Using Dream to mess with players: cool move, or jerk move?

[heavyfuel]

This post is technically about PF2e, but no system specific knowledge is necessary.

So, an upcoming campaign will have a BBEG whose second in command is a trickster of sorts. Basically a high level Witch who never confronts the players directly.

Well, one of the players is going to be either a Cleric or a Paladin (he hasn't decided yet), but either way, I'm thinking of having the Witch mess with him by means of some Dream Message spells (basically works like the Dream spell in 3.5, but it doesn't show the caster).

During the course of the adventure, the Which will feed him some vague - but correct - information via DM while sort of pretending to be his deity (nothing too on the nose, just calling him "my champion" or something like that). Eventually, when the party believes the dreams are speaking true, the Witch will misdirect them by saying the BBEG is hidden somewhere they aren't, buying the BBEG time to fulfill an important part of his plan.

When they finally get to confront the Witch directly, she'll mock them for believing her dream lies and then likely be murdered by the party.

I'm thinking of allowing a Religion check for them to know it's against "deific protocol" to message mortals directly, so they'd have a hint that it's either a lie, or a deity breaking protocol. Also going allow the whole Bluff vs Perception since the Witch is pretending to be someone else, even if just by voice.

So, would this be a jerk move on my part?

[Chronos]

I'm thinking of allowing a Religion check for them to know it's against "deific protocol" to message mortals directly, so they'd have a hint that it's either a lie, or a deity breaking protocol.

Directly, yes, but does a dream count as "direct"? There's a long tradition in stories and lore of deities contacting mortals through dreams.

But, then again, the Dream spell does exist, and there's also a long, storied tradition of mortals impersonating deities to manipulate people.

I wouldn't give any direct indication that the dreams are unreliable, but I would make sure that they, at least potentially, have access to other, independent channels of information that sometimes contradict the dreams. And then let them figure out what is and isn't reliable.

[heavyfuel]

Directly, yes, but does a dream count as "direct"? There's a long tradition in stories and lore of deities contacting mortals through dreams.

Good point. Maybe make the success on the religion check be "it's really unlikely for that to happen for real"? Or something to that extent.

But, then again, the Dream spell does exist, and there's also a long, storied tradition of mortals impersonating deities to manipulate people.

Is there? I thought I was on to something new here lol! Maybe I just need to catch up on my D&D/Golarion lore.

As a side note, should I allow an unprompted check for characters to maybe think it might be a spell (cast by a mortal)? I mean, if they straight up ask me "can this be a spell (cast by a mortal)?", then sure, they get a check. But what if they don't?

I wouldn't give any direct indication that the dreams are unreliable, but I would make sure that they, at least potentially, have access to other, independent channels of information that sometimes contradict the dreams. And then let them figure out what is and isn't reliable.

A great idea! After the dream has proven to be true a few times, the one time it's wrong (on purpose) is also the one time it contradicts their informants or other intelligence. Leave it up to the players to follow on the words of the "deity" or to trust their intel.

[Pugwampy]

I see nothing wrong with this scenario . You can always give players extra XP or a magic goodie to conpensate their supposed suffering .

I have used dream scenario to roll back a game breaking situation

I bought a 4th edition miniatures starter game
Dream was an excuse to force players to try different charactors and 4th edition rules for one encounter .