Perception actually plays a relatively small role in the "gotcha" situation (other than Krusk's all too common example of the sadly obtuse DM who doesn't realize how opaque his scenario is). Gotcha is about choice, specifically the lack of it.
Setting aside my bias against simulationism (in D&D at least; as a writer I extract an incredible amount of enjoyment from world-building and storycraft, but that generally translates into frustration at the playing table), "gotcha" is generally poor form for two reasons. For one, it creates an unnecessarily hostile relationship between the DM and the players. If the DM is always trying to "outsmart" the players when he has an enormous amount of game-mechanic advantages against them, he only invites them to try the same. A "gotcha", as Lunar points out, is typically used to funnel the possible range of PC actions into a few predictable outcomes, usually for the sake of planning and pacing. If you take a step back from the table you can see that the "gotcha" is really just a poor design choice (think of all those times in a video game when you hit a barrier that forces you to backtrack through a level, and think of how much "fun" you had). If you need to slow down the PCs, add in a skill challenge or a roleplaying scenario, or re-design your adventure area.
The best solution that I know of to fighting poor design choice is embracing the "Yes, and..." mentality to DMing. A good session will have its ups and downs, but it should be evenly paced and engaging from start to finish. Letting your players use their imaginations will help that.
To clarify, if it is 100% true that the DM is not interested in whether the PCs succeed or not against a given task, would this preclude a "gotcha" situation as you have described?
If the players know that's how the DM thinks, then yes. In your case, I'm assuming your players know that you make heavy use of random tables, so that it's easily possible for situations to get rolled up that wouldn't occur in someone else's game or would have different meaning if they did.
In the door scenario, I don't think it's necessarily a bad setup. Actually, I might do something like that -- create an obstacle, think of the obvious ways to circumvent it and build in things to block those solutions. The key detail in my approach that I think makes it reasonable is that I only block those solutions that I think of beforehand. If the PC's come up with a clever approach (or even an obvious one) that I didn't think of, then it will work, or have a chance at working with some skill checks. I do not retcon barriers to their ideas on the fly, because I could do that all day just to make it impossible or to try to force them into the One True Solution, both of which would be bad DMing in my opinion, whether or not classified as "gotcha."
To me the door example is not gotcha DMing. It can be railroading if done to force the PCs down a particular path or it could simply be bad DMing because the story get stuck*. To me Gotcha DMing tends to involve a situation in which the players observe one thing, base their action on it and than get punished for doing the logical thing.
Obviously, from a story perspective the occassional 'gotcha' is fine, especially if the players afterwards realize they would have seen it comming had they been paying attention. For example, some of my friends still talk with awe when their PCs were fooled by a villain into doing something and blindly believing that the item he gave them indeed would teleport them out. They never double checked the story, and hence were really surprised when the item did not teleport them at all. It was a gotcha, but the players trusted their DM that if they had done the necessary footwork they would have learned about the plot and looking backwards they realized there had been clues enough.
On the other hand, some Gotchas are just bad. For example, the few times I had new players purposely express that they gather their dropped weapons after a fight, I always tell tham that you really do not have to tell me that. I am not going to grin behind my DM screen because you as a player forgot to grab your families ancestral weapon.
* Mind you, I have used these kind of situations in my campaigns just because my players sometimes really like to discuss problem solving or to impress the fact that just because to keep the adventure going I am usually not bothering with the mundane does not mean there is no mundane (e.g. we are always ambushed on a shop <> only when I detail the ship somehting will happen, the dozens of time nothing happens I don't bother with the ship). If the players get blindsided by the situation though, in other words they litterally are spending more then 15 minutes on what is just window dressing, I flat out say it is window dressing and they shouldn't worry too much.
Kerapalli sums up my views perfectly. Though the door example isn't a gotcha in my book. It's just poor design that needs to be left in the 70s. Pacing and momentum is important. I take the view that every session should be played as if it was the game's last. A door hiding the rest of the adventure with one solution goes against that notion. Is it logical to come across a door that is beyond the PCs' abilities to open? I guess so. Is it fun? Probably not. It's like I told a DM the other day, after 20 years of gaming if I have to spend even a second of session time describing how I approach, position myself, search, unlock a door, and say who goes into the room first, just assume I set off the trap directly into my face, then let's just get on with it. Those niggling transactions can simply go.
I view "gotcha DMing" much the same as the ideas of "metagaming" and "railroading," which is to say, these are three concepts with no single definition across a sampling of gamers, but rather buzz words that say, "whatever it is you're doing, I don't like it."
No amount of tips, tricks, or gimmicks will ever be better than simply talking directly to your fellow players to resolve your issues. Reduce DM Prep & Increase Player Engagement:Don't Prep the Plot | Structure First, Story Last | Collaborative Roleplay | "Yes, and..." | Prep Tips Games I'm Running on Roll20: Island of the Frog | Vanguard of Dis | Star*Juice | Tesseract | The Crucible | Fimbulvetr | The Delve | Draj, City of the Moon Follow me on Twitter:@is3rith
Perception actually plays a relatively small role in the "gotcha" situation (other than Krusk's all too common example of the sadly obtuse DM who doesn't realize how opaque his scenario is). Gotcha is about choice, specifically the lack of it.
Setting aside my bias against simulationism (in D&D at least; as a writer I extract an incredible amount of enjoyment from world-building and storycraft, but that generally translates into frustration at the playing table), "gotcha" is generally poor form for two reasons. For one, it creates an unnecessarily hostile relationship between the DM and the players. If the DM is always trying to "outsmart" the players when he has an enormous amount of game-mechanic advantages against them, he only invites them to try the same. A "gotcha", as Lunar points out, is typically used to funnel the possible range of PC actions into a few predictable outcomes, usually for the sake of planning and pacing. If you take a step back from the table you can see that the "gotcha" is really just a poor design choice (think of all those times in a video game when you hit a barrier that forces you to backtrack through a level, and think of how much "fun" you had). If you need to slow down the PCs, add in a skill challenge or a roleplaying scenario, or re-design your adventure area.
The best solution that I know of to fighting poor design choice is embracing the "Yes, and..." mentality to DMing. A good session will have its ups and downs, but it should be evenly paced and engaging from start to finish. Letting your players use their imaginations will help that.
However, isn't this all dependent on player expectations of the game, its world and the methodology of the game? The concept of a "funnel" or "if you need to slow down" etc all presumes an agenda by the DM. If it is known there is no agenda at play, at what point is the "gotcha" completely nullified? The very word itself implies an agenda because it's trying to "get" something over on the PCs.
It really seems to me like there is a HUGE victim mentality being invoked either for or on the part of the PCs.
Kerapalli sums up my views perfectly. Though the door example isn't a gotcha in my book. It's just poor design that needs to be left in the 70s. Pacing and momentum is important. I take the view that every session should be played as if it was the game's last. A door hiding the rest of the adventure with one solution goes against that notion. Is it logical to come across a door that is beyond the PCs' abilities to open? I guess so. Is it fun? Probably not. It's like I told a DM the other day, after 20 years of gaming if I have to spend even a second of session time describing how I approach, position myself, search, unlock a door, and say who goes into the room first, just assume I set off the trap directly into my face, then let's just get on with it. Those niggling transactions can simply go.
I view "gotcha DMing" much the same as the ideas of "metagaming" and "railroading," which is to say, these are three concepts with no single definition across a sampling of gamers, but rather buzz words that say, "whatever it is you're doing, I don't like it."
The assumptions here are vast. So I will try to clarify again.
You mention pacing and momentum but how is that entirely the purview of the DM? In a PC-driven game, isn't it necessarily the efforts of the PCs that drive the pace (and therefore the momentum and pacing) of the game? Also you mention "hiding the rest of the adventure" but I question if you have read the thread as it is explicitly stated several times that A) there is no "ADVENTURE" as there is no story or such at work... B) also nowhere in any part of the explaination does it say there is anything particular behind the door. These are all assumptions being read into it...actually, even more than that, these are all things being RE-INTRODUCED to the situation even after it's explained that it isn't the case.
Essentially, again, I have to invoke that this seems like a pretty major persecution complex when someone says "Okay first of all, these people are definitely not there to hurt you...what do you do?" "I draw my sword since they want to hurt me" "Uh...." - that is pretty much what I am getting from this.
I'd also heavily disagre with the ideas that phrases, especially meta-gaming, are meaningless. They aren't. Do people use them incorrectly? Sure, but it's like saying that "literally" doesn't mean anything because a bunch of morons use phrases like "The weather is so bad here it's literally hell on earth"...well yeah, people can mis-use words. That is, however, not the words fault...and the word or phrase should not be thrown out. People should just strive to use it correctly. Cutting words out of conversations though seems to me a poor attempt to control said conversation.
As far as the "20 year" remark though with approaching doors and such...it really seems to me like you've either grown board with some of the core concepts of D&D (though these concepts are by no means hard-coded into the game) or that, very likely, you have gamed with some very bad DMs. I would ask you this, since you brought up a trapped door...if you don't want to deal with that or "spend a second on it"...what if the rogue in the group does and he is seated next to you?
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
The assumptions here are vast. So I will try to clarify again.
You mention pacing and momentum but how is that entirely the purview of the DM? In a PC-driven game, isn't it necessarily the efforts of the PCs that drive the pace (and therefore the momentum and pacing) of the game?
Pacing and momentum are driven by the players of the game in my view, among whose number I count the DM since we're all playing a game together. If the momentum is not being sustained by the PCs, then the DM should step in and inject some tension or action, based upon established fiction. How and when the DM arrives at that decision and how he determines what action to inject will be a matter of style.
Also you mention "hiding the rest of the adventure" but I question if you have read the thread as it is explicitly stated several times that A) there is no "ADVENTURE" as there is no story or such at work... B) also nowhere in any part of the explaination does it say there is anything particular behind the door. These are all assumptions being read into it...actually, even more than that, these are all things being RE-INTRODUCED to the situation even after it's explained that it isn't the case.
You don't need to have a story to have an adventure. Presumably, the door is in a location and the PCs are exploring said location. That's an adventure. A door with nothing behind it shouldn't even be in the location.
Essentially, again, I have to invoke that this seems like a pretty major persecution complex when someone says "Okay first of all, these people are definitely not there to hurt you...what do you do?" "I draw my sword since they want to hurt me" "Uh...." - that is pretty much what I am getting from this.
I'd also heavily disagre with the ideas that phrases, especially meta-gaming, are meaningless. They aren't. Do people use them incorrectly? Sure, but it's like saying that "literally" doesn't mean anything because a bunch of morons use phrases like "The weather is so bad here it's literally hell on earth"...well yeah, people can mis-use words. That is, however, not the words fault...and the word or phrase should not be thrown out. People should just strive to use it correctly. Cutting words out of conversations though seems to me a poor attempt to control said conversation.
What are the correct, universally agreed-upon definitions of these terms then? (Links will do.) And if you have such definitions, why are we discussing the definition of "gotcha" here? Or rather, why did you ask, "what is 'gotcha' DMing to you" if there's already a definition?
As far as the "20 year" remark though with approaching doors and such...it really seems to me like you've either grown board with some of the core concepts of D&D (though these concepts are by no means hard-coded into the game) or that, very likely, you have gamed with some very bad DMs. I would ask you this, since you brought up a trapped door...if you don't want to deal with that or "spend a second on it"...what if the rogue in the group does and he is seated next to you?
Yes, I'm bored of searching doors for traps and determining marching order. Luckily, 4e does away with some of the door searching (in theory). That doesn't stop old DMs from clinging to legacy design/approaches though, even if they are good DMs otherwise.
No amount of tips, tricks, or gimmicks will ever be better than simply talking directly to your fellow players to resolve your issues. Reduce DM Prep & Increase Player Engagement:Don't Prep the Plot | Structure First, Story Last | Collaborative Roleplay | "Yes, and..." | Prep Tips Games I'm Running on Roll20: Island of the Frog | Vanguard of Dis | Star*Juice | Tesseract | The Crucible | Fimbulvetr | The Delve | Draj, City of the Moon Follow me on Twitter:@is3rith
Pacing and momentum are driven by the players of the game in my view, among whose number I count the DM since we're all playing a game together. If the momentum is not being sustained by the PCs, then the DM should step in and inject some tension or action, based upon established fiction. How and when the DM arrives at that decision and how he determines what action to inject will be a matter of style.
"If you guys think you've used up your options, there's plenty more dungeon and plenty more world out there. The door's bolted to the wall...it's not going anywhere. It's been here a couple hundred years so its probably not going anywhere any time soon."
Does that count as interjecting properly? ..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />Then it's a pointless and useless example. Why are we even discussing it? Also, you don't need to have a story to have an adventure. Presumably, the door is in a location and the PCs are exploring said location. That's an adventure. A door with nothing behind it shouldn't even be in the location. It's a complete waste of time.
You are drawing incorrect conclusions. There is NOTHING IN PARTICULAR behind the door...not NOTHING. Again, as originally outlined, I am not making any assumptions about what is behind the door. The door itself is the matter of discussion. Again: The door does not necessarily have anything behind it...and it DEFINITELY does not have anything behind it that is key to something that, without it, will end the PCs ability to continue to have fun and adventure in the world. Could the door have something interesting behind it that opens up more options? Sure. Could it have treasure? Sure. Could it have a different part of the location they are exploring? Sure. However, turning around and walking away with, in no way, eliminate "fun" from the game if you quantify "fun" as "things we can do". In this case, "getting past this door right now" might as well be "jump up and high-five the moon"...neither is mechanically or feasibly possible, but it's lack of current possibility does not preclude the PCs from taking further actions. There is no pre-defined "narrative" going on...there are no expectations thrust upon the PCs except those they might wish to create. I expect NOTHING of them.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />I'm not sure what this is in reference to.
It is in reference to the fact that I have, multiple times now, clarified the intent of the DM in this situation (No agenda, no expectations, no punitive measures, etc etc) but intent of a different kind is continuously being placed into the DM in peoples replies. Again, it is the equivalent of a person telling you "There is absolutely no reason these people you are meeting will want to hurt you" and your reply is "Then I draw my sword since they want to hurt me"...it is a complete disconnect between what one person is saying to another.
What are the correct, universally agreed-upon definitions of these terms then? (Links will do.) And if you have such definitions, why are we discussing the definition of "gotcha" here? Or rather, why did you ask, "what is 'gotcha' DMing to you" if there's already a definition?
Meta-game is the derived from the actual consequences of engaging in a game against another person in that game. That is to say, when you make decisions based on the decisions your opponent or competitor would be making based on the game's rules, strategies or environment, that is meta-gaming.
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
"If you guys think you've used up your options, there's plenty more dungeon and plenty more world out there. The door's bolted to the wall...it's not going anywhere. It's been here a couple hundred years so its probably not going anywhere any time soon."
Meta-game is the derived from the actual consequences of engaging in a game against another person in that game. That is to say, when you make decisions based on the decisions your opponent or competitor would be making based on the game's rules, strategies or environment, that is meta-gaming.
I disagree with your definition. Where's the "official" definition? Also, what is the official definition of "gotcha?" Links will do, or page references to published materials. Please note that I play 4e, so if the definition comes from any other edition, it's not applicable.
No amount of tips, tricks, or gimmicks will ever be better than simply talking directly to your fellow players to resolve your issues. Reduce DM Prep & Increase Player Engagement:Don't Prep the Plot | Structure First, Story Last | Collaborative Roleplay | "Yes, and..." | Prep Tips Games I'm Running on Roll20: Island of the Frog | Vanguard of Dis | Star*Juice | Tesseract | The Crucible | Fimbulvetr | The Delve | Draj, City of the Moon Follow me on Twitter:@is3rith
Please commit to a stance. To you, is this an agreeable interjection?
Could you come up with another example?
The players, through their own research and tenacity (since I personally have a group of motivated, intelligent players indeed) have discovered there could very well be a treasure nearby but the locals believe it to be guarded by a dragon. They have figured that the dragon could be a wyvern or some lesser beast since the descriptions seem vague or folkloric at best. They do eventually find the place in question and, indeed, there is a dragon of great size and dangerousness. The group, at this point, says to themselves “Well this thing could be an absolute bear to face. Let us wait until we have amassed greater power because undertaking such a task”… the group agrees and goes on their merry way to do something else that strikes their fancy. NOTE: The dragon was in place in the area long before the PCs started investigating…that is to say, the DM had awareness of the dragon before it could have been reasonably made aware to the players. It is not a quantum-dragon…it was “always” there. In this example, were the PCs presented with a “gotcha”? Does it depend on whether or not they engaged the dragon and lived or died? As always, assume the players sitting around the table fully understand that the DM has no vested interest in the success or failure of the PCs and allows them to do as they will and make their choices as they desire so they factually know this treasure/dragon is not load-bearing…no grand narrative rests on its scaly shoulders.
I disagree with your definition. Where's the "official" definition? Also, what is the official definition of "gotcha?" Links will do, or page references to published materials. Please note that I play 4e, so if the definition comes from any other edition, it's not applicable.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metagaming: “In simple terms, it is the use of out-of-game information or resources to affect one's in-game decisions.” Does it cover a breadth of situations and dynamics? Yes. But that is the case with any word just as if I say “Sandwich”…is it a Rueben? Is it a Hoagey? Is it from Subway? It is a cheesemelt? Those are all sandwiches. All those things are metagaming, some apply more than others and some are more appropriate than others, but that is the origin and usage of the word. Misuse may very…but misuse of words is LITERALLY one of the most common mistakes in communication. In that case you, unfortunately, can’t throw the baby out with the bathwater…it’s not the words fault.
Here’s another freebie. 1. railroadingpresent participle of rail·road (Verb)
Verb: 1. Press (someone) into doing something by rushing or coercing them: "she hesitated, unwilling to be railroaded into a decision".
Sorry to be to terse on this but I hate when people discuss the WORDS of a conversation rather than, y’know, the conversation. I do not enjoy debating what “is” is. The rogue can have his spotlight, sure. I would blame this transaction on the DM for setting it up so poorly, not the rogue for doing the thing he does.
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
I'd define it as various DM actions that basically "trick" the players. For example, having a dragon be a minion while his weak human undereling is a solo, or telling the ranger that because he did not specifically say he was resting during the extended rest, he gains no benefits from it.
We summoned a devil once. All we used was the D&D books, too. It was pretty kwazy.
God of Arrested Development and Intelligence Resident Left Hand of Stalin and Banana Stand Grandstander Pie-Cooling-On-A-Windowsill of the House of Trolls In the morning HK'll be sober but you'll still be a meatbag. I know I misspell "Danke" in my posts. It's an inside joke. "Ten cents gets you nuts." -George Michael Spoiler:Show
''Being president is like running a cemetery: you've got a lot of people under you and nobody's listening.'' —Bill Clinton
You are not a moral man. There are not enough middle fingers in the world for you.
"Heroes"...I wish I had those. I remember in my first-ever campaign one PC went around shootin all the unconscious baddies in the head to gain Dark Side Points...
Whaaaaaat?!??
Wow...way to waste perfectly good potential slaves.
Er...no wait I mean..uh...something not evil!
(Quotes screwed up on the next one, won't give the poster's name. It's in the Best Lines thread on the D&D forum)
First, an experience from a game I played in a few years back. Our DM didn't like 3.5 as a whole but liked parts of it. So he hands us a big ass rules packet for his modified FR campaign, complete with quotes from important NPC's on the front. I can't remember most of the HRs, just that some how gods like Cyric and Bhaal existed at the same time, despite the obvious problems there. In the end the game became a problem more because of the railroading than the HRs, but it ended with this classic line, after our ranger tried to disarm the strange woman following us WITH HIS BOW: DM: You just killed (insert random noble sounding name here) JP: Was she important? Jack: Dude, she's quoted on the front of the rules packet!
"Why in the wide,wide, world of all things irrational would I help you? -Daniel Jackson "Fun will now commence." -Seven of Nine
Cut the last encounter on your way out after dealing with the Darth. He's the BBEG. Treat him as such. Play up that Darth Revan is THAT much of a badarse. When the shuttle landed, I had no less than 13 JEDI MASTERS step off the shuttle. The PCs were slack-jawed. After the meetup with Bastila (as she's carrying Revan's body), only TWO jedi masters remained with her. Let me tell you, the player whining about not getting to fight Revan himself shut up pretty quickly when he saw that.
1. Cleric cast protection from fire on Tank. 2. Tank goes in and get surrounded by enemies. 3. Wizard cast fireball and blows them up. 4. ??? 5. Profit
I go by the saying," If it ain't friendly fire then it's not working."
