|
4 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 3:07PM
#11
|
|
|
Seems to me your friend vampire got the right idea to track down a thieves guild. Very jason statem method. Once their organized crime money maker brothel is burned down, it would nt be long before thieves guild come to the players for a thorough retribution... Including the City Garrison... Families of victims hurt... Basically everyone in the city.
Appears to me your player basically created their own hook totally in line with your adventure, and swallowed it sink and all. it should tickle you just thinking how you gonna use it all as part of your campaign, adventure, and make the players pay...in a fun, exciting and meaningful way. LOL
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 3:16PM
#12
|
|
|
Seems to me your friend vampire got the right idea to track down a thieves guild. Very jason statem method. Once their organized crime money maker brothel is burned down, it would nt be long before thieves guild come to the players for a thorough retribution... Including the City Garrison... Families of victims hurt... Basically everyone in the city.
Appears to me your player basically created their own hook, and swallowed it sink and all. it should tickle you just thinking how you gonna use it all as part of your campaign, adventure, and make the players pay...in a fun, exciting and meaningful way. LOL
This is an excellent point.
You see the problem as potentially negative. You can turn this into a postive for building an interesting side adventure for your players.
Depending on how this goes though you could also reinforce this kind of character behavior. I bring this up only if you have issue with this type of character behavior in the first place.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 3:18PM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2006
|
Let him do it. Roll in plain site a percentile dice to determine how involved the fire becomes. With really low numbers being cosmetic damage that was put out and 90+ as an out of control blaze that engulgs blocks of the city or a large portion. Let the repurcussions flow from how big or small the fire was. If the fire was minimal maybe the pc gets away with it. If the damage is significant enough mages could be brought in to divine the cause which could be trouble for the pc.
Maybe some politics are at work behind the scenes and some innocent could be blamed or an innocent group could be signaled out.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 4:28PM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Jun 19, 2004
|
Let him do it. Roll in plain site a percentile dice to determine how involved the fire becomes. With really low numbers being cosmetic damage that was put out and 90+ as an out of control blaze that engulgs blocks of the city or a large portion. Let the repurcussions flow from how big or small the fire was. If the fire was minimal maybe the pc gets away with it. If the damage is significant enough mages could be brought in to divine the cause which could be trouble for the pc.
Maybe some politics are at work behind the scenes and some innocent could be blamed or an innocent group could be signaled out.
I like the idea of a scapegoat being blamed for the fire. If there was something in the city that they disliked, blaming it on them to rally the public against them would be interesting, as well as sending a couple people quietly after you.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out hereSpoiler:
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here
If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here
Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 9:05PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
Do let him do it, and do have consequences, but DO NOT use those consequences to teach the player a lesson. If you need to teach the player about how you like players and characters to act, that is a conversation to have outside of the game. Using the game itself to teach the lesson is passive aggressive, probably won't work, and will probably lead to an argument.
Obviously there should be consequences for actions in a game, but those consequences should only ever be intended to make the game interesting and challenging, for the amusement of the players. Using them to make the game boring for the players is a waste of everyone's time, including the DM's.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 10:55PM
#16
|
|
|
I'm going to go against the grain of everyone saying "let them do it".
If you don't want him to burn down the brothel, be creative in how you choose to disallow it. Don't just say "No, you can't burn down my brothel" but if there just happenes to be a patrol of guards walking down the street at that time, it seems highly likely that arson would be a bad idea.
Perhaps another band of "adventurers" comes along and stops the would be arsonist and chases him away. Maybe the brothel has a famous, and dangerous vampire hunter as clientele and he/she happens to discover said vampire beginning to set his little fire.
Perhaps the brothel is a stone building...and stone obviously doesn't burn.
In short, if you don't want your player doing things like that, be creative with how you stop them from doing it...don't just say no. But, if you don't want to deal with the consequences of him burning it down, find a way to make it...less then convenient to do so. It's my experience that in such situations, players generally won't make a huge effort to cause mayhem.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 13, 2013 - 3:32PM
#17
|
|
|
DM's ability to adept to player's actions & decisions and then incorporate the "cause and effect" of those actions smoothly into the original plot the DM had in mind can be difficult...but it is necessary.
It may force the DM to skip or change on the spot some of the skill challenges or encounters the DM may have prepared, and that can be irking. But the DM shouldn't be stuck with a ridgid linear plot or story anyway. It should be fluid enough to incorporate players decisions and actions and it's "cause and effect". Ultimately the authors of the story are both the dm and the players.
If anyway possible, I prefer not to make side adventures as the "cause & effect" of players actions. If anyway possible, I try to incorporate it into the original plot. If I get stonewalled and not sure how to incorporate it on the spot because my friends did something totally unexpected, I tell my friends this isn't what i expected but its cool... give me 5 minute to adjust. I take a break, do a quick readjustment in my mind and we move.
To me the OP's situation is golden. Easy to adept & incorporate into a plot involving tracking down a secret syndicate, for whatever the purpose, friendship or foe. The players unintentionally handed me themselves on a silver platter. Oh happy days...
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 13, 2013 - 3:54PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
In short, if you don't want your player doing things like that, be creative with how you stop them from doing it...don't just say no. But, if you don't want to deal with the consequences of him burning it down, find a way to make it...less then convenient to do so. It's my experience that in such situations, players generally won't make a huge effort to cause mayhem.
In my experience, the more the DM tries to use in-game methods to stop in-game actions they don't like, the more the players will argue against or simply circumvent those methods.
If you don't want the players to do something in game - and there can be many reasons for this, including things that make other players unhappy, or which are unintentionally boring for enough of the players - the only way to have a chance of succeeding and to avoid bad feelings (and this bad behavior) from the player, is to talk to them outside the context of the game. It's hard to do, but it's the mature way to handle it, and in the end people tend to prefer handling things like adults.
And this isn't to say that the player will take it well. They still might bridle at what you're asking, and they might even be right. But in a person-to-person discussion, at least there's no excusing one's choices in terms of rules, or alignment, or anything. Say what you don't like, and stand by it.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 13, 2013 - 5:20PM
#19
|
|
|
In short, if you don't want your player doing things like that, be creative with how you stop them from doing it...don't just say no. But, if you don't want to deal with the consequences of him burning it down, find a way to make it...less then convenient to do so. It's my experience that in such situations, players generally won't make a huge effort to cause mayhem.
In my experience, the more the DM tries to use in-game methods to stop in-game actions they don't like, the more the players will argue against or simply circumvent those methods.
If you don't want the players to do something in game - and there can be many reasons for this, including things that make other players unhappy, or which are unintentionally boring for enough of the players - the only way to have a chance of succeeding and to avoid bad feelings (and this bad behavior) from the player, is to talk to them outside the context of the game. It's hard to do, but it's the mature way to handle it, and in the end people tend to prefer handling things like adults.
And this isn't to say that the player will take it well. They still might bridle at what you're asking, and they might even be right. But in a person-to-person discussion, at least there's no excusing one's choices in terms of rules, or alignment, or anything. Say what you don't like, and stand by it.
I do agree with this. The best way to handle the situation is outside the game saying "look bro, I don't want you burning down the brothel. It's inconvenient for me, and the consequences are likely to not end well for you when you have a whole town upset with your actions. Think before you light..."
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 13, 2013 - 5:42PM
#20
|
Date Joined:
Aug 15, 2011
|
Along with 'mass murderers make for poor PCs'.
|
|
|
