I read The Clue Files yesterday, and some of the stories made me wonder, how much of this actually was the players' mistake. What I mean is this: sometimes, players declare an action, not thinking it through to the end. Like, in one of those stories, a player chucks a bomb from a building into a busy street. His fellow player shouts "wait, disarm it first!", but the GM just says "too late" and the bomb goes off in the street.
Now, in my opinion that's sheer jerkishness on part of the GM. However, I find that this is quite entrenched in the gaming community. You said it, you did it, and what you forgot to say, well, tough luck. Now I wondered, how do you handle such situations?
Some ideas what I'd like you to consider:
- Do you ever ask your players to write up extensive equipment lists, and then let them get in trouble "for want of a nail", i. e. if they forgot to list a minor but important item, like a flashlight, or fuel for a vehicle or whatnot?
- Do you ever remind your players of things their character would likely be aware of? Do you tell them the likely consequences of an action, that their characters could foresee?
- Do you allow your players to revise an action, if, a second or so later, they remember themselves why they shouldn't do that?
I generally tend to err on the side of leniency, never really check equipment lists, allow players to reconsider actions their characters would recognize as stupid, and so on. I hardly found a tale on the Clue Files where I wouldn't have interjected with something like: "You know that's stupid, don't you?" Like the whole party taking a nap on a sinking boat, or shouting on a stealth run and so on.
On the other hand, I am merciless with players, who, despite time to think, advice from their fellow players and myself, continue to do stupid stuff.
I read The Clue Files yesterday, and some of the stories made me wonder, how much of this actually was the players' mistake. What I mean is this: sometimes, players declare an action, not thinking it through to the end. Like, in one of those stories, a player chucks a bomb from a building into a busy street. His fellow player shouts "wait, disarm it first!", but the GM just says "too late" and the bomb goes off in the street.
Now, in my opinion that's sheer jerkishness on part of the GM. However, I find that this is quite entrenched in the gaming community. You said it, you did it, and what you forgot to say, well, tough luck. Now I wondered, how do you handle such situations?
Some ideas what I'd like you to consider:
- Do you ever ask your players to write up extensive equipment lists, and then let them get in trouble "for want of a nail", i. e. if they forgot to list a minor but important item, like a flashlight, or fuel for a vehicle or whatnot?
- Do you ever remind your players of things their character would likely be aware of? Do you tell them the likely consequences of an action, that their characters could foresee?
- Do you allow your players to revise an action, if, a second or so later, they remember themselves why they shouldn't do that?
I generally tend to err on the side of leniency, never really check equipment lists, allow players to reconsider actions their characters would recognize as stupid, and so on. I hardly found a tale on the Clue Files where I wouldn't have interjected with something like: "You know that's stupid, don't you?" Like the whole party taking a nap on a sinking boat, or shouting on a stealth run and so on.
On the other hand, I am merciless with players, who, despite time to think, advice from their fellow players and myself, continue to do stupid stuff.
I almost never DM, but here are my answers:
1) No. But of course there is a balance. They have to write down items that are "extra" (like "A ladder, or an excessive length of rope). I never count the number of rations or torches, I just assume they packed for the length of the trip or maybe half way if it's a long trip (meaning I assume they have packed rations for the 3 day trip; or rations to reach the next fortified Inn, or whatever). Now if they try to pull a fast one ("I always carry glass bottles of acid with me! Not that I have never mentioned it, written it down, or used them before...") then obviously "No you don't have that".
2) Yes. Not very often, but sometimes.
3) Depending on the situation. In preparation for battle, or when deciding who goes where in a city... sure. In the middle of a heated battle... Maybe not.
And yes, people who insist on stupidity get what they deserve. Luckily enough in the group I hang out we are all adults and far less likely to do "Suicidal plot derail" (as players) by doing things like "I don't like how the noble is looking at me so I kill him. Right here. In the middle of town. At noon. And I expect my Paladin not to fall."
If we do something stupid it's usually because we have misunderstood something like the layout of a room or house ("Oh you mean the door was on that side.").
Last edited by Avilan the Grey : 07-15-2009 at 02:43 AM.
1. - Not usually, but it depends on how careless it really was. Typically I try to remind players at creation that some things are just flat out logical to have - and they generally take that advice.
However if they're stupid enough to walk into a pitch black maze without a means of seeing in the dark... yeah <~_~> they're in trouble.
2. - I usually have them roll a check against the relevant stat in whatever game we're playing. If the player has forgotten, but the character knows; I use this as essentially the knowledge suddenly jumping to the fore of their thoughts. (Like how you may be sitting at your computer some night, and think "oh crap, I need to do X tomorrow!")
I do not however think for them - if they have a plan that isn't particularly bright; I'll usually let them go through with it. I *may* offer a wisdom (or similar) stat check to avoid it if I think it'll ruin the campaign rather than simply be a mistake that can be learned from though.
(Ie: The difference between a party wipe, and a painful lesson. - I don't like it when the party wipes; as it means the story usually grinds to a halt)
3. - Not often. It depends largely on the severity of the consequences, how fast they catch the mistake, and what's happened in the in-between time.
For example: You do something, and then a half second later realize "Oh wait no, that would be bad!" - Yeah, you can probably take that back.
If a half hour later you realize you shouldn't have done something; or the consequences are rather minor... probably not.
It depends on the specific situation a lot though.
My players rarely do things without thinking. However, that one time they didn't think, a PC died with little hope of resurrection.
It's in my Red Hand of Doom campaign journal a few pages down: They had just beaten the green dragon in chapter I. They went back to town and forgot to heal. A goblin raid complete with tricked-out mounted archers and a caster attacked that night. The artificer got nuked by a scintillating sphere and died.
"I dunno, you just gave me the image of a nerd flying slow motion over a coffee table towards another nerd, dual wielding massive books. It was awesome." -- Marriclay
Personally, to deal with the bomb thrown into the street, I would say that each character got a Reflex "save". The character who threw the bomb at, say, DC 15 and the other at DC 20. If either made it, they would have scrambled to stop the throwing-motion whatever. Not that it would help, you know, since it would then go off.(Assuming the timer was effectively at zero since it went off when it hit the street)
Usually, I give people hints (Aren't you, you know, forgetting something?), but sometimes I just let it play out. If they can make their save, good. If not...well, real lives get screwed over by people not thinking about what they do. I usually try not to screw over my characters that bad, though...
Last wednesday, my players fought a bunch of degenerate freshwater sahuagin in an underground lake.
What they did was this: They caught one of them, killed it - then carved up the corpse, and threw it in the water.
Naturally, this triggered a massed attack - but as the players got to pick the location, they were on solid ground, and able to see their enemy.
It was touch and go - but they pulled through.
In my perception, their plan was bordering on suicidal, but I see the logic of it. They didn't want to fight the fishies in the water, dragged under by their nets and drowned whilst skewered by tridents.
However, there were easier ways around the fight, but they never went looking for them. Damnable fools.
But the point is that sometimes there is wisdom in stupidity. And if I hadn't let them go ahead with their suicidal plan, I'd have robbed them of an amazing victory (which I helped only very marginally with).
We had an NPC corpse (that we were going to bring back to life) which was lost forever because nobody remembered to bring it with us when we left out hideout for the last time.
- Do you ever ask your players to write up extensive equipment lists, and then let them get in trouble "for want of a nail", i. e. if they forgot to list a minor but important item, like a flashlight, or fuel for a vehicle or whatnot?
As a player I hate the fact that most DMs (all I have seen at least) don't do that. I LOVE making my detailed equipment lists, counting down my rations, remembering that I need to use my sleeping bag or become fatigued, and going shopping when back in town (the last part is also a favorite part for me in video game RPGs. ). It gives the game a level of realism I like. However, it is usually all for not.
Oh, and doesn't that all make things too easy? That is the feeling I get when a DM is too "lenient". If there is no challenge, and no risk, then it seems kinda pointless for me.
And the remembering things a second late thing, well that is how life works right? I mean in real life we don't get a 5-second redo button. For example: earlier today I was shredding some papers with personal information, and halfway through I accidentally grabbed a sheet of paper also on the desk with fluff I had been working on for my future games. Oops! Remembered when t was halfway through the machine.
I read The Clue Files yesterday, and some of the stories made me wonder, how much of this actually was the players' mistake. What I mean is this: sometimes, players declare an action, not thinking it through to the end. Like, in one of those stories, a player chucks a bomb from a building into a busy street. His fellow player shouts "wait, disarm it first!", but the GM just says "too late" and the bomb goes off in the street.
Now, in my opinion that's sheer jerkishness on part of the GM. However, I find that this is quite entrenched in the gaming community. You said it, you did it, and what you forgot to say, well, tough luck. Now I wondered, how do you handle such situations?
Some ideas what I'd like you to consider:
- Do you ever ask your players to write up extensive equipment lists, and then let them get in trouble "for want of a nail", i. e. if they forgot to list a minor but important item, like a flashlight, or fuel for a vehicle or whatnot?
- Do you ever remind your players of things their character would likely be aware of? Do you tell them the likely consequences of an action, that their characters could foresee?
- Do you allow your players to revise an action, if, a second or so later, they remember themselves why they shouldn't do that?
I generally tend to err on the side of leniency, never really check equipment lists, allow players to reconsider actions their characters would recognize as stupid, and so on. I hardly found a tale on the Clue Files where I wouldn't have interjected with something like: "You know that's stupid, don't you?" Like the whole party taking a nap on a sinking boat, or shouting on a stealth run and so on.
On the other hand, I am merciless with players, who, despite time to think, advice from their fellow players and myself, continue to do stupid stuff.
I like my players to grow intelligent.
It's not a matter of making them pay for their mistakes, it's a matter of making the world work as it should.
So yes, if my players go somewhere and forget the fuel (in an environment where fuel is likely an uncommon commodity) then they HAVE to care about it, and if they don't say anything I assume they forget about it.
Quote:
- Do you ever ask your players to write up extensive equipment lists, and then let them get in trouble "for want of a nail", i. e. if they forgot to list a minor but important item, like a flashlight, or fuel for a vehicle or whatnot?
Yes I do. Especially when I know there will be troubled times ahead and/or times when they will be unable to "refill" their supplies for a long time. I want them to be able to plan and to prepare themselves.
I am GMing a Call of Cthulhu campaign and knowing how many bullets you've left, or how much dynamite, can make the difference between life and death. Also, in many parts of the world, fuel is rare, expensive, and difficult to get (Africa in the mid 1920's, for example...). So I expect my players to come up with ideas, plans and everything else needed to overcome these problems.
Of course, I do the same for the NPCs and the occasional BBEGs... I know what resources they have and if my players succeed in cutting the supply lines of the evil guys... I let them. It's important, and it adds both flavour and realism to the game. My players love to plan ahead, because from time to time it's rewarding to know you've been smart enought to save yourself from troubles, or have managed to twart the evil plans of your opponent through careful planning.
Quote:
- Do you ever remind your players of things their character would likely be aware of? Do you tell them the likely consequences of an action, that their characters could foresee?
I usually make them roll an Int check if they miss something that their characters would likely be aware of. If the player thinks of it, ok. If the players doesn't, then the Int check is a sort of a safety net. If both the player AND the Int check fail... then too bad. People sometimes do stupid stuff or overlook things... Nothing to worry about. They just suffer the consequences, and later they say "well, it makes sense... it was indeed a stupid thing to do, now that I think about it"
Same goes for foreseeable consequences. Either they see them themselves, or they roll an Int check. If both fail, well... usually hilarity ensues Of course, the degree of "foreseeableness" (is that even a word?) comes from my personal judgement. I don't make them roll for *all* the consequences. They roll for those they should see coming (in my opinion) and they don't.
Quote:
- Do you allow your players to revise an action, if, a second or so later, they remember themselves why they shouldn't do that?
Yeah of course. Unless it's in the heat of a fight, and something out of character happens that makes them change their mind (I hate that), then it's just sensible to let them think twice. It's a game after all, it's not a matter of the GM winning AGAINST the players... it's a matter of working together for a better game experience for everyone. Being a jerk is not on my agenda.
Last edited by Jan Mattys : 07-15-2009 at 04:32 AM.
In order to counteract this, one of my players took the GURPS trait "Common Sense". This doesn't bestow his character with any particular powers of sense, but as the GM I am now REQUIRED to ask him "Are you sure?" in any stupid situation he wants to put himself in. We haven't had to use it yet and this bears in mind the same player also took Daredevil I think which only bestows bonuses for being badass and reckless.
I imagine it wouldn't be hard to make say an amulet of sensibilities that functions the same was for D&D players. Make it a cursed item that they put on and can't remove until they've learned a valuable lesson. It's either that or have angry townsfolk pitchfork them at every opportunity for blowing up the dungeon with the local kids still inside.
But the point is that sometimes there is wisdom in stupidity. And if I hadn't let them go ahead with their suicidal plan, I'd have robbed them of an amazing victory (which I helped only very marginally with).
I see your point. Stopping the players too early might rob both them and the GM of a lot of fun. I don't really think your story completely fits my issue. After all, your players made a plan, and the one point they didn't consider, namely their chances to win the fight they thereby triggered, was something both they and their characters were genuinely unaware of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pika
Oh, and doesn't that all make things too easy? That is the feeling I get when a DM is too "lenient". If there is no challenge, and no risk, then it seems kinda pointless for me.
I've heard that before, but I don't think the challenge should be one of bookkeeping or double-checking every statement. That only leads to cagey players who obsess over every round of ammo, ask questions about every detail of a scene and so on, all of which usually detracts from the fluidity of the game, which to me is a very important component of fun. So, if a player asks "We did bring torches, didn't we?" I say yes, rather than have to wait half an hour before the next dungeon crawl can begin, because my players try to cover all eventualities.
Likewise, I hate to let a well-prepared story go to waste, because my players overlooked some small detail in their planning. Better to just smooth it over and play on. Saves everyone lots of frustration.
I like my players to grow intelligent.
It's not a matter of making them pay for their mistakes, it's a matter of making the world work as it should.
So yes, if my players go somewhere and forget the fuel (in an environment where fuel is likely an uncommon commodity) then they HAVE to care about it, and if they don't say anything I assume they forget about it.
Yes I do. Especially when I know there will be troubled times ahead and/or times when they will be unable to "refill" their supplies for a long time. I want them to be able to plan and to prepare themselves.
[...]
I usually make them roll an Int check if they miss something that their characters would likely be aware of. If the player thinks of it, ok. If the players doesn't, then the Int check is a sort of a safety net. If both the player AND the Int check fail... then too bad. People sometimes do stupid stuff or overlook things... Nothing to worry about. They just suffer the consequences, and later they say "well, it makes sense... it was indeed a stupid thing to do, now that I think about it"
Same goes for foreseeable consequences. Either they see them themselves, or they roll an Int check. If both fail, well... usually hilarity ensues Of course, the degree of "foreseeableness" (is that even a word?) comes from my personal judgement. I don't make them roll for *all* the consequences. They roll for those they should see coming (in my opinion) and they don't.
I pretty much run things the same way for the first two questions, so I figured I'd just quote this instead of typing it out.
For the "take-back" issue, I allow it as long as no one else has stated their actions yet, kind of like taking your hand off the piece in chess. If you realize it after someone else has acted, but not reacted to your action, I'll sometimes allow a Will save to undo something stupid and intangible (insulting the king, etc.) and a Ref save to undo something stupid and tangible (tossing a bomb into a street without disarming it, etc.), though I usually only use the second rule with groups relatively new to RPGs until the get the hang of things.
__________________
Better to DM in Baator than play in Celestia
You can just call me Dice; that's how I roll.
Sig of Clear Thought
Spoiler
This sig contains mundane text, but entwined within it is a magical effect. If anyone reads this sig, requiring only a brief perusal, he gains a +5 inherent bonus to his Intelligence. Strong Awesomeness; Craft Homebrew, amanuensis; Price: Priceless
My players rarely do things without thinking. However, that one time they didn't think, a PC died with little hope of resurrection.
It's in my Red Hand of Doom campaign journal a few pages down: They had just beaten the green dragon in chapter I. They went back to town and forgot to heal. A goblin raid complete with tricked-out mounted archers and a caster attacked that night. The artificer got nuked by a scintillating sphere and died.
They're a lot more cautious now.
This is the way to go. No sarcasm, players learn better and faster this way.
__________________
Warning: my time zone and internet acces may lead to strange/late post answers.
Spoiler
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurald Galain
The rogue isn't really using charisma in melee, the rogue is applying Ability Score #6 to his Type-One attacks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken-do-nim
DMing is how you turn D&D from a game into a hobby.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maroon
Players can see a story where there isn't one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldariel
For 4.0? I expect them to whine to the DM until he makes the big bad boogeyman go away.
In order to counteract this, one of my players took the GURPS trait "Common Sense". This doesn't bestow his character with any particular powers of sense, but as the GM I am now REQUIRED to ask him "Are you sure?" in any stupid situation he wants to put himself in.
This trait (and its equivalent as a Merit in white wolf games) has probably caused more DM stupidity than anything else I can think of - it's a license (and can be read as a requirement) to not ask that question any other time.
My [former] group's house rule: "Make a wisdom check" - if they fail the check, they do whatever they just said they were going to do - if they succeed the DM tells them something that usually (along with the check itself as a warning flag) makes them reconsider.
Last edited by Random832 : 07-15-2009 at 08:56 AM.
It varies from game to game that I run. In my Renaissance Italy GURPS campaign I don't pay a lot of attention to the nails (we've never kept track of money) except for specific, important items- weapons, mystic keys, the carriage driver, etc. What I let them take back depends a lot upon the situation. I didn't let them take back the fired black powder weapon in the cave that deafened everyone, but I do let them take back the "Oh-wait-that would-be-stupid!" ideas if it's before they get very far into it, much like PairO'Dice's reaction rule.
In my DnD campaigns, I'm much more anal about what they carry with them. They might not get in trouble for want of a nail, but if they don't have the hammer written down they're could be in trouble. I rely a lot on common sense and on whether it would be entertaining for everyone, drive the main plot, or may be an adventure seed on its own.
__________________
I drive a quantum car- every time I look down at the speedometer, I get lost.
-------------------------
It's your world. Shape it, or someone else will.
I agree with the learning curve thing for the basics. Healing, setting guard at night, buying potions ahead of time, and so on. But I think you should be careful what you teach them. If you get hung up on detail, players will obsess over it - they need to, or they're dead. I DMed a group like that once. They were not smarter than others, just more fixated on detail and precision. They double- and triple-checked their plans, their equipment and sometimes needed quite a while to formulate a coherent statement of what they were about to do. After a while they realize I didn't care about such petty stuff and game speed about doubled, with no loss in fun for anyone.
I mean, consider the following exchange:
GM: "OK, you're about to leave town. Anything you want to do before you leave?"
Player: "Hmm, no. Oh! Wait! I forgot something!"
GM: "Yes, what do you want to do?"
Player: "I'll replace that 50ft rope I left hanging in the dungeon!"
Do you really want to take up precious game time with such dialogue? I told the player to just subtract the money and not bother me with rope for chrissake,
On another note, I recently played on a convention, and we were travelling into the desert with a zeppelin. So now the GM breaks out the equipment list and tells us to list everything we take, including ammo, zeppelin fuel and food. Well, none of that ever got to be relevant, because we spent so much time on that, we never made it through the plot and didn't even use half our stuff.
Ultimately, the question is, do you want to play a game or put your players through a logistics exercise?
Basic equipment upkeep is okay, overly huge amounts of book keeping is honestly a waste of time for those of us that are not accountants. In most games I've played there's a limit. Usually my various DMs have allowed a sort of improvisation rule: if you forgot your shovel, a sword will work, but it'll take 5 times as long.
As for the undo rule, well, it depends. Are you running across the room to throw something out the window (a 10 sec action, more or less?) then you have time to stop. If it's an instant action (i drop the oil of impact), to late to undo a 1/2 sec action. Seems to make sense to me. If there's time in real life to rethink, there should be time in game.
__________________
Suppose you start your game in a tavern that is circular and evenly lit. Where do the PCs sit?
Spoiler
Characters:
Draconium- Darus
Vampire2948's Sandbox- Jayel
Treasures of the Lower Underdark- Zerith
In general, I remind my players of stuff when it's obvious they forgot about something, and ask them are they sure if they want to do something really stupid. I let them revise their action, too, at least until I describe the result. I even change the course of action if it becomes apparent that I made a mistake. An important part of DMing is to realize that nobody is perfect, and everyone makes mistakes sometimes - even you - and that the game shouldn't suffer just because someone forgot about something his character never would.
I agree with Halaster - the DM in the example he provided was a jerkwad.
__________________
Siela Tempo by the talented Kasanip. Tengu by myself.
Banners:
1: C.L.U.E #3 is a failure on the part of the GM, not the players. Having highly trained professionals forget to bring a flashlight is like the PCs being arrested for indecent exposure because they didn't put pants on their equipment sheet.
2: Yes, to a certain extent. In particular, there are certain details that a character is more likely to remember than a player. For example, say a man is wearing armour. The characters can see it whenever they look at him, but it could slip the mind of the players, unless I say things like "The man, who is wearing armour, turns to face the rogue."
3: Generally yes, as long as nothing else has happened in the meantime.
__________________
The following errors occurred with your search:
1. This forum requires that you wait 300 seconds between searches. Please try again in 306 seconds.
1. I do actually, though I warn them ahead of time that that's going to be the way it is. I've found that if I don't I end up with some players who will be carrying everything they ever need in a dungeon (a month's worth of food, five changes of clothes, not to mention the ceramonial robes and a set of diguises, 20 torches, a few hundred feet of rope, a ladder, a 10 ft pole, a dozen or so sacks, a bedroll a tent, etc etc) all in their backpack and then another player or two who has nothing but their weapons and armor and possibly some flint and tinder. So I have my players make comprehensive equipment lists and go over them with them. Helps realism in my opinion and to be honest once they've gotten their initial "starting package" together it doesn't come up that often again for me.
I will note however that in my long time group we've established some basic packages that we all know what they contain. For example the spellcaster/scribe package has a few candles, a blank book or rolls or parchment, a couple of quills and a pot of ink. The travelling package has a week's rations in it, a tent, a bedroll and some other useful items. I also will allow players to say they've bought a weeks worth of rations or 20 hours worth of lamp oil instead of saying they've got 7 trail rations and 12.248 liters of oil (or whatever it would be).
2. I don't remind them explicetly but if they say they're going to do something truely moronic (ie attack the king, burn down a church in broad daylight) I'll ask them if they're sure. Usually th answer is yes but it never hurts to ask.
3. I'll let someone revise an action if I haven't described the reaction yet. In the tossing a bomb into a crowded street example. If Player A had told me he tossed the bomb off the building and them Player B says "No wait, don't do that!" I'll assume that in-game Player B's character yelled that out to Player A's character in time to stop him (assuming Player A agrees and Player B's character is present for the time bomb shot put). If however I'd said "Alright you watch in horror as the bomb rips through the civillians below." and then they tried to change their action...nope sorry you just blew up a few dozen people.
The same would hold true if Player A had told me right after he tossed the bomb that he didn't actually want to do that ("Wait no I don't toss it I use that nifty disintegrate ray gun on it...") then that's fine too.
__________________
~Nostri, frequent lurker and periodic poster
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldan
I agree with this plan. Any terraforming plan involving Thermite is a good plan.
Ultimately, the question is, do you want to play a game or put your players through a logistics exercise?
Sometimes the first, sometimes the latter, sometimes both.
Players should never get used to "always have what they need". At the same time, players should never triple-check the buttons of their blouses.
There's a reasonable line to be drawn: important, or significant stuff SHOULD be taken track of.
Where to draw the line depends on many factors: the GM, the players, the campaign (or the one-shot instance) and the system.
For example: I'd rarely bother to be anal in a Vampires Masquerade campaign... but I'd pay a lot of attention to details in a survival-horror kind of game.
All in all, it's a matter of finding a compromise between hardcore realism and perfect smooth storytelling. In my experience it's quite easy to fnd the right balance for each group... but maybe I was just lucky in my GMing career. :)
Some ideas what I'd like you to consider:
- Do you ever ask your players to write up extensive equipment lists, and then let them get in trouble "for want of a nail", i. e. if they forgot to list a minor but important item, like a flashlight, or fuel for a vehicle or whatnot?
- Do you ever remind your players of things their character would likely be aware of? Do you tell them the likely consequences of an action, that their characters could foresee?
- Do you allow your players to revise an action, if, a second or so later, they remember themselves why they shouldn't do that?
I rhink it also depends on the system you're running. The story mentioned in the OP is a Shadowrunner game where PC's are often playing recklesssly with explosives in tense circumstances. It happens.
Generally, I'll let it slide if, say, the player is obviously joking.
Player: "I go french the Queen!" *group laughs*
Me: "Well then, the Royal Guardsmen-"
Player: "Ha! Nah."
Also, I'll let other nearby PC's step in, especially when it's to save their own skin.
Player One: "I stab the important NPC for mocking me!"
Player Two: "I stop him."
However, when a player is risking only himself, and does something stupid, I let it happen, but describe it in a spectacularlly funny manner, so as to creat a good story. Most of the time the players don't even try to take it back, or only halfheartedly fight the awesome.
Of course, it's stll situational. One off Shadowrun game? Part of the fun. But I'd never, say, permadeath a character from a long running campaign that's been sheperded from the vile darkness of level one all the way to the 'hey I'm pretty cool' level 14 without some options.
Also, that one power that make the GM ask 'are you sure' is the best idea ever.
__________________
Once we break down, it all breaks down.
When my players come up with plans, I often allow them a "Wisdom check" when describing something blatantly stupid. As for gear, I allow some slack. It's generally when the players come up with a paranoid list of various gadgets and ends that I put something in that they don't have the gear for.
Crowbar? check
10 foot pole? check
Everburning torches? check
Sovereign Glue? check
Universal Solvent? check
Well we need a bucket. !@#$
__________________
Ask me about our low price vacation plans in the Elemental Plane of Puppies and Pie
1) No. I assume basic equipment is there, and only unusual equipment needs to be tracked. The big caveat here is if the specific game has a "resource" component to it, such as a "Lost"-style stranded-on-an-island-with-just-what's-on-your-person motif, then of course tracking every last item becomes critical.
2) If the player is acting against what his/her character's knowledge should be, then yes. Of course, this cuts both ways -- if the player knows something the character doesn't, the character can't act on that knowledge.
3) I generally do play-by-post, so this rarely comes up. In general, if the behavior is out of character, I'd give 'em a chance to correct it. if it's in-character, then, what happens, happens.
__________________
Boundless Horizons: Now In Open Alpha Testing! Get it at Victorious Press or GitP.
I give my players three (depends on the group size I guess) collective "Are you sure?"s from the DM. The rules behind that are this:
When the DM says "Are you sure?" you immediately respond with "No, let me think that over again." and proceed to do just that. After all the AYSs are used up, the player's actions only get a raised eyebrow and a detailed description of what happens.
I don't think they've run out of these after I've told them about the limit.
__________________
Placeholder till I figure out a better sig.
In my new campaign, I make my players choose where do they put every item they have and how do they carry it. They do not have something as the inventory of a videogame. They have backpacks, or bags, or whatever. And you cannot carry every item you want just because you have enough strenght. You must have some place where put it.
I guess everybody does this, but I am annoyingly careful with this things so they look realistic. Or else they would trick me.
- Do you ever ask your players to write up extensive equipment lists, and then let them get in trouble "for want of a nail", i. e. if they forgot to list a minor but important item, like a flashlight, or fuel for a vehicle or whatnot?
Items so mundane they fall beneath notice in our daily lives I generally won't hold players to needing to list. For example, I assume anyone packing ratios or a hunting bow likely has a pot or at least some kind of skewer to cook things on. In the unlikely event we should ever need to focus on the culinary ventures of the group, they'll just have one. If they made a point of listing a particular pot they have... all the more power to them.
I'm going to assume if going for a long journey, a vehicle would have a full tank of gas.. or a horse has at least some basic feed with it. I'll probably also ask if they intend to buy extra if the probably don't bring it up.
I'm not there to go HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Gotcha. I'm there to do what I can to keep the gaming moving smoothly. Trapping them with something they overlooked, but no sensible character with an INT over 10 would forget if they were actually in the situation.. is just silly.
Quote:
- Do you ever remind your players of things their character would likely be aware of? Do you tell them the likely consequences of an action, that their characters could foresee?
- Do you allow your players to revise an action, if, a second or so later, they remember themselves why they shouldn't do that?
Yes, I make a point of doing this. It'll generally take the form of asking for some like an INT or WIS roll. Or sometimes i'll just throw it to them if it would be obvious to them. When it involves a revision though, I generally try to limit how far after their turn it happens. Since re-plays are so cumbersome.
- Do you ever ask your players to write up extensive equipment lists, and then let them get in trouble "for want of a nail", i. e. if they forgot to list a minor but important item, like a flashlight, or fuel for a vehicle or whatnot?
Yes, if they don't have it on their character sheet, they don't have it. If they do have it, they should be able to state where they got if from.
Quote:
- Do you ever remind your players of things their character would likely be aware of? Do you tell them the likely consequences of an action, that their characters could foresee?
Yes, the character is generally stronger/faster/tougher/smarter/wiser/more charismatic than the player is, so things that the character would know and the player wouldn't are relayed to the player.
Quote:
- Do you allow your players to revise an action, if, a second or so later, they remember themselves why they shouldn't do that?
Depends on how long it takes them to figure it out. They state that they throw a bomb out the window without disarming it, wait till I say it hits the street to revise their action, then no, too late. If they stop themselves before I can start describing the result, then yes.
__________________
Thanks to Ninja Chocobo for the avatar.
I'm taking a break from nethack at the moment, but advice is still welcome.
I am not perfect, nor do I pretend to be, if you find an error in something I've said, show me.
RSS Feeds: 
How do you deal with players not thinking
). It gives the game a level of realism I like. However, it is usually all for not. 
