| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
genebateman
Acolyte
23 Posts |
 Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 02:05:32
|
i do my best to let the characters that their actions and inactions have reactions. most DM's i see have it for their actions but never inactions. sometimes i see that educates the party more and gets them moving.
i have them lost trade routes and friendly way stations, battles won but at great lost, hero died.
to me this makes them think more
|
|
|
Derulbaskul
Senior Scribe
Singapore
408 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 11:43:04
|
I wouldn't call it punishment, per se, but I try to ensure that both actions and inactions have consequences that are logical.
I have a situation in my current 4E Neverwinter campaign involving the orcs that have taken residence in the River District. If they are not dealt with by a certain point - and that doesn't necessarily mean killing them all - the inaction of the PCs will see the orcs join up with an orc horde that will be marching on Neverwinter. Of course, the PCs don't know that yet.... |
Cheers
D
NB: Please remember: A cannon is a big gun. Canon is what we discuss here. |
 |
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 13:37:09
|
No, but its a great idea. I've always penalized players for the (stupid) stuff they've done, not for stuff they haven't done.
They need to understand that their actions have consequences, even when their 'action' is inaction.
I've seen this applied in published modules - the ones with set timelines. The first one that jumps to mind is Red Hand of Doom. Since the whole thing is about an escalating war, how the PCs handle themselves in each 'episode' affects how other things turn out later (and how hard the final part will be - the 'victory' is actually a sliding scale, which is brilliant). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6445 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 13:56:16
|
I have been running a campaign that involves a brewing war with powers in the underdark.
I do indeed have all actions and inactions follow some line of cause and effect.
In the first book they were preparing for a siege that they knew was coming. Their actions and inactions determined what allies they would have and what forces the enemy have. And most often then never bothered searching areas or using equipment lying around or making friends and so missed out on a lot of allies and events. They still successfully defended the siege though.
Now they are in the underdark they will be visiting areas and revisiting them later so their actions have an effect that they discover later.
In one district of an old abandoned dwarven city it is inhabited by minotaurs that are gathering magic and sacrifices to perform a ritual to call a demon to aid them. The PCs get wind of this but they might decide not to bother clearing out the minotaurs since it is dangerous (they are level 3). If they leave the minotaurs then when they return the minotaurs will have been successful, but instead of summoning a lesser demon they get lucky and Baphomet sends a Glaur demon to aid them who then rampages through the other districts destroying the friends they made previously.
In a later stage they will visit a dwarven/svirfneblin settlement and be given the option to pick sides in a political matter which results in the election of a new king. Taking the easy path will result in them getting less forces for an army they need to build. In fact to get the best result they need to take the secret option that isnt being offered to them (it requires them to think). TO make matters worse i will be bribing them with money to take the easy option because i like being mean and sneaky.
In fact for most things they have obvious options and choices that give them ok results but with some drawbacks, then there is usually a secret and difficult choice that gives the best results but they have to think of it themselves and then do the hard work to get it. |
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions Candlekeep Archive
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 1
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 2
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 3
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 4
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 5
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 6
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 7
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 8
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 9
Alternate Realms Site |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2510 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 14:19:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by genebateman
i do my best to let the characters that their actions and inactions have reactions. most DM's i see have it for their actions but never inactions. sometimes i see that educates the party more and gets them moving.
This reads as: "rails got too boring or weird to as much as walk along, now PCs just sit down. Let's drop a few rocks on characters' heads, this sure will motivate players to stay awake so they can pick up the refrain when their storyteller needs it." 
With very, very little margin of error. Unfortunately. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2450 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 15:01:25
|
It depends on what sort of campaign you're running. If it's just a series of dungeon crawls, maybe with a loose plot stringing them together, inaction doesn't matter much. But, as TB says, that can quickly become a railroading campaign, which some people don't like.
If the campaign is more of an open style, or sand box style, then absolutely things should continue to happen whether the PC's do things or not. Not just enemies but important neutrals should continue their own plots. The limit is really how much you as a DM want to keep track of. But this isn't punishing the players, it's running a game world, and sometimes PC inaction will lead to good results for them (ie: two factions stop worrying about them and start to fight each other). |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
Kris the Grey
Senior Scribe
USA
422 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 17:43:46
|
| Hoondatha (and others) are right. For a game world to be 'dynamic' and thus seem like real life, events have to be ongoing and PCs enemies, friends, and people they have never met must all still be pursuing goals of their own 'off screen' that have an impact on the PCs lives. Sometimes that works in their favor, sometimes it doesn't. That's life - and any good simulation of it! |
Kris the Grey - Member in Good Standing of the Watchful Order of Magists and Protectors, the Arcane Guild of Silverymoon, and the Connecticut Bar Association |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
8028 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 22:43:00
|
Real life tends to reward those who take initiative; they are presented with more opportunities. People who coast through life being comfortable and reactive (instead of proactive) often bemoan their fates, endlessly citing lack of the “right“ opportunities.
I observe these tendencies carrying over towards playstyles. Some PCs generate their own adventure, others constantly need to be prodded to follow breadcrumbs, they can all be motivated by knocking them out of their comfort boxes.
I‘m also a big fan of operant conditioning, it works on dogs, it works on humans. In simplest terms you just reward good behaviour and punish bad behaviour, it works best in groups where some individuals desire the same rewards given to others. If necessary, you can have a DMPC lead by example, but be careful to not play favourites. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Renin
Learned Scribe
USA
290 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2014 : 14:39:59
|
| For me, their inactions always spur on what happens next. Sometimes, this ends up making the actual plot even more difficult. If anything, that's their 'punishment' to me. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12189 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2014 : 16:31:31
|
| Truthfully, I've gone both ways. I've rewarded and penalized them sometimes for actions (for instance, sometimes just jumping freely through a portal is the right thing to do... and sometimes it isn't). I've also rewarded and penalized them for inaction (maybe they were afraid to go through the portal and it closed on them... maybe they took too long healing up and regearing after they were ambushed and lost their gear to some red wizards... and thus some of their gear was sold by the time they caught up to said red wizards). |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jan 2014 : 16:44:11
|
I was thinking, instead of punishing the characters, maybe we should punish the players themselves?
Who's up for a spanking? 
{I kid, I kid...} |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Cards77
Senior Scribe
USA
751 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jan 2014 : 02:10:00
|
It's critical that the PCs be the stars of the show. ALL of their decisions (actions) should have ramifications, even doing nothing (which is still an action). Everything the PCs do should have some effect on the game world, it doesn't have to be major, but it's imperative that if the situation demands a decision, and they decide to do nothing, the game world should reflect that decision.
For instance, in my own campaign: our druid PC is from the Moonwood. She got word that Quervarr had been attacked by lycans. She immediately stopped what she was doing and returned to Quervarr to help her friends fight the people of the black blood (she did what her character would likely do). The result of taking swift action resulted in her being able to find her mentor, and receive additional help from other druids.
Had she not done this and decided to go do other things, or not do anything, it's likely her mentor would have been killed in the fighting, along with more innocents, and some other NPCs. Thereby, this would have made dealing with the root of the problem (the People of the Black Blood leadership) that much more difficult. them having succesfully attacked Quervarr and eliminated a number of the local semi-powerful NPCs. Additionally, it could lead to questions about her PC and why she wasn't there when she was needed most. Maybe Quervarr eventually falls to the lycans.
In this way, both actions, and no-action have real consequences in the game world. This helps the players think critically when making decisions, and it also makes the world feel real, and more lived in as the players have to live with the decisions they make. Thus driving home the ultimate overarching theme of every game: what the PCs do MATTERS. |
|
|
|
SirUrza
Master of Realmslore
USA
1283 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jan 2014 : 16:42:34
|
I wouldn't call it punishment, but if I have an encounter setup for character(s) to save the girl and they walks away, odds are the girl will be dead, mutilated, and if it's reasonable, there will be grieving family/people that the character(s) may encounter.
People tend to get very hung up on avoiding a game not being rail roadie. Well if I create an idea that the players are going to have to stop a girl from being sacrificed to prevent an ancient evil from being released and they decide to head in the opposite direction, well guess what, that evil is going to be unleashed and it might come back to haunt them, it will definitely impact the world. |
"Evil prevails when good men fail to act."
The original and unapologetic Arilyn, Aribeth, Seoni Fanboy. |
|
|
|
Libelnon
Acolyte
United Kingdom
12 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jan 2014 : 17:06:36
|
I don't like the idea of 'punishing' characters quite in that regard. But I do like the idea of making players question the morality of their questgivers and in turn the foes they face; I've played one quest where the party were sent to deal with a nearby camp of Orc bandits. When we got there, we discovered it full of orc women and children; it wasn't a bandit camp, but a refugee camp. Cue the Paladin having an ethical crisis while the evil cleric (who was rather reluctant to go along with the quest) was contemplating who to stab first.
Best thing I find about Forgotten Realms is that the 'bad guys' aren't always such, and vice versa. So the questgiving merchant could actually a greedy power-player striving to usurp authority with his less-than-legal business dealings (as was the case above). His target, the Half-Orc marauder, could actually be a misunderstood Paladin who is attempting to thwart his plans. |
Looking for someone to bounce ideas off regarding a first-time campaign in the FR universe, using 3.5 and set in 1372DR.
If you're willing to help out, feel free to PM me. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
does any one punish characters for inactios?
