest, because you can't comfortably sleep in Chain or Plate armor, it's too heavy and it messes with heating and cooling, so they ought to get exhaustion over time.

[Potato_Priest]

As always, talking is a good idea. Tell your players what you think the issue is. Ask them about their own thoughts and concerns. Don't try to trick them or punish them. Maybe tell them you reserve the right to assume that any practical arrangements will remain the same unless they tell you otherwise.

Yeah, the reason I came to the forums for a solution is because I don't think that punishing them is a good idea.

My players have in the past have been annoyed by the level of specifics I try to extract when I DM. I think I should have a talk about how I'm just trying to avoid weird retroactive stuff, and maybe establish some baseline assumptions.

[Temperjoke]

Speaking personally, if a player wanted to sleep with anything heavier then light armor on, I wouldn't give them the full benefits of a long rest, because you can't comfortably sleep in Chain or Plate armor, it's too heavy and it messes with heating and cooling, so they ought to get exhaustion over time.

I'm not sure about this. I don't want to debate it here, since I think its been debated and debunked before, but I believe this is a common mistake made regarding chain and plate armor.

[War_lord]

Anyway, I agree with what you said about the cart. If the OP wants to stop his players pulling Schrodinger's Cart (good idea for a magic item) without punishing them, they just have to be prompted when it comes up.

[Isaire]

Speaking personally, if a player wanted to sleep with anything heavier then light armor on, I wouldn't give them the full benefits of a long rest, because you can't comfortably sleep in Chain or Plate armor, it's too heavy and it messes with heating and cooling, so they ought to get exhaustion over time.

Eh. I guess there's some truth to that, but not sure that there's much need to punish fighters more, seeing as they and clerics will be the main classes that lose out and clerics are still full casters after that. Kind of unfortunate for the more martial classes to be disadvantaged every night..

[War_lord]

Eh. I guess there's some truth to that, but not sure that there's much need to punish fighters more, seeing as they and clerics will be the main classes that lose out and clerics are still full casters after that. Kind of unfortunate for the more martial classes to be disadvantaged every night..

Well, as a DM I wouldn't have the players be ambushed at night with no warning every night, maybe once in an entire campaign. There's nothing wrong with making the PC's fight outside their comfort zone once in a while (Out of the Abyss does a great job of that). But anyway, end of the tangent.

[Sigreid]

Eh. I guess there's some truth to that, but not sure that there's much need to punish fighters more, seeing as they and clerics will be the main classes that lose out and clerics are still full casters after that. Kind of unfortunate for the more martial classes to be disadvantaged every night..


Well, as a DM I wouldn't have the players be ambushed at night with no warning every night, maybe once in an entire campaign. There's nothing wrong with making the PC's fight outside their comfort zone once in a while (Out of the Abyss does a great job of that). But anyway, end of the tangent.

Tiny hut takes care of that really well as well if the party has a wizard.