Players characters evading direct questions

[KorvinStarmast]

They don't trust. Either they don't trust the NPCs or they don't trust you.

Most likely root cause. The why may vary.

Sounds like they have nothing to offer.

Spoiler: nice analogy

Show

They're poor kids from the projects with no material or spiritual resources and no pertinent information, and you expect them to say something they have no reason to know is relevant. If they don't know the Changelings have any interests in the Muir Woods they have no reason to mention them. And they're in this situation because they have faulty (out of character, it sounds like) expectations of the nature of the Seelie court as romantic crusaders against evil in all its forms.

Except you don't expect this to be their induction into the Unseelie, despite the situation as you described being almost custom designed to produce that outcome! Seriously, this is a starting story for a group to be inducted into the Unseelie court after seeing the selfish hypocrisy of the Seelie not acting except for their own. (Honour is a lie, writ large in their lives)

Your social scene was just the players being asked for a password when they didn't know the password and they didn't even know that the password could ever have existed or been learned.

If the players have various experiences with "gotcha" GMing, that will inform their reaction. It takes coaching, as a GM, to sometimes get past that. It also takes, to follow up on the point Kish made, establishing a trust relationship.

Talakeal:
It may be that you play mostly with people (based on your many experience-based posts) who have zero or low social skills...a situation that puts the fun into dysfunctional but not in a satisfying way.
I have learned to leave groups like that.

[Vyke]

They don't know about the freehold though, they don't know there is a shared location. That's why I say the only way they could produce the password is at random, just spooling out every piece of information they possess without any intentionality because they don't know what, if any, of it is relevant.

They "have" the password, but they don't and can't know they're being asked for a password because they don't have the context that lets them percieve that.

"Look we'd like your help in fighting some werewolves and fomori. We don't know the number but we have done some scouting and we do know they plan to attack a place called Muir Wood. Since we know where it is we can combine our forces and ambush them, hopefully minimising our own causalities. Or we know where they lair so we can attack them in their own home, a tenement block not far from here. We're happy to discuss what resources we can bring to the fight if you have anyone near by that can support it."

"Hmmmm. Muir wood. Yes, I think my superiors might be interested in such an alliance. As neighbours we would be happy to stand by you if you would stand by us in the future. Nothing that would make you uncomfortable, of course."

And that there, is a seed of a future adventure.

They aren't being asked to say random words until they accidentally give a password. They are being asked to state clearly what they know about the threat. The Seelie want to know what is happening and what the players want them to get themselves into. As far as we're aware (Talakeal, correct me if I'm wrong) this might be one of the few things they specifically know to be the case. They don't know how much the Seelie care about it but they are 100% going to have to tell them where it is at some point anyway if only to get their allies where they need to be.

And if they don't... no problem. Just a harder fight with no allies. Maybe a fight they lose.

It's not unreasonable. This is the conflict that needs to be resolved in the scene. How would you do it? Have the Seelie go "Oh no we couldn't possibly risk our people unless they're attacking Muir wood, the site of our secret freehold. Where did you say they were attacking?"

[Vyke]

If the players have various experiences with "gotcha" GMing, that will inform their reaction. It takes coaching, as a GM, to sometimes get past that. It also takes, to follow up on the point Kish made, establishing a trust relationship.

Talakeal:
It may be that you play mostly with people (based on your many experience-based posts) who have zero or low social skills...a situation that puts the fun into dysfunctional but not in a satisfying way.
I have learned to leave groups like that.

Oh yeah, absolutely. Talakeal, if they do open up to the Seelie absolutely do not have them get betrayed for opening up the information. :)

[Batcathat]

It's at random because they don't have the context that lets them know what is and is not relevant. They have no way to measure and decide what information is going to help and what isn't.

Telling people more about the situation you're asking them to help out with isn't really random behavior though. Now, there can be reasons not to do it or reasons not to think to do it, but doing it isn't exactly out there.

[GloatingSwine]

Telling people more about the situation you're asking them to help out with isn't really random behavior though. Now, there can be reasons not to do it or reasons not to think to do it, but doing it isn't exactly out there.

"The situation" they're asking for help with though is that there's a nest of Fomorians in their actual home. They're not just trying to protect Muir Woods, they're trying to eradicate the source.

They are actually better served by not giving this extra force a way to avoid fighting the Fomorians in their lair. Tell them about the threat further from home and they might choose to engage there and leave the nest intact, and as actual children they have no way of assaulting it by themselves. The Court fighting for their freehold at Muir Woods doesn't actually solve the problem.

So it sounds like they're going with plan B, insurance fraud.

[Vyke]

"The situation" they're asking for help with though is that there's a nest of Fomorians in their actual home. They're not just trying to protect Muir Woods, they're trying to eradicate the source.

They are actually better served by not giving this extra force a way to avoid fighting the Fomorians in their lair. Tell them about the threat further from home and they might choose to engage there and leave the nest intact, and as actual children they have no way of assaulting it by themselves. The Court fighting for their freehold at Muir Woods doesn't actually solve the problem.

So it sounds like they're going with plan B, insurance fraud.

I mean... sure. But that isn't the Seelie's fight.

[GloatingSwine]

I mean... sure. But that isn't the Seelie's fight.

Which implies, of course, that there were no answers to the question that would have been useful to the players, and they are in fact in a no-win situation because for some reason they're playing children who have few to no direct ways to act on the world, no resources because they're tenement rats, and no allies to call on.

[Vyke]

Which implies, of course, that there were no answers to the question that would have been useful to the players, and they are in fact in a no-win situation because for some reason they're playing children who have few to no direct ways to act on the world, no resources because they're tenement rats, and no allies to call on.

No. You have inferred that. And you do so incorrectly.

I have specifically given a response that would have been useful to the players above. I'll quote it.

"Look we'd like your help in fighting some werewolves and fomori. We don't know the number but we have done some scouting and we do know they plan to attack a place called Muir Wood. Since we know where it is we can combine our forces and ambush them, hopefully minimising our own causalities. Or we know where they lair so we can attack them in their own home, a tenement block not far from here. We're happy to discuss what resources we can bring to the fight if you have anyone near by that can support it."

"Hmmmm. Muir wood. Yes, I think my superiors might be interested in such an alliance. As neighbours we would be happy to stand by you if you would stand by us in the future. Nothing that would make you uncomfortable, of course."

The fact you don't like it is irrelevant.

[Unoriginal]

"The situation" they're asking for help with though is that there's a nest of Fomorians in their actual home. They're not just trying to protect Muir Woods, they're trying to eradicate the source.

They are actually better served by not giving this extra force a way to avoid fighting the Fomorians in their lair. Tell them about the threat further from home and they might choose to engage there and leave the nest intact, and as actual children they have no way of assaulting it by themselves. The Court fighting for their freehold at Muir Woods doesn't actually solve the problem.

If that's the case, then why ask the Court in the first place?

The PCs are unwilling to reward the help in any way, and are outspoken about it.

So... they're literally asking a group they consider untrustworthy for help, making clear said group won't get anything beneficial in exchange of the help, and are expecting the group to shoulder all the risks and dangers.

Then they're disappointed the group doesn't help them?

Which implies, of course, that there were no answers to the question that would have been useful to the players, and they are in fact in a no-win situation because for some reason they're playing children who have few to no direct ways to act on the world, no resources because they're tenement rats, and no allies to call on.

Why is "those werewolves are planning on messing with your stuff" not an answer to get help?

The Fair Folk are known not only for defending their stuff, but also inflicting dire retribution on those who mess with their stuff.

[GloatingSwine]

If that's the case, then why ask the Court in the first place?

The PCs are unwilling to reward the help in any way, and are outspoken about it.

They're also unable to reward the help in any way. They're children. They have no direct way to act on this problem, so they can't even meaningfully offer service in exchange for service.

So... they're literally asking a group they consider untrustworthy for help, making clear said group won't get anything beneficial in exchange of the help, and are expecting the group to shoulder all the risks and dangers.

Then they're disappointed the group doesn't help them?

They're asking a group they, mistakenly, think will ride out to smite evil at the mere knowledge of its existence. But they don't seem to have many alternatives either. Because they're children. They aren't looking for allies, they're looking for champions who can act in their stead because their ability to do so is so limited.

Why is "those werewolves are planning on messing with your stuff" not an answer to get help?

The Fair Folk are known not only for defending their stuff, but also inflicting dire retribution on those who mess with their stuff.

They don't know the fomorians are going to mess with the fair folk's stuff. They don't know the stuff even exists.

[Vyke]

Why is "those werewolves are planning on messing with your stuff" not an answer to get help?

The Fair Folk are known not only for defending their stuff, but also inflicting dire retribution on those who mess with their stuff.

In the interest of fairness, because the players don't know they're messing with the Fair Folk's stuff. Of course if they just said what they know instead of keeping it a secret from potential allies, they would.

[Vyke]

They're also unable to reward the help in any way. They're children. They have no direct way to act on this problem, so they can't even meaningfully offer service in exchange for service.



They're asking a group they, mistakenly, think will ride out to smite evil at the mere knowledge of its existence. But they don't seem to have many alternatives either. Because they're children. They aren't looking for allies, they're looking for champions who can act in their stead because their ability to do so is so limited.

They could offer to do the Fair Folk a favour down the line. I guarantee they'd take that offer seriously.

[GloatingSwine]

They could offer to do the Fair Folk a favour down the line. I guarantee they'd take that offer seriously.

Which is where we're back to trust, but also literally every story about the Fae ever making it exceptionally clear that you should never get yourself into owing that sort of open-ended favour. Which makes the lack of trust 100% justified.

[Unoriginal]

They're asking a group they, mistakenly, think will ride out to smite evil at the mere knowledge of its existence. But they don't seem to have many alternatives either. Because they're children. They aren't looking for allies, they're looking for champions who can act in their stead because their ability to do so is so limited.

Then their idea to commit a domestic bombing is also doomed for failure, because they're random children and their opponents are a threat even adults who dedicated years of training to fight would have problem with.

But also the GM should have corrected the assumption about the "ride out to smite evil", since the PC who suggested asking the Seelie would have known they weren't that kind of beings.

They're also unable to reward the help in any way. They're children. They have no direct way to act on this problem, so they can't even meaningfully offer service in exchange for service.

They may be children, but the Lords and Ladies are known to not let that stop them.

Maybe Billy and Timmy would have to give up their ability to sing or their sight, but OP clearly indicated that some of the Seelie were willing to make a bargain, and they were shut down.

So it's not unable, it's unwilling.

And it's fair, having to do dubious, damning deals to destroy dastardly dangers is not something most people are happy to do, but let's not pretend like the PCs couldn't take such a deal.

[Vyke]

Which is where we're back to trust, but also literally every story about the Fae ever making it exceptionally clear that you should never get yourself into owing that sort of open-ended favour. Which makes the lack of trust 100% justified.

Possibly. But that's, what we call, a campaign hook. And it's only justified if it's used to make the players miserable.

[GloatingSwine]

Then their idea to commit a domestic bombing is also doomed for failure, because they're random children and their opponents are a threat even adults who dedicated years of training to fight would have problem with.

That's why they've found someone else they think is willing and able to do it.

And it's fair, having to do dubious, damning deals to destroy dastardly dangers is not something most people are happy to do, but let's not pretend like the PCs couldn't take such a deal.

Well it sounds like that's what they're going to do, but with someone whose price is exacted on the world around the characters.

But also it's not clear that the Seelie fae ever actually named a price. The players made it clear they were unable and unwilling to pay anything, but we haven't actually heard about a price being set either. (Not necessarily because there wasn't one, Talakeal's stories always leave out important information, but until we're told "the Fae requested they serve as jesters to the court for a year and a day in exchange for help" or something I'm going to assume they just never tried presenting one because the players had pre-declared they had nothing to give)

[Unoriginal]

Which is where we're back to trust, but also literally every story about the Fae ever making it exceptionally clear that you should never get yourself into owing that sort of open-ended favour. Which makes the lack of trust 100% justified.

The lack of trust in the Fae is justified, but they still went to the Fae to ask for help thinking they'd help no string attached.

There is a dichotomy in how they're treating the same group at the same time, and I think that part of their frustrations come from this.

Maybe they expected the Fair Folk to be the "unconditionally kind" kind and then reacted with "oh no, this is the 'will demand your firstborn for even a minor favor' kind, let's back down" the first time they got told that no, the Court won't fight on their behalf against evil just like that.

But in that case the problem is setting lore not being communicated or remembered correctly, as I said earlier. And the GM should have told them that Fairies aren't selfless crusaders against darkness as soon as the idea was mentioned.

Unless if none of the PCs had any way to know that... which doesn't seem to be the case.

[NichG]

Communication in general seems to be a problem here. The GM's perspective here is a mirror of the players! The players don't want to just randomly volunteer information, which confuses the GM. But the GM also doesn't seem to want the Seelie from coming out and saying what they would need, because that would make it feel less like an RPG to them and more like collaborative storytelling!

So everyone here is being stingy with information while simultaneously also being frustrated by the consequences of that.

[Talakeal]

Sounds like they have nothing to offer.

They're poor kids from the projects with no material or spiritual resources and no pertinent information, and you expect them to say something they have no reason to know is relevant. If they don't know the Changelings have any interests in the Muir Woods they have no reason to mention them. And they're in this situation because they have faulty (out of character, it sounds like) expectations of the nature of the Seelie court as romantic crusaders against evil in all its forms.

Except you don't expect this to be their induction into the Unseelie, despite the situation as you described being almost custom designed to produce that outcome! Seriously, this is a starting story for a group to be inducted into the Unseelie court after seeing the selfish hypocrisy of the Seelie not acting except for their own. (Honour is a lie, writ large in their lives)

Yep. It absolutely did end up with them in bed with the unseelie court.

The only way they "answer" the question is just by spewing out words until they hit on the right one completely by accident.

Other people have already covered this, but I think you are missing the point of the thread.

They were repeatedly asked a direct question. "What are the fomorians planning?".

All they had to do was answer the question honestly.

This isn't some "read the GM's mind" or "produce an answer unbidden".


Although, IRL common sense would tell me that if I was reporting a conspiracy to the authorities, I should probably tell them what the criminals were planning on doing.

[icefractal]

I think they were imagining this scenario:

Fey: "What are the Fomori planning, exactly?"
PC: "They're going to attack Muir woods."
Fey: "The woods? That's way out of our territory. Sorry, but we don't have unlimited resources, we have to focus on problems within the city."

Or possibly (you'd have to ask them, and no guarantee of getting a straight answer) they mentally discarded "Muir woods" because it wasn't important to their characters.

Like, say I see some organized-crime looking guys hanging around my neighborhood, and then overhear one of them saying:
"... and we'll start a big shootout here, make sure all the police are rushing to this area, then while they're busy we hit the diamond center and ..."
The part about "the diamond center" is so incredibly unimportant to me compared to the "start a big shootout here" part. 99.999999% of my concern with the situation is about the part where me and my neighbors get shot, I could give less of a **** about what they're planning to steal by using this as a distraction.

[Talakeal]

Communication in general seems to be a problem here. The GM's perspective here is a mirror of the players! The players don't want to just randomly volunteer information, which confuses the GM. But the GM also doesn't seem to want the Seelie from coming out and saying what they would need, because that would make it feel less like an RPG to them and more like collaborative storytelling!

So everyone here is being stingy with information while simultaneously also being frustrated by the consequences of that.

You seem to be having trouble separating in character and out of character knowledge.

As a GM, I know quite a bit more than any other party at the table or in the game world. But it isn't my role to share that information; and it kind of breaks the nature of an RPG to share information with the players OOC.

In character; the Seelie know things the PCs don't, and the PCs know things the Seelie don't.

The Seelie are attempting to resolve this by asking and answering questions.
The PCs are clamming up and refusing to answer the questions that are asked of them or asking questions of their own in turn*.

This is not a mirror. This is one side being open and trying to resolve the lack of information, and the other side being closed off and trying to maintain the asymmetry of information.


Now, OOC I suppose it is a mirror; both sides are expected to keep in character and not use meta-game information to resolve the situation.


*: Although asking the right question might take a little cleverness on the player's part.

I think they were imagining this scenario:

Fey: "What are the Fomori planning, exactly?"
PC: "They're going to attack Muir woods."
Fey: "The woods? That's way out of our territory. Sorry, but we don't have unlimited resources, we have to focus on problems within the city."

Or possibly (you'd have to ask them, and no guarantee of getting a straight answer) they mentally discarded "Muir woods" because it wasn't important to their characters.

Like, say I see some organized-crime looking guys hanging around my neighborhood, and then overhear one of them saying:
"... and we'll start a big shootout here, make sure all the police are rushing to this area, then while they're busy we hit the diamond center and ..."
The part about "the diamond center" is so incredibly unimportant to me compared to the "start a big shootout here" part. 99.999999% of my concern with the situation is about the part where me and my neighbors get shot, I could give less of a **** about what they're planning to steal by using this as a distraction.

That's very possible.

But it still doesn't explain why they didn't give up the information after their initial attempt to get the Seelie to storm their building had already failed.

[NichG]

You seem to be having trouble separating in character and out of character knowledge.

As a GM, I know quite a bit more than any other party at the table or in the game world. But it isn't my role to share that information; and it kind of breaks the nature of an RPG to share information with the players OOC.

In character; the Seelie know things the PCs don't, and the PCs know things the Seelie don't.

The Seelie are attempting to resolve this by asking and answering questions.
The PCs are clamming up and refusing to answer the questions that are asked of them or asking questions of their own in turn*.

This is not a mirror. This is one side being open and trying to resolve the lack of information, and the other side being closed off and trying to maintain the asymmetry of information.

It's a mirror in that you don't want to communicate and they don't want to communicate, you both have excuses for why that's the right choice, but when the result of that is dysfunction neither of you are willing to actually change your behaviors to fix it.

You can't imagine an official of the Seelie saying 'Look guys, we need detailed information in order to decide if we're going to act or not. The less you tell us, the less convincing you are. Your only hope to get our cooperation is to be completely and totally upfront about everything you know.' rather than just asking questions, getting stonewalled, and going 'well I didn't get the answer so I guess I'll just walk away'.

Clearly both you and your players are dissatisfied with this state of affairs.

Like, if this is what everyone wanted - you depicted a particular NPC personality accurate to your vision, the players then depicted their characters' response to encountering someone with that personality accurately to their vision, and no one felt frustrated by it then great! But if that's the case, why post this thread? So clearly, the players didn't feel like 'hey that was a great scene where we got to say screw you to the arrogant seelie and launch our unseelie alleigance'. You didn't feel like what happened made sense either, or you wouldn't be here asking about it.

Even if you're just curious about the behavior, why are you coming here and asking strangers about it rather than asking the actual only people who know the true answer - your players!

So it feels to me, no one at your table is actually comfortable with honest, forthright communication. You don't know how to talk to each-other in a way that actually ensures the other person understands. So you end up with this kind of thing where you're confused by each-others choices.

[Easy e]

I find it helpful for the NPCs to be as blunt as possible.

Players: We need your help?

NPC: Why would I help you?

Players: Formorians are evil and up to no good!

NPC: That has ne bearing on me. Why do you think should care about Fomorians being evil? How does that impact me?

Players: Ahhhh.... they could disrupt what you are doing?

NPC: I don't care about theoretical situations. What are they doing, and I can tell you if it threatens me.

However, the players now have a clear choice. The NPC has been very clear on what they need to make a decision, will you give them that information or not.

Perhaps a reverse question to consider is, why would players feel the need to hide information in the game?

[Talakeal]

You can't imagine an official of the Seelie saying 'Look guys, we need detailed information in order to decide if we're going to act or not. The less you tell us, the less convincing you are. Your only hope to get our cooperation is to be completely and totally upfront about everything you know.' rather than just asking questions, getting stonewalled, and going 'well I didn't get the answer so I guess I'll just walk away'.

I find it helpful for the NPCs to be as blunt as possible.

Players: We need your help?

NPC: Why would I help you?

Players: Formorians are evil and up to no good!

NPC: That has ne bearing on me. Why do you think should care about Fomorians being evil? How does that impact me?

Players: Ahhhh.... they could disrupt what you are doing?

NPC: I don't care about theoretical situations. What are they doing, and I can tell you if it threatens me.

Guys.... this is exactly what happened!

Even if you're just curious about the behavior, why are you coming here and asking strangers about it rather than asking the actual only people who know the true answer - your players!

I did ask them. They didn't seem to really know very well themselves, but at that point they were already frustrated and it was getting late so I let it go.

But this is far from the first time this has happened, and so I am really more curious about the general principle than the specific situation.

[Cygnia]

Oh, to be the proverbial fly on the wall at one of these games...

What sort of payment were you expecting these child PCs even being able to offer the Sidhe in return for their help?

I get being frustrated with the closed lips those. This really is calling for an out-of-game session where everyone (yourself included) can hopefully/constructively air out those frustrations.

[icefractal]

Guys.... this is exactly what happened!

I know an exact transcript isn't possible, but could you give your best recollection of the actual dialog which occured?

Because I've heard, over the course of this thread:
* The fey asked exactly what help the PCs wanted.
* The fey asked what the fomori were up to.
* The fey specifically said that they'd be more likely to help if the PCs told them all relevant info, bluntly and directly.

Those are three different things!! Things that can overlap, but still, different things! If after 50+ posts, we don't even know what the fey did or didn't say, then I'm not surprised your players didn't grok it either. I know you don't like posting "irrelevant" details, but I think they're only irrelevant to you because you have the full picture in your head.

[NichG]

Guys.... this is exactly what happened!

What was the player response to the last bit? Was it 'No, we refuse to tell you'? Or just like 'We already told you everything' or 'We told you what you need to know'? Or was it just reiterating something they had already said?

I have a feeling that no, it wasn't exactly like this in ways that matter, but that it differed in ways you're either filtering out, not sensitive to, or rejecting as relevant on principle.

Did anyone ever explicitly say "If you tell us the details, we'll help you."? Did anyone explicitly say e.g. "We need to know where they're going to attack."?

[Kish]

The general principle is that they think you're constantly trying to screw them over, Talakeal, whether accurately or inaccurately. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they caught they you wanted them to give the changelings a full description of the situation, and that caused them to conclude that was the one thing they must not do at any cost. Particularly if, as you're now saying, the NPCs didn't just ask "what are they planning?" but said, "We're not going to help unless we have a reason to, now tell us exactly what they're doing."

[Unoriginal]

Honestly, when something happens in a PC-NPC interaction and the GM doesn't know what it means, the scene should be put on pause until it's clarified.

Like, if my PCs were talking to a guide who can help them, but say something they were warned would immediately make this NPC (like calling him by the insulting nickname his rival coined), I would drop character and just ask if the PC is trying to make him mad or if the player just forgot.

[BRC]

I see two Possible explanations here.

Your Players are Underthinking it
Viewing the game world as a matter of straightforward black and white conflict, they see the Formorians as Evil. The fact that they intend to attack the Changelings means the Changelings are good, and should therefore be willing to help them against the Formorians. Pointing out that the Formorians are an imminent and direct threat to the Changelings doesn't occur to them because the changelings shouldn't need to be directly threatened to try to help.

Or

Your Players are overthinking it
Knowing that by involving the Changelings they're entering a sort of Fae storyline, your players are being very paranoid about not accidentally making an agreement or slip of the tongue that lands them within some sort of fae-contract. Not unreasonable, but they're overcorrecting by refusing to say anything specific or definite at all. Rather than saying "The Formorians are planning to attack you", they want to make vague statements about how the Formor are bad news and need to be stopped, because they're worried that any specific statement they make might get fae-ruled into some sort of binding contract.
Or, alternatively, the entire party has decided that giving up the information is crossing some sort of line, and none of them want to be the one who makes that decision for the rest of the party. They're all waiting for somebody else to come forward and give up the actual information.