|
7 months ago ::
Nov 02, 2012 - 1:41PM
#1
|
|
|
Hey guys. New(er) to the pnp game. We have a campaign that we just started and are still at level one so we are pretty fresh into the campaign.
We are meeting tomorrow and one of the players gave me a piece of paper today with a dialogue they want me to read out loud tomorrow at some point in the game. It is basically the voice of his characters master ordering him to attack one of the other players because of blah blah blah. I like the idea and it was well done but I am not sure that I as the DM want to start taking sheets of dialogue that players want read during our campaings. I think it opening a can of worms and might take away from the flow of the game.
How would you guys handle it? I was thinking if he wants it read he could do it himself thus limiting the amount of times players will do this. If they know they have to read it themselves, in character, it may keep them from making it a regular thing.
I was also thinking he could just take the action he wants without having anything read and when the other players react to his actions it will start a totally random event. He can then explain in his own words what happened and why he did.
I really need some feedback here because as the DM I want to keep it fun for the players but I also don't want the players literally controlling the flow of the game. Does that make sense? I am totally new the DM experience and the pnp game in general. HELP PLEASE!
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 02, 2012 - 1:54PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Mar 28, 2010
|
player vs player dynamics, especially so early in a campaign can really harm a table. The way the player is presenting this to you is also kind of off-putting because if you do as he asks, you would be basically aiding the player to justify attacking the other. You should be careful of this because right now you're trying to build trust at the table. Personally I wouldn't do this for that reason alone. But if you need more reasons, ask yourself what the reaction of the targeted player will be ? If anything maybe asking that player for permission to go forward with this would be appropriate, since we're talking about one player attacking the other. Player driven plots are fine but not if they involve causing other players at the table grief, and that's what this sounds like it could become / cause.
"Non nobis Domine Sed nomini tuo da gloriam" "I wish for death not because I want to die, but because I seek the war eternal"
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 02, 2012 - 2:20PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
The fact that it involves attacking another PC should set off alarm bells. It sounds like he's setting up an in-game, in-character reason for inter-party violence. That's what I'd be concerned about here.
Discuss this with the group as a whole. If it's about fighting another PC, make sure the other player is on board with it, and I recommend not using dice, but allowing the target of any attacks to narrate the outcome. If both people are into it, then it will be a cool scene, if one person isn't into it, then that person can describe the attacker making ineffective attacks for whatever reason.
Apart from what I'm assuming is the underlying issue, I don't see any real issue with this. The player is engaging with the game world, and taking some narrative control. Some really cool stuff could come out of an approach like this.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 02, 2012 - 3:55PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2006
|
If it were me, I would not read the paper. If you do read the paper, it follows that the person who handed it to you will attack the other player. Then the other player will likely get upset and the person who handed you the paper has an out to put part of the blame on you since you, as the DM, had an NPC tell him to do it. This would drag you into the middle of a sticky situation. If he wants to attack the other person, then he can later tell them that he heard the voice. On a side note, I don't allow players to attack each other in my games. It's just asking for trouble, hurt feelings, and the creation of characters designed to get revenge and kill the other persons character.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 02, 2012 - 4:20PM
#5
|
|
|
Hey guys. New(er) to the pnp game. We have a campaign that we just started and are still at level one so we are pretty fresh into the campaign.
We are meeting tomorrow and one of the players gave me a piece of paper today with a dialogue they want me to read out loud tomorrow at some point in the game. It is basically the voice of his characters master ordering him to attack one of the other players because of blah blah blah. I like the idea and it was well done but I am not sure that I as the DM want to start taking sheets of dialogue that players want read during our campaings. I think it opening a can of worms and might take away from the flow of the game.
How would you guys handle it? I was thinking if he wants it read he could do it himself thus limiting the amount of times players will do this. If they know they have to read it themselves, in character, it may keep them from making it a regular thing.
I was also thinking he could just take the action he wants without having anything read and when the other players react to his actions it will start a totally random event. He can then explain in his own words what happened and why he did.
I really need some feedback here because as the DM I want to keep it fun for the players but I also don't want the players literally controlling the flow of the game. Does that make sense? I am totally new the DM experience and the pnp game in general. HELP PLEASE!
You control the NPCs. A player does not.
He is looking for a justification to attack another player. As DM, he basically wants to put words into your mouth to justify what he wants to do. This shouldn't fly.
If you want to mess with him for laughs, pull out the paper and say "I, as lord of the land of Blahblah, hereby order you, Player Mcguy to immediately and lawfully...MARRY Other Playerdude!"
That should get a good reaction when his characters "master" apparently loses his marbles. Blame it on senility. Or syphilis. Whatever.
Realistically though, make it clear you aren't going to do it...then ask what's up with it and why he wants to attack another player.
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
My blog and stuff http://dmingtowin.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 02, 2012 - 10:21PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Oct 19, 2012
|
Hey guys. New(er) to the pnp game. We have a campaign that we just started and are still at level one so we are pretty fresh into the campaign.
We are meeting tomorrow and one of the players gave me a piece of paper today with a dialogue they want me to read out loud tomorrow at some point in the game. It is basically the voice of his characters master ordering him to attack one of the other players because of blah blah blah. I like the idea and it was well done but I am not sure that I as the DM want to start taking sheets of dialogue that players want read during our campaings. I think it opening a can of worms and might take away from the flow of the game.
How would you guys handle it? I was thinking if he wants it read he could do it himself thus limiting the amount of times players will do this. If they know they have to read it themselves, in character, it may keep them from making it a regular thing.
I was also thinking he could just take the action he wants without having anything read and when the other players react to his actions it will start a totally random event. He can then explain in his own words what happened and why he did.
I really need some feedback here because as the DM I want to keep it fun for the players but I also don't want the players literally controlling the flow of the game. Does that make sense? I am totally new the DM experience and the pnp game in general. HELP PLEASE!
You control the NPCs. A player does not.
He is looking for a justification to attack another player. As DM, he basically wants to put words into your mouth to justify what he wants to do. This shouldn't fly.
If you want to mess with him for laughs, pull out the paper and say "I, as lord of the land of Blahblah, hereby order you, Player Mcguy to immediately and lawfully...MARRY Other Playerdude!"
That should get a good reaction when his characters "master" apparently loses his marbles. Blame it on senility. Or syphilis. Whatever.
Realistically though, make it clear you aren't going to do it...then ask what's up with it and why he wants to attack another player.
Go Yagami! I might be a little meaner and have the player's master order that his own apprentice/servant (whatever he is) be cast in irons by the other people, maybe even the player that the first player wanted to attack originally. Wouldn't that be hilarious.  Well, that's what I would do, not necessarily what you should do.
What Noc mentioned about player trust, especially in new games, is important enough to bear repeating. What I would really do were I in your exact position, I would explain exactly to that player why you aren't going to do this, and I wouldn't take no for an answer. Be willing to hear his input, but make damn sure he knows that you're not going to budge on this.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 03, 2012 - 10:08AM
#7
|
|
|
The other posters have said everything that needs to be said. Don't do it.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 03, 2012 - 1:26PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Oct 23, 2008
|
Turn it into an encounter but instead of the master ordering the player to attack another have the master initiate a fight, the Master against all the players - it can be a training exercise or test they must pass for the master to declare them ready to adventure out.
This way you can turn it into a bonding of the party rather than a divide that may happen with PC v PC. A test of their teamwork, force them to have to accomplish a goal that takes all of them cooperating to do. If they fail the Master scolds them for their unfocused and self-serving actions, and orders them to undertake a demeaning task as the next adventure rather than the cool, glory (& treasure) filled one.
I do not accept PC v PC in my games, if there is controvercy then it must be resolved in character without the roll of the dice (except for maybe any skill rolls they might be making). D&D and especially the party mentaility of 4E make this a cooperative game and unless the PC conflict is story based and fun then there is no place for it.
"The great epochs of our life come when we gain the courage to rechristen our evil as what is best in us." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 03, 2012 - 1:56PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jun 29, 2011
|
Have to agree with others on this one, all PvP does is bring trouble. All I can add is talk to the PC thats suppose to get killed/attack and see if he is cool with such. In my group any PvP must be agreed to by both players before it even starts and it seems to work, sometimes the players enjoy the challange.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 03, 2012 - 2:07PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2006
|
I think the op has to provide some details on what expectations of the game were going in. If everyone knew it was a free for all going in that would be different than if it was expressly a cooperative game. A good many games start with no in depth discussion about the parameters of the game.
It would certainly be a blindside for the unsuspecting player to not only be attacked by another character but have the apparent endorsement of the dm.
|
|
|
