>Players are in hot pursuit of a BBEG's lieutenant >Said

>>49900133
>one hit kills the player for bullshit reasons
Your bait is weak and you should feel ashamed of yourself

>>49900160
She was an assassin rogue who sneak attacked him with a vorpal dagger that he had gifted to her. The perception roll was to see if he could beat her stealth and possibly react to the attack.

I'd consider this fair, he should have known the risks involved...

>>49900133

I mean his girlfriend just snuck up and literally stabbed him in the back for a ridiculously petty reason. Honestly I think that's what the player finds most frustrating. You bushwhacked him with no warning for what feels like cheap drama. No one likes getting one-shot because the GM thinks he's being dramatic.


A friend turning enemy can be a great plot hook but it sounds like you didn't handle it all that elegantly.

>>49900133
>That DM Thread
Staring!
>That DM!

>>49900133

I don't have much to say here, but doing what you did is very difficult to pull off.

All I can give you is hindsight which I am sure has at least crossed you mind, if not occured to you at some frequency.

What I personally would have done before doing something like that would be to pull the player who was fostering the love interest to see if he would be ok for something like this to happen.

I know, I know, it mitigates the surprise. But on the same token, in my experience, if the player cooperates, they'll do so many horrible things to their own characters than you would have ever imagined.

If they don't like it though, then negotiate or don't do it. It's a cooperative game after all, and something like this does mettle pretty deeply on a primal level, even if it is only pretend.

File: guard.gif (89KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 600x450px

>>49900133
Shit-tier GMing. Having a lover go full betrayal evil isn't interesting plot, it's just feelsbad, and the kind of feelsbad that turns off player's interest in your media.

I mean, aside from the whole "fuck over your player's loved ones" gaff, which is already a grade-A fuck up as a GM, you then proceeded to subvert everything that the players knew about a person they thought they knew quite intimately. By making this character not who the player thought she was, you also take away player agency--you'd think even the most autistic of individuals would spot something was up if their lover was the type of gal who'd slit your throat at a moment's notice. So you're also saying to your players, "your perception of the world doesn't matter, and the events in this world are not internally consistent: they are instead capricious, according to my whims."

As a player, that would sure as hell take the wind out of my sails. I wouldn't feel partial to playing any more sincce I don't know if any relationships I build in-game are going to be meaningful or just see a complete betrayal down the moment cause my asshat of a GM thought it would be cinematic.

Finally, this action is basically GM fiat "your character is dead." You had the lover just slit his throat. He doesn't get a say in the matter, and that's poor form as well.

TL;DR maybe you should put down the DM guide for a bit while you reconsider your style.

>>49900214

>your girlfriend sneaks up on you and slits your throat
>your character dies, no save
>wait why are you mad at me?

>>49900214
>What I personally would have done before doing something like that would be to pull the player who was fostering the love interest to see if he would be ok for something like this to happen.

This comes off as incredibly coddlish and unrealistic, bad things some times happen. Often without people having any overt idea about it. Are we supposed to play fluffy cotton candy adventures here, where there are no stakes and no hard times?

What is a victory without real unscripted tragedy to put it into context?

>>49900206
>No one likes getting one-shot because the GM thinks he's being dramatic.
This was simply the unfortunate circumstance of the mechanics working in the favor of the enemies.

>>49900133
Is this bait or do you have actual autism?

File: 1463413992101.jpg (25KB, 253x218px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 253x218px

>>49900235
>you then proceeded to subvert everything that the players knew about a person they thought they knew quite intimately.
Did you read my post? I stated that I had repeatedly been hinting at the character's moral bankrupcy and considerations about jumping ship. Yet the players just ignored it wholesale.

>>49900254
>mechanics
maybe you wanna take another stroll through those rules

>>49900254
How fucking strong is the dagger that a commoner npc can 1 shot a PC? And did you even bother to roll the dice? Let fate decide, not your thirst for cinematics? Oh and what were the hints you gave him?

>>49900274
or your warnings were nonexistent / only obvious to yourself
gosh, I wonder what's more likely

File: smug doc.png (501KB, 748x756px) Image search: [Google]

501KB, 748x756px

>>49900133
>two men roleplaying a romantic relationship with one of them pretending to be a girl
I don't even blame OP for doing what he did. If I got suckered into playing make believe as some neckbeard's "waifu" I would cuck and kill him too.

If this guy keeps being disruptive at your table you should just kick him out of the group entirely.

>>49900133
>I describe the lieutenant doing the unspeakable to his lover.
Because that is what an officer will be doing while his hideout is being actively raided, right?
>>49900177
>She was an assassin rogue who sneak attacked him with a vorpal dagger that he had gifted to her.
Because vorpal means lol any hit will kill as opposed to only Nat 20s, right?

>Tough enemies everywhere and fortifications make it really hard to get anywhere

Because the BBEG really lets his minions go and use a good chunk of his army on... What, hackysack hide the sausage time?

At least make your scenario reasonable, brah. This whole thing sounds terribly contrived.

>>49900275
>>49900281
Read my posts, please. I already specified she was an assassin rogue using a vorpal dagger. The perception check was to see if he could spot her before she'd get the surprise round. Assassins score automatic critical hits against surprised targets. Vorpal weapons kill on critical hits. The perception check was the save.

>>49900287
>Because vorpal means lol any hit will kill as opposed to only Nat 20s, right?
Can you find me where in the book it specifies Vorpal weapons only work on 20s? You may be thinking about 3.5, we were playing 5e.

>>49900254

>This was simply the unfortunate circumstance of the mechanics working in the favor of the enemies.

Nah, fuck off with this. Mechanics working against the players is only a valid excuse when you haven't orchestrated a scenario explicitly to fuck over the players. Saying "lol he shoulda rolled higher on his perception" is a bullshit excuse for literally one-shotting a PC with his own fucking love interest.

You basically said "rocks fall everyone dies" and blamed the player for failing his athletics roll.

File: gameplay.jpg (137KB, 640x424px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 640x424px

>>49900274
Rule No. something or whatever:

Players are fucking oblivious. Unless it's super blatant, they will not get the hint and you're setting yourself up for failure.

>>49900304
Most of my players are highly perceptive individuals, I sincerely do not understand why they didn't catch this one when they've actively caught my other hints.

File: alright i'll listen.jpg (119KB, 462x356px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 462x356px

>It's a boring bait thread where people aren't even saging it episode

>>49900317
I'm honestly just trying to tell my side of the story to get some constructive criticism from /tg/.

File: git gud.png (314KB, 1044x533px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 1044x533px

>>49900312
Maybe it's because literally everything you've said in this thread indicates you're a shit GM? Even your players are pissed at you, mate. You don't have any good defense.

Now am I a shitty DM for saving one of my players?

They were fighting a lesser beholder and some cultists and the beholder hit him with a ray of wounding. While the cultists right beside him rolled to finish him off and both critting... The others finished up and I just had the paladin pray over him and had a demigod meeting I had planned for much later just resurrect him.

Is this a bad thing?

File: Mannlet.jpg (213KB, 862x605px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 862x605px

>>49900328
If you want some constructive criticism, you should delete the thread, think of some better bait, and work on something better. Magical realm stuff is a bit boring but it usually feels more believable so you would do better starting with that.

>>49900299
https://open5e.com/equipment/magic-items/vorpal-sword.html

Yeah, you're just making shit up on the spot to make your story more convincing.

Have you actually tried playing games and posting about actual scenarios that happen instead of cheap shots designed to get a raise out of /tg/?

>>49900337
Yes, that death was fair and would teach the players that they aren't shounen protagonists or mary sue snowflakes and that the world doesn't bend to their whims.

Instead you just made all stakes pointless and showed your true colors of some hack author running his players through his novel.

>>49900345
>https://open5e.com/equipment/magic-items/vorpal-sword.html
Huh, my bad. The players really should have reminded me of this when it happened. It's too late to retcon it now, but they really could have saved the player.

>>49900337
Does resurrect magic exist in the setting?

If yes, it's fine, if no, then you should try to avoid bending the rules of the setting like that.

>>49900177
Bullshit. Reasoning:

-If there's vorpal weaponry being gifted around, this scenario goes very differently from described. You've described a trap for fifth-level fighters, not a high-tier D&D war party.

-Ideology and romance don't actually mix that readily. Coming to join the BBEG's faction isn't going to automatically include elopement. Though it's a reasonable lead-in to a doublecross, your setup is inelegant and illogical. I suppose it's possible you're leaving out much for brevity.

->>49900235

-You obviously have an interest in fleshed-out non-murderhobo characters if you encouraged this to begin with. You would not, therefore, logically take actions to encourage murderhoboism. Which, by the way, this is.

->>49900287

So yeah, nah, I call bullshit. Good story I guess, but utterly unbelievable.

>>49900352
Yet I've killed the party at least once a piece. This PC was one of my favorites and I figured one time wouldn't hurt them.

They've had hard times and easy times. I don't see how one moment of kindness is that bad.

File: 1456844481204.png (137KB, 451x302px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 451x302px

>>49900285
>If this guy keeps being disruptive at your table you should just kick him out of the group entirely.

Nah, OP. If this guy keeps being disruptive, you should cuck him in real life.

>>49900364
Yes it does. The demigod that saved him is one under the paladins deity. I don't really plan on doing it again, the guy was just one of my favorite PCs.

>>49900359

Nah what could've saved the player was not fucking icing him just for shock value.

Games are not your novels. And honestly you sound like a shitty novelist too. Why would this woman just straight up murder her boyfriend like this? Because the way you describe it sounds like she was just fucking bored. Meaning she's got shit motivations and either your players are the densest assholes ever or you didn't broadcast the fact she was this petty or capricious as well as you think.

>>49900133
After reading this thread you sound like a dumbass who doesn't realize what he did wrong.

Most of us have already sided with the players. Just acknowledge that you fucked up.

It probably comes off as a great twist in a Game of Thrones way, but Game of Thrones is needlessly dark and stupid at times.

>>49900375
>This PC was one of my favorites and I figured one time wouldn't hurt them.
>Literally playing favorites

Why don't you just suck the player's cock instead? Even without that, you're literally giving your players plot armor, which should kill all semblance of versimilitude and gravitas.

>all these people getting baited so hard

How low did /tg/ sink?

So, OP, after the perception roll was failed, was there a way for the player to survive? Did the girl pass all her rolls as was supposed to be, did you properly calculate all the damage and saw that it resulted in death, or were you like "lol, you're dead"?

If you rolled for her damage, was she unusually lucky in all her rolls and the player unusually unlucky? Were her stats reasonable or was she specifically made stronger to be able to kill the player?

Did you go into the encounter expecting the player to die, or did you expect him to live and he died due to shitty luck?

Because so far, it sounds like you set out to kill a player and gave him no chance to fight back besides a single hard roll. That's shitty. Rock's fall level shitty.

>>49900418
Are you new?

>>49900254

>This comes off as incredibly coddlish and unrealistic, bad things some times happen. Often without people having any overt idea about it. Are we supposed to play fluffy cotton candy adventures here, where there are no stakes and no hard times?

I'm not suggesting no stakes or hard times- quite the opposite actually. A game without stakes is no game at all.

But what I am suggesting works for me. Think of it this way.

In media like movies and games, the audience gets to see some things that the characters in the movies or games don't see. Perhaps the audience knows that the character is in danger, and it creates suspense within the audience.

You can draw a parallel to that with the players and their characters. If your players are good and cooperative, they'll have their characters fall right into the trap for you, knowing full well what was going to happen- because their characters wouldn't know.

They would do it because they want the sensation that you intended for them to have from going through it.

>What is a victory without real unscripted tragedy to put it into context?

It's like what had been said in the OP, in that you alluded to something; but they didn't catch on.

What I'm suggesting is to make sure they catch on, so that they can help you build up that tragedy with you.

When they want that tragedy, they'll go places you would never have, and it would surprise you I guarantee it. Then the two of you could have bounced the ideas back and forth and made something far better than either of you could have imagined.

But this requires trust, and if you don't trust your players, then why play with them?

I love a good tragedy myself, but I personally would like to know it first. If I was warned of it, I would cooperate all the way! If your player is like me, he would have too.

>>49900414
You're a very angry man.

So out of the 20+ people I run campaigns for I can't have a group I favor?

You sound like you don't have many friends. I'll be your friend faggot

>>49900359
You've consistently displayed no knowledge of either 3.5E or 5E apart from rolling perception checks and even then you've failed at using perception properly - a passive perception check would have been required instead of asking for a roll.

Combined with the outlandish scenario and your feigned inability to understand why players would be upset has labeled you as either someone bad at putting together a coherent story for your players, or someone bad at putting together a believable story for /tg/. At this point it doesn't matter which, know that your efforts have been found to be poor and could have been so much more.

I'm disappointed in you. Why couldn't you have at least tried to put a semblance of effort in? How hard is it to make a believable facade that people would accept you instead of rejecting you outright?

>>49900133

This is an exceptionally bad way to do it, because the PC doesn't really have a chance to respond to the betrayal. He just died.

Like, a good way to do it was like something that came up in our campaign. Our Fighter's fiancee was captured by the villain, and she eventually fell for him. When they broke into save her, she was happy to see them, but also desperately guilty. When the Fighter asked her what was wrong, she blurted out:

> "Please don't kill him - I love him!"
> "There's still some good in him. Please don't kill him."

And it turned out that the villain liked her too, because when the PCs defeated him, he surrendered and said:

> "I surrender. All I ask is that I get to see the Princess again."

Obviously, the Fighter walked up to him, stabbed him in the heart, and kicked him off the tower they were fighting on because STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM MY WOMAN.

>>49900397
>Nah what could've saved the player was not fucking icing him just for shock value.
I don't see what makes this event pure shock value.
>>49900371
>Ideology and romance don't actually mix that readily.
This is just blatantly false.

>>49900400
>It probably comes off as a great twist in a Game of Thrones way, but Game of Thrones is needlessly dark and stupid at times.
George Martin is practically the new Tolkien, comparing my GMing to his writing is a compliment.

>>49900420
All of the rolls were made and accounted for, his survival chance was lessened by the amount of time he spent on the Lieutenant. Had he simply finished him off, he would have easily been able to deal with the woman.

File: sunset.png (219KB, 472x624px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 472x624px

>>49900447
>George Martin is practically the new Tolkien, comparing my GMing to his writing is a compliment.
And you played your hand again just a bit too much here.

>>49900444
This all reeks of forced drama made more for something coming out of a soap opera or anime trash. Not fit for my games.

So, /tg/, OPs bait aside, how do you feel about killing a character simply because of failed rolls?

Suppose the plan wasn't bad, the player didn't do anything stupid and it was supposed to all go well, but the dice gods were just having an angry day and the player failed a bunch of rolls. Is it alright to kill his character? What if the setting is permadeath? How many chances should a player fail before he dies?

Should character death only come as a result of player stupidity and action, or can it come simply as a result of bad luck?

>>49900447
Look I can understand a set piece event but the way you went about it was just wrong.

Ignoring the terrible RPing and setup for this.

He shouldn't have died. Maybe take a dagger to the gut and they bail. Not death.

I'm as nice as its gonna get OP. But you dun fucked up.

>>49900447

>I don't see what makes this event pure shock value.
>Hay so your gf is evil now
>Yeah, she decided your boring and went to go jump the bad guy's bones
>Oh but she also wants to kill you now. Oh man, you fucked that roll up so guess what? She just did!
>Man, you didn't even see this coming? Wow what a dumbass
>Whaddya mean you don't want to come to game anymore? This was a wonderful, unscripted tragedy! Appreciate my amazing GMing, you fag!

>>49900447
>All of the rolls were made and accounted for
except for you not following the vorpal rules and insta-killing the PC, that is

>>49900484
I don't like a player dying due to one bad roll.

A series of bad rolls, sure. A really bad decision that is obviously unwise, sure. but 'one single' thing resulting in death usually doesn't leave me happy.

>>49900497
This just comes off as a gross misrepresentation.

>>49900498
I will concede that mistake, however I broke one rule to give the player a chance to beat the stealth roll he had no way of beating with his passive perception, so...

>>49900470

This is what players live for, man. This is the big, emotional moments in an RPG people enjoy. Like, there was one game I ran where the girl the PC was constantly feuding with was captured by a demon. The thing forced her to spill her deepest, darkest secrets.

Turns out her darkest secret was that she was in love with the PC. You better believe the PC fucked her brains out afterwards.

>>49900447
>George Martin is practically the new Tolkien, comparing my GMing to his writing is a compliment
I find it sad that someone out there unironically believes this.

Not op, because he's a shitty troll. But man GRRM is terrible.

>>49900447
>All of the rolls were made and accounted for
You didn't answer the most important question of my post: Did you or did you not walk into that encounter expecting that the player would die? Did you purposefully give her stats and weapons good enough to one-shot the player or was it incredibly bad luck on the players part? Was she strong enough to one shot the player (weapon aside) before she went with the BBEG's party?

>>49900516
Anime trash, again. Am I honestly supposed to take a character who'd fall in love with someone who they've had a serious feud with for a long time seriously?

>>49900484

I very rarely DM anymore, but when I do, I have a secret rule that I don't tell my players.
PCs never die unless the players want them to.
They're smart guys. If I DMed more, they'd quickly figure it out, but as is, it's worked very well.

>>49900527

It's an RPG, man. We're already pretending that the PCs are brave adventurers instead of sweaty man-children. It's not that much of a jump to the next step.

>>49900509
>I will concede that mistake, however I broke one rule to give the player a chance to beat the stealth roll he had no way of beating with his passive perception, so...
Go ahead and name what defenses and monsters used in your stronghold scenario, then, and tell us how one character could run off without the others being able to instantly follow as a group.

Please do elaborate.

>>49900519
>stealth
Now GRRM isn't terrible, not like most of these newer authors but I for one love his books. He paints a fantastic world.

Now Tolkien, Lovecraft and Arthur C. Clark are my favorite writers.

>>49900525
I simply used her statline, which was slightly inferior to his except for the dagger. She stood a chance if she ambushed him in a surprise round, which she did.

I did not walk into the encounter expecting him to lose, it simply happened. In fact, I expected him to stay with the group and fight smart as a cohesive unit.

>>49900502
What would you rather your PC die to? One failed roll in something your PC is very good at, or multiple failed rolls in something your PC is bad at?

To make a contrived example: Suppose you have a Barbarian that's all fight and no talk. Suppose he got captured by an enemy queen and is going to get executed, but the queen gives him a chance. Would you rather he died because he failed one roll in a contest of, say, strength, or would you rather he died after failing a series of diplomacy rolls for her to let him go?

>>49900509

I'm just representing the situation as you described it
>GF randomly disappears, you tell the players she's kidnapped
>Players go rescue her
>Turns out she actually switched sides for some ambiguous reason
>She's suddenly so far gone she actually murders her boyfriend

You say you set this up but you don't explain how. If you actually hinted she's this capricious, violent, and untrustworthy there is no way the players should've been blindsided like this.

And again, you say this was all for drama but you fucked up what little drama there could be by killing the one guy the betrayal could actually affect.

>>49900540
I specifically stated that they covered for him once they were close enough to the room. As a rogue, he had several character abilities that allowed him to quickly slip past the enemies.

>>49900484
Personally, I try to take the decision based on the situation.

Let's say that there's a paladin in pursuit of an evil cultist, who just cut the rope to the bridge: the paladin tries to make the jump over the chasm but fails, he tries to hold on to the ledge but he fails. Since killing him now would be very shitty in the story that we are all telling together, I rule that he manages to hold on to a root of a dead plant and that he can try to climb. Then, of he does, I will tell him that he can either roll for it or take a level of exhaustion without risking to fall. Then, we go from there.

This way I don't have to force the player who had bad luck to sit out the grand finale making a new character and instead of disappointingly dying into a very deep chasm he will potentially die to hordes of undead protecting the escaped cultist. That makes for a much more interesting, group-made story. In my opinion, at least

>>49900554
And again, you say this was all for drama but you fucked up what little drama there could be by killing the one guy the betrayal could actually affect.
I don't see how the others wouldn't be affected by their close friend and comrade in arms being tragically murdered during the rescue of his lover. They didn't even know she was the one who did it, in character that is.

>>49900557
ROGUES HAVE UNCANNY DODGE AND ELUSIVE YOU DUNCE
SNEAK ATTACKS DON'T WORK IF THEY'RE OF EQUAL LEVEL

STOP PRETENDING TO KNOW THE GAME

>>49900548
While I feel both are mechanically pretty awful, the latter at least provides some stop gaps to dying. he could get lucky and pass a roll. Perhaps the player can try to sway the rolls into something he's good at. Either way, it's not 'You failed one roll. You're dead'.

I'd probably throw the character into jail to be sentenced to death, and I feel that opens up more options. He'd certainly be able to break out. Perhaps an enemy of the queen offers him freedom somehow. Perhaps there's a gladiatorial/arena game and they decide to throw him in with the promise of freedom. Any of these could have various consequences that include death, but I feel they'd be more satisfying.

>>49900611
>SNEAK ATTACKS DON'T WORK IF THEY'RE OF EQUAL LEVEL
We were playing 5e, not 3.5. Can you find me where in the book it specifies this?

>>49900571

Generally, when an actual good writer makes a loved one betray her boyfriend, they make sure the boyfriend actually fucking knows who's betraying him.

This fucker rushed in to save his girl and all he saw was a knife stuck in his throat.

Now you say the other players don't know who the fuck it is either. Why the fuck would you even tell them if no one in this party can actually know in character the gf is a team killer.

I don't know if you're worse at writing than GMing. Go practice both more, anon.

>>49900560
>grand finale
Personally, I apply different rules for climax sessions than I do for more regular sessions.

At the start of the campaign, we agreed to several things with my players: character death is permanent and I wont fudge rolls either way, if the dice say you die, then you die and that character is gone forever.

However if were approaching a big climax and there won't be any chance to introduce another character, I do try to make sure that character death is the fault of the player actions and not actions of the world. So far it's worked well, even if players do tend to take longer than I'd like to come to a decision.

>>49900621
Elusive: you are so evasive that attackers rarely gain the upper hand against you. No attack roll has advantage against you while you aren’t Incapacitated

Sneak attack: you know how to strike subtly and exploit a foe’s distraction. Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll. The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon.

HOW MANY TIMES ARE YOU GOING TO FUCK UP

>>49900621
Elusive: "you are so evasive that attackers rarely gain the upper hand against you. No attack roll has advantage against you while you aren't incapacitated."
page 96 of phb

>>49900637
Despite the hostile tone, which makes me think you have some issues you need to work out. This is legitimately good advice that I'll take into account for the future.

Thanks Anon.

>>49900447
>All of the rolls were made and accounted for
Can you list all the rolls that were made leading up to the character death and were they passed or failed?

>>49900647

I'm only hostile because you fucked over your players with your poor grasp on the rules, good gming, and good storytelling and spent this whole thread trying to justify it without ever really giving any good answers.

File: 1462722565674.png (168KB, 748x484px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 748x484px

>>49900646
>>49900645
>Expecting a character to have a level 19 ability
Just because a vorpal weapon was in play, doesn't mean characters are level 20 snowflakes.

>>49900651
>Several rolls fighting the Lieutenant
>The perception roll to notice the girl coming in to surprise him
>Her attack roll
>his death saving throws

>>49900663
I'm sorry if I struck a sore spot with my story, anon. I'm glad I've never experienced a cucking as bad as you seem to have.

>>49900677
So what I'm getting here is that you killed the player in two rolls, one of which is suspect.

>>49900677
>Anime image
Confirmed cancer

It's literally that easy

>>49900681
Yes, is there something wrong with this?

>>49900677
So you're saying that you gave an enemy a vorpal weapon, fudged the rule and insta killed a player (vorpal only insta kills on a 20 roll and just makes players unconcious), and remove a player's character agency for the sake of "drama" and you're confused why your players hate what happened?

>>49900688
Well, that has already been answered many times in this thread.

I think this thread is done. Apologize and move on. Don't make the same mistake again.

>>49900687
You obviously haven't been browsing the gamefinder enough.

>>49900706
Pretty much.

>>49900709
And why would I do that?

>>49900677
Damn. Well, at least you get props for actually double checking what people accuse you of. That's a better display of the rules compared to your previous understanding.

>>49900719
>And why would I do that?
Because you fucked up. Apologizing is what we do when we fuck up.

>>49900723
He might actually be able to run an actual game if he puts this amount of effort in to double checking his work!

>>49900484
It should occur through bad luck, but such instances should be rare. Sometimes a character fails their saving through against a Save or Die. That's just how the system works. But if they're exclusively fighting creatures that have a chance to one-shot them that's on the DM.

>>49900719
>Pretty much.

well, there you go. Rule 1 of being a good DM, never take a player's character agency, its their character, not your puppet. Players hate it when that happens. Don't do that shit for the sake of "drama." You should have given said character options and maybe forced some insight checks. Also the bad guys is a tad idiotic, wasted alot of his resources for some nookie. If I were the BBEG, I'd have fired his ass.

>>49900751
>Also the bad guys is a tad idiotic, wasted alot of his resources for some nookie. If I were the BBEG, I'd have fired his ass.

He is, isn't he? It's almost like he's a shallow cardboard cutout that exists for the sake of creating this godawful greentext story.

>>49900719
>And why would I do that?
Because, as you said >>49900133
>My players are really angry at me
When this happens, ultimately, the 'why' is irrelevant (though it's been explained, ad nauseum in this thread). Your players are angry because of your actions. If they aren't enjoying the game, why should they play it?
Maybe there's a group out there that would enjoy this style of DMing, but obviously your players don't. So either find a new group, or apologize to your players for causing them to not enjoy the game, and make the changes required so that they can.
It's a collaborative group effort. Treat it as such.

File: SquintingPhilipJFry.jpg (142KB, 735x1150px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 735x1150px

>>49900328
>I'm honestly just trying to tell my side of the story to get some constructive criticism from /tg/.
Okay.
I'll pretend this thread isn't obvious bait.
Playing pretend is a traditional game, sure.

>>49900133
>>I had hinted at this change of heart over the course of the campaign, yet no one paid attention
The entire story hinges on this line.
If, as a player in your game when the group raging in response to the betrayal, you bring up all the many signs we missed and it all falls together like the end of the Usual Suspects?
I would applaud you as a great GM, even if I was the dead PC.
If you just string together several "totally obvious guys" clues that could have meant anything?
You are pure shit.

From what you've said though, there are two options:
1. You laid out her betrayal in a clear way that they all missed, could see retroactively, and that you have done a piss poor job presenting to us.
If this is the case, then >>49900287 is correct and your final delivery of the betrayal was done in an utterly unbelievable way, and you should be ashamed.

2. Whether you knew it or not, you're wrong about how clear the betrayal was and this was a "tweest" out of left field that supposedly justifies an unexpected save or die.
If this is the case, then >>49900497 is correct and your climactic betrayal is shit that you want others to swallow with a smile, and you should be ashamed.

tldr: You suck at this any way you look at it OP. But at least you tried.

>>49900677
>>49900719

You fucked up and the Player paid the price. You should apologize and make it up to him somehow.

>>49900133
>>I had hinted at this change of heart over the course of the campaign, yet no one paid attention

Elaborate.

It's pretty obvious that this is all your fault but elaborate.

>>49900839
Hypergamy, my dude.

File: URQuiteTheOncologist.png (539KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

539KB, 1280x720px

>>49900687
>>Anime image
>Confirmed cancer
>It's literally that easy

>>49900541
>Now Tolkien, Lovecraft and Arthur C. Clark are my favorite writers.
Smells like a play for hipster cred.

Personally, if I had fucked up so hard in delivering a story to my players, I would just throw everything out the window and go balls to the wall. Like, having the PC that I dicked over rise as some revenant of pure hatred and maybe throw in some spoopy powers to help get them started on the party's quest for totally justified revenge against the cunt that betrayed them such that they might bring her to a slow and painful death. Maybe later, when I've regained my players' trust, we can delve into a deeper story with themes of not letting rage overpower you and how far people will go for revenge, but for right now we are playing murderquest and that's perfectly fine.

>>49900543
Are we still talking about 5e ? Cause rogue killing a fighter or other martial class in one hit is ridiculous.

>>49900133
>the players can hear the love interest's screams

I don't need to read any more of this to know he's getting cucked.

File: Angry.jpg (36KB, 310x310px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 310x310px

>players don't get it
>not dropping even further hits
>one hit kill
>where's the rest of the party to back up the guy because if one guy ran up why couldn't the rest in the time it takes to beat the shit out of lieutent man
>stealth in plain view without cover
>killing a person and healing in the same turn so the party can't stop any of it
>one hit kill

>>49900177
>assassin
>gifted vorpal dagger
>gifting vorpal daggers
>heals the guy to full health as an assassin
Go fuck yourself you shitty piece of shit DM, even if this wasn't real you should fucking never DM ever because of how fucking shitty you are
>doesn't even understand what a fitting tragedy is and instead substitutes the definition of it with cucking a player followed by unsatisfying death

>>49902134
>>doesn't even understand what a fitting tragedy is and instead substitutes the definition of it with cucking a player followed by unsatisfying death

I dunno, this sounds like a tragic waste of time to me.

>It's a That DM doesn't know he's a That DM episode

>>49900133
>Long term love interest
As in, she is in love with the character? For real? And the character is in love with her? For real?

>Converted without use of mindcontrol
So why did she do this? If she was inclined to share opinions with the bad guy, why did she fall for the good guy?

>Hints
Like what?

>>49902186
No a waste of time doesn't make people as angry as finding out your love interest is cucking you, you're DMing claiming he dropped hints but they were probably so vague and autistic no one noticed, and getting 1 hit killed by your love interest who is a fucking assassin+healer combo

>>49900484
I roll with open dice, no takebacks unless I make a direct mistake (Oh I should have had disadvantage here etc.).

The same goes for my players.

I love when the dice mess things up.

When the BBEG ruins his sword, when the PC gets eaten whole, all of this is wonderous and makes the game feel alive and unsuspected.

>>49900530
I don't think I could play with those rules. I had a GM who did that, and every time one of us got into trouble it'd be like a saturday night cartoon. A mysterious stranger pops out to help us. Never hinted at before.
The baddie does something unexpected, like spare the characters, for a shitty reason.
A stroke of insane luck suddenly happens, like the troll slips and falls off the bridge.

It just makes the game feel so flat and meaningless.

>>49900484
The first death felt a little weird, but it's gotten easier.
In combat if the player dies due to either shitty dice or shitty tactics then whatever, they die.
In my campaign you can get rezzed pretty easily, but it's at the expense of either ability scores getting fucked around or becoming permanently sterile.
The enemies are usually really nasty, but my players enjoy that because when they succeed they look happy, and most of the time they succeed despite the dark things that try to rip them to ribbons.

>>49900485
Getting stabbed in the back by your crying exlover would've been better because it would've shown her desperation and devotion versus just cold "u died lel neck slit fucko"

>>49900359
>The players really should have reminded me of this when it happened.
So your player are supposed to rules check you on everything you do? Hell did they even know she was an assassin using the assassin strike ability? That's really your fuck up on the rules. As them GM if you are using something you should know how it works, especially if you think it's an instant kill against a PC. Also, apart from the sudden "lol your gf cucked you and murdered you" had she been a mostly trust worthy character? If you actually trust some one then little hints that they might be up to something shady are likely to be ignored and you are going to need some solid evidence that they are screwing you over before you stop trusting them.

File: overbait2damax.gif (86KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 200x200px

>>49902231
Wrong.

It's an
>many newfags can't identify the bait and start arguing pointlessly with the faggot OP
episode

File: Gae bait.png (36KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 800x600px

>>49902358
This.

>>49900359
>DM fucks up super fucking bad
>it's on the players guys, they should've known!
just fucking kill yourself

>>49900133
>>49900299

>Character is fighting, this is not the first round of combat
>Is somehow suprised ???

Surprise is something that happens when combat starts. New characters can join an existing combat scene, but they can not proc a new "suprise sequence".

That said, the character deserved to die for rushing ahead like an ass.

>>49900133

Allow me to put in my own experience as a player...

I have a similar story and opinion as these two fine gentlemen.

>>49900235
>>49900444

Pathfinder Campaign, shit is going on in the Kingdom, each of the characters plays a different race as a representative. I opt for a Halfling and create a massive family for him (one of his sayings was something along the lines of "You think I'm bad? You should see my fourteen brothers and sisters!").

Literally wrote a short story with a small description of his family and their personalities in a concise way, made it whimsical, almost Tolkien-esque in style when he wrote 'The Hobbit', that's where I drew a lot of my inspiration from.

Some of his family were adventures, others just merchants, his mother was a retired adventurer and his dad was your typical easy going Halfling with no special qualities whatsoever, though he can bake a mean pie.

During the campaign, we get a vision. My family's names appear with a cross scratching through them, but we were already a week's ride away and a day's ride from our current quest. I was desperate to go back, but my party actually opposed roll me to say it would be fine, so I had to go with the party and as a player, pretend to be convinced by their arguments that everything would be fine.

Eventually get back to home, to find my family was massacred, except for one, who was in a catatonic state due to the violence and horror he witnessed. Not only that, upon discovering the bodies, the GM made one of the other players do a fort roll and they failed, meaning they then threw up over the pieces of the corpses which the table found hilarious.

I did not.

Every other single player in this campaign got to meet their families/home town's or loved ones.

I was the only person who this tragedy and it was purely because my GM thought it would be an epic tragedy or whatever.

It was simply to me, shit writing for cheap drama.

>>49900133
You're bait is good, because everyone is biting (including me). Plus, you got dubs, so I'll give you that too. However, if this silly little pasta is actually real, then you are a cunt.

>>49902476

In the end, I spoke to the GM about it as my RP group started out as a friends group before we got into RP'ing and we did it together, so I explained myself, he apologized and there were some bullshit miracles at the end of the campaign where I got my family back but that felt just as cheap as losing them in the first place. Though I very much appreciated the attempt to make it right.

There are other stories but I am so adverse to now writing interesting families for my characters because so often the GM decides to fuck with them or kill them because 'ooooh high stakes, high drama...' and for no other actual interesting reason.

So now I predominately write loner characters and try to make them as fleshed out as possible or have characters who had family but have since died or such in their actual backstory because otherwise, they're going to get taken from me anyways.

File: 126546306.gif (1MB, 256x192px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 256x192px

>>49902508
This guy knows what's good.

I also always do characters who have a) lost their whole family b) hate their family because they suffered abuse from them or c) could not care less about their family now that they are with the party.

Unless I know the GM and know that he won't pull such bullshit on me, I go with one of these options to avoid said cheap shots.

File: valhallen.png (371KB, 637x475px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 637x475px

>>49900210
>Vaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalhallen!

>>49902476
>Not only that, upon discovering the bodies, the GM made one of the other players do a fort roll and they failed, meaning they then threw up over the pieces of the corpses which the table found hilarious.
jesus fucking christ, you're a better man than me, if I were I probably would've smacked the DM irl for that type of shit
Shit like that is why my character's families are dead or tough as nails blacksmith family

>>49902529

I will say, one of the best stories I made was for a good friend of mine who did a homebrew low fantasy system.

In the story I was known as a 'Cloak' of the North, basically their version of King's Bodyguards, they were knights, rangers, scouts and protection all rolled into one in terms of a job description.

Backstory was that the good King was killed as a plot by Witches and Barons, Barons were then killed by Witches so they could rule the land, other cloaks were promised power as they let this happen, the King's son is raised by the Witches and because the brattiest brat of all bratdom. My character's brother tried to convince me to join them as it would be better for the country but my character kept shouting about our oath to protect the King and the Kingdom, brotherly fight and I won by killing him, I escaped barely alive, fleeing the Country when tensions between the North and South were high. Disguised myself, lived out in the wild and swore a revenge against all Cloaks who betrayed their oath.

The King story and Witch plot was the main story by the GM as were the Cloaks, I made my character around that concept.

Cue throughout the story I find a boy who basically becomes my ward, there is a girl with another group who tried to kill us all but because she was just a girl, my character couldn't harm her, thinking she was just in the wrong crowd. Who the boy had a crush on and eventually we turned her to our side.

We do the Campaign, stopping the Brat King, inserting a new King, my character becomes the head of the new order of 'Cloaks', regains his honour, fulfilled his oath by killing the traitors and gains a son and daughter in the process.

All in all, it was a wonderful book end campaign for my character and the GM was fantastic in all aspects of working with the players to create a good story.

File: Superior Axe user.png (226KB, 413x592px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 413x592px

>>49902587
I wouldn't mind having brat NPCs for family following the party around, as long as I know that the GM is fair and he won't just plot them away for plot and then they have basically no chance of survival.

If they get kidnapped because the group is defeated and stuff, then I would understand: but most GMs wouldn't do that and no good GM would just up and kill them off screen.

>>49900509
that doesnt justify anything, you turned a 1 in 20 chance to insta kill into a 100 percent chance

>>49902607

It was really fun, the boy was basically just a glorified washer to begin with (doing dishes and clothes), my character taught him how to use a sword, how to hunt, how to forage until he could actually kind of hold his own.

It would have genuinely make for a great cheesy family movie, think 'Pursuit of Happiness' crossed with 'Game of Thrones' and there's your Oscar-Nominated two hour epic.

>>49900133
Welp, you thought it was a good idea but turns out it was a bad one. Maybe try to fix it by having the one who stuck the knife in the player not actually be the real gf but a shape-shifting/magically disguised impostor?

OP if you want drama, bring him back to life with some bullshit, and have him show down with his ex waifu. imagine the feels. everyones happy again. and you honor is only slightly sullied.

>>49903919

Remember though the circumstances of this death mean no one, not the victim or his party members, actually know in-character whodunnit.

And even if things went down this road then there won't be any "feels". Just this guy making a bee-line for his ex and killing her mercilessly. At least that's what he should do in this situation; if not then he's a just a pussy-whipped loser.

>>49902508
>>49902579
And this is literally exactly why players rapidly condition themselves to do it, only for DMs to whine. Jesus wept.

>>49900254

This stinks of adversarial gming. Perhaps you shouldn't be running a what is essentially a social and cooperative experience. Unscripted tragedy comes from the dice.

TL;DR: You fucked up bad and should feel bad.

>>49900177
Backpedalling! The post!
M bullshit thread

>>49905124

He's already tried justifying himself by saying the tragedy did come from the dice. One roll, specifically.

Of course, he's all but stated the dice roll was basically a formality and he pretty much knew the guy would fail.

File: 1465337051135.png (145KB, 702x397px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 702x397px

>>49900133
>doing the unspeakable
What was he doing?

>>49905316
Holding her hand, probably.

It's just a fake bait thread meant to enrage people

>>49900133
>shit that never happened

Now, how would YOU do that kind of scenario, /tg/?
I'd
>make the girl mad suspicious to one or two PCs that are not the "unfortunate lover", ahead of time
>sneak attack on standard rules, with ordinary dagger, girl is a normal combatant
>The PC can stall for time and wait for the party
>He can get fucked, but the girl won't allow for his death

Seems pretty fair now, anything I missed?

>>49905633
The fact that the "unfortunate lover" is still getting cucked and betrayed is still probably going to leave them with some seriously shitty feels. And you are going to have to offer a pretty good explanation as to why she did this. And even if you do I doubt players will trust you enough to try and be anything but murder hobos because of shit like that.

>>49905633
>the girl won't allow for his death
What did you mean by this?
Because it sounds like she won't kill him, for "reasons".
Which is contrived bs to protect a pc and going too far.

Without a badass dagger, she might not have much chance in battle so the entire challenge of the encounter would be fighting her without killing her.
Which is hanging too much on expectations of PC behavior.

But, much better than OP.

I would try to keyser size the bitch up, probably tip my hand, and blow the final surprise.
But, going for the "We should have seen that coming" moment would be my goal.

>>49905811
>going to have to offer a pretty good explanation as to why she did this. And even if you do I doubt players will trust you
Also this.
That's why the twist making sense and getting them to kick themselves for not seeing it is key, it spreads the blame so they don't just hate you.

It's important to note that the closest I ever got to pulling this off was when only one player saw the twist coming, and before I could respond, the rest of the party laid out explicitly why that was an unlikely scenario while I just twiddled my thumbs.
When the twist happened, that one player got to gloat like a champ and I wasn't hated because they were all warned.
(And I had prepared a whole list of reasonable loopholes to get out of all their explicitly stated reasons why It wouldn't happen.)

>>49905898
Considering that in the proposed scenario the turncoat love interest was apparently pretending to be raped to drive her lover into an incoherent rage so the wouldn't notice her sneaking up to stab them in the back I doubt many players would want to take her alive.

>>49900177
>I'd consider this fair, he should have known the risks involved...
if you have to end your post with three periods like a trailing off sentence, you're probably full of shit
you're a fucking garbage DM

>>49906001
I either I missed something or you've just stretched to write out a plausible reason for her actions, where I thought we'd toss most of OP's details.

Either way,
>I doubt many players would want to take her alive.
I agree.

>>49900133
Why did she scream though?

>>49906051
>If you have to serve your meals wriggling at end of a sharp hook, you're probably a shit chef.

>>49906092
See this for an attempt at reason >>49906001
See this for actual reason >>49901594

>>49905218

Yeah, but that's because he fucked up with the dice. Vorpal blades don't proc beheading with an Assassin's ability, or even with expanded crit ranges. It has to have an attack roll of 20.

So, yeah. Fuck this "GM" and his shitty bait.

>>49906064
Did we toss most of the details? Going by >>49905633 most of the details were the same, they were just dropping the vorpal weaponry and the assassin class and making sure at least some one in the party picked up the hints about her being bad news.

>>49906146
>Now, how would YOU do that kind of scenario, /tg/?
This part made It seem flexible to me.
Kind of a "get as close as you can without going over" deal.

>>49906199
Ah, I was working under the assumption that all details were the same unless expressly stated otherwise.

File: 1438337919892.jpg (53KB, 604x604px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 604x604px

>>49900160
>>49900206
>>49900210
>>49900235
>>49900269
>>49900281
>>49900285
>>49900287
>>49900303
>>49900317
>>49900332
>>49900400

I fucking HATE this new generation of players. STORY OVER GAMEPLAY. THAT'S IT.

STORY.

OVER.

GAMEPLAY.

What the FUCK is this "Oh but how can be of npc one-shot stronk pc!?! xD"? You know how fucking retarded that sounds? That's literally like when children say "Nuh uh! My guy's not dead! He's a general, and that means he's STRONGER!"

If you had said ANYTHING like that 10 years ago, the entire table would be looking at you like you were a literal retard. This fucking generation, man. All you care about is dice and numbers. Dice and numbers, 1's and 20's, it's so fucked up. I remember when roleplay was actually fun and when the story was good, the players were great. Not it's just bullshit upon bullshit upon bullshit.

Hey, sonny! I got a hot news flash for you! Lovers have been stabbed in the back MANY TIMES BEFORE. This isn't some "you're a hack" twist, there is great precedence for your lover to slit your fucking throat if, for one thing, SHE WASN'T YOUR LOVER, and two, YOU WERE KILLING HER ACTUAL LOVER.

Wow, it's true what they say. You fucking millennial pieces of shit are seriously stagnant beyond hope. And don't give me that "hurr durr muhlenniuhls" bullshit. I KNOW it's this fucking generation of gamers, because none of that shit would have slid if this was being played when I was still around, no matter who was GM or who was playing.

The state of how far tabletop gaming has fallen has actually made me angry. I'm going to stop typing before it ruins the rest of my morning. Fuck you all.

File: fgt.jpg (80KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1280x720px

>>49906326
>implying story over gameplay is old school

kewl bait btw
pls kys

>>49906326
You sound like an angry faggot

File: 1464468689194.jpg (55KB, 588x591px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 588x591px

>>49906326
Holy shit is this original pasta?

>>49906326
No, fuck you. Most systems are gameplay focused. If you disregard the rules every time It pleases you, you create an unfair system, potentially ruining all the fun and completely denying the existence of the system in the first place.

If you value story so much, play freefom.

Also
>10 years ago
>laughingsluts.jpg

>>49906326
Two problems.
1) The OP has admitted he fucked up with the rules and the situation didn't go as intended.
2) Most people here agree the story probably sucked because of poor presentation. (Even OP conceded that their is now an issue because no one in character know about the betrayal that was supposed to galvanize the party.)

>>49906384
It's not "old school". You faggots just forgot about it.

>>49906391
And you sound like a millennial piece of shit

>>49906412
Is it really so surprising now when people criticize the current generation of gamers so that any criticism at all is now considered "pasta"?

>>49906431
And if you're a good DM? If you know how to build a story? If you disregard the rules because you know, in your fucking head, that the rules are sometimes bullshit and don't need to be listened to at all?

>>49906447
The situation didn't go as intended because his players got angry at his plot twist. Instead of using their tragedy as a call to arms, they got all butthurt and faggy that something actually noteworthy happened for once, and if OP didn't present it in a dramatic light, then that's his problem for being such a shit narrator.

>>49906326
>>49906447
Oh and problem number 3, my brother-in-law and his friends who have been playing since AD&D and plays HackMaster rather than newer editions are very much the play-as-the-dice-fall-no-matter-what type.

>>49906542
>replies to all
fuck off virt

>>49906542
Lol, fuck off you idiot. If you want to tell a story first and foremost, you don't want the game nor the players.

>>49906542
lol

>>49906542
>The situation didn't go as intended because his players got angry at his plot twist. Instead of using their tragedy as a call to arms
Well it's hard to use something as a call to arms when you don't know it happened.

File: dungeonMaster.jpg (23KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 300x300px

>>49906326
>Muh Story

I hate this. I hate this so much. You're wrong, you idiot. Story is the result of gameplay. Gameplay comes first every time. You can't talk about the story of your game until it has actually happened in the game. Your players, their actions, and the dice determine what the story is. The other way around is reading a book to your players and telling them what happens. Your thinking is the type of thinking that leads to frustrated players. Your thinking is what causes the "epic BBEG" to teleport away with "Only 1HP guys, I swear!" Your thinking is what completely undermines any form of player agency and any point of rolling the dice in the first place. I seriously hope you don't run a game and if you do then I feel bad for your players.

>>49906665
>Your thinking is what causes the "epic BBEG" to teleport away with "Only 1HP guys, I swear!" Your thinking is what completely undermines any form of player agency and any point of rolling the dice in the first place. I seriously hope you don't run a game and if you do then I feel bad for your players.

I think it's very ironic that you're calling me out on this, when this is EXACTLY what I'm calling out the new generation for. I care about GOOD stories, with GOOD endings. If my players surprise me with something interesting that I hadn't considered before, then I'll take that and incorporate it into my game, even if it completely derails my intended path. Similarly, I am NOT the person to pull the "LOL 1HP LEFT. HE RUNS AWAY" shit, NOR would I pull the "LOL, SOME RANDUMB GUY SAVES YOU BECAUSE I DON'T WANT YOU DEAD" shit either.

You create a story, and you let the players play within your story. Unless you're some sort of supercomputer AI that can process information instantaneously, you WILL railroad your story. People who try to do "gameplay" first are almost always those guys who go for base-line ELFS AND DORFS xD settings where their entire campaign is just killing kobolds and being paid to clear out goblins because, tough shit, the GM fucking sucks.

>>49906326
>Clearly bait
>Clearly not an actual DM
>Clearly 14
Pick one. Hell, pick all 3.

>>49906326
I think I agree with your point, but it's hard to tell because you sound like such a, well, an angry faggot.

If OP had actually ran this game, and the game had save or die effects (or similarly relevant rules) in it, then mechanically OP did nothing wrong, no matter how badly he pulled off the betrayal twist.

But yeah, your post has too much grrr-argh, you bad mutant.

>>49902529
As a DM, I rarely kill the families of the PCs. It is inefficient, and rarely creates interesting situations. Threats, on the other hand, work wonders.

One time the players were attacking an assassin's guild that had kidnapped a group of children (for training; they had magical potential). Think magical elf ninjas, with poison and disguise as the modus operandi. They were kidnapping children with aptitude for a certain kind of magic, as an attempt to monopolize it (divination, for those wondering), cue training from hell for the children etc.

So, the players storm inside their not-so-obvious front, after some info gathering. The PCs do not really have a plan. They just run in and start yelling their demands. No disguise, they are easily recognizable.

They knock one guard out, take him as hostage (at least somewhat clever). They demand the children be freed.

The local boss steps in to the room - apparently unarmed - and explains the situation.

(Cont...)

>>49900254
>This comes off as incredibly coddlish and unrealistic
Its a game you retard, the whole point is for people to enjoy it. By acting outside of the will of the players to specifically fuck them over you not only pissed them off you gave them a reason to not trust NPCs or have non-pragmatic relationships in the future.
>Should I try to be friends with this NPC for the sake of story?
>Nah, the DM will probably have them betray me for drama

Give me one reason I as a hypothetical player should bother with a love interest in your games after seeing another player get one-shotted by their love interest because "lel the BBEG is cooler." You claim that you hinted at the change of heart but apparently you didn't hint well because exactly zero players got the hint.

Going out of your way to have a player betrayed by characters who they do like IC is like having a paladin fall, unless the player agrees to it it is bad form and won't be half as tragic or cool as you think. If you want a player's friend, sibling, or love interest to betray them ask them first, say "hey I was thinking of trying to add some more interesting conflict into the game, would you mind it if someone important to you betrayed you?" You could even ask the whole table to make it even harder for them to identify who the possible traitor is if there even is one.

>>49906765
>If OP had actually ran this game, and the game had save or die effects (or similarly relevant rules) in it, then mechanically OP did nothing wrong, no matter how badly he pulled off the betrayal twist.
The problem is the OP had an instant kill item which is only supposed to work when you confirm a natural 20 roll go off on an ability that grants an automatic critical hit which is not the same thing and would be quite broken in the hands of any one, PC or NPC.

>>49906750
>I care about GOOD stories, with GOOD endings.
Than write a fucking book. Your players aren't playing to be marionette characters in your shitty novel, they are playing to control their own characters.

>>49906750
>I care about GOOD stories, with GOOD endings.
And all the people who were actually there to experience it in full detail apparently agree it was not a good story. Or at least not an enjoyable one for them. The GM is supposed to make a fun experience for every one and in this case it seems all his players agree he failed to do so.

>>49906787
>A band of dimwitted no-gooders found us out and thought they could start some trouble? Who do we have here? Oh, Elise Grimroot, Jack Stonebr-
>>Shut your mouth, we have no intention playing your games. Give the kids back or we sack this place and burn it down.
>...
>Well, that won't do. You're certainly well armed, and we don't really want trouble here. But the kids are quite important to us, so how about you just give me the name of the informant who sold us out, and we both can continue our business as usual.
>>Did you not hear us,give. The. Kids. Back.
>Not here to claim a reward, then? That means we'll have to set up a new front, don't we..
>>Stop stalling, or else *threatwns to kill the guard they knocked out*
>Mmmh, you really catch on slow. Say, Elise, how is your mother in Galehall doing? Weather has been better than business over there, i hear? The textile trade dying has really created an influx of adventurers.
(At this point the players finally catch on)
>> D-don't you dare, how do you even!
>Mmh, over the years we've made a habit of grabbing the information on all to-be worldfixers, helps keep unnecessary casualties to a minimum, see?
(Cont)

>>49906898

>And all the people who were actually there to experience it in full detail apparently agree it was not a good story

This is what kind of irks me about OP's GMing. He pulled off some banal face heel turn with no warning and for no real reason other than, as someone else in this thread pointed out, feelsbadman.

It's shock and betrayal for the sake of shock and betrayal, which never fucking works. Anakin Skywalker's fall from grace was more elegant than the scenario OP described.

Of course, we're also responding to blatant bait so maybe we're all the real losers.

>>49906326
Gameplay is over Story when it's better. Story over Gameplay when it's better too. It was a shitty 'story', so gameplay is better. Though, if OP used an overpowered bullshit level 1 build, to one shot his PCs, then he'd also be shit.

File: 1377323612135.png (64KB, 319x304px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 319x304px

>>49900177
>>>49900160
>She was an assassin rogue who sneak attacked him with a vorpal dagger that he had gifted to her.
And this is exactly the point where this entire narrative collapsed into "never happened" bullshittery.

Oh Greentext Story Anon, will you never find real friends to have real games with?

>>49906942
>>If you think I'll let you li-
>You won't have to, the guild will get someone else to exact revenge.
>>We'll just sack this place and go back to protect her family, then. How about that, smart-ass.
>That would be an... Unfortunate number of casualties for us.
>>....
>But not unrecoverable. And since it would essentially contain you on house arrest, it could be argued to be a fair tradeoff, after all.
>>We'll just get rid of your damn guild for good, problem solved?
>While babysitting dear mother back at home? I don't think so. And before you think of taking down our assassins, let me assure you, we'd have no intention to attack while you're on self-induced home arrest. Waste of resources, see? We'll just bide our time. We can afford a few people watching over you, after all. Only five of you, and hundreds of trained assassins. It's a numbers game.
(At this point, players look at me like I'm the root of all evil. I grin back, confirming that they may be right.)
>So you can let Jill go, alright? She's just a trainee, but no need to sacrifice lives when we can avoid it. So you'll just fork over the informant's name and *You're* free to go. We can pretend this awkward... Barge-in never happened, and we won't charge you for the cost of setting up a better front, okay...
>>....

( the players did, in the end, though they managed to diplomancer themselves some agrment on noncompetition in the future.)

>>49906834
The problem I have with your post, and I suspect Angryanon McFaggot would have as well, is that it presumes that the numbers attached to the weapon are more important than the situational bonus of the PC distractedly murdering his enemy and completely trusting her.

It's a bit like suggesting that a PC could never be killed in their sleep.
Appropriate rolls should take place, but once you're in a vulnerable spot and the dice turn on you? You're dead, Jim.

OP's story is fake and gay,

ITT: OP meta roleplays his fetish with /tg/

File: 120823472289.png (186KB, 298x423px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 298x423px

>>49906787
>>49906942
>>49907087
>more shit that never happened
>this time featuring cringy writing

>>49907275
>>this time featuring cringy writing
Shh! Don't reveal the secret ingredient of the 'Special Sauce'!

>>49900359
Quit GMing.

>>49907230
These threads are generally "theorycraft adventures", where people invent the sort of fun times they'd have if they actually socialized and played TTRPG.

>>49907230
>>49907347
>>49907261
All of these are true.

>>49907211
It's not really presumption of numbers on the weapon, it's knowing he used the rules wrong. He made something that is not supposed to be a save or die into a save or die. Also in 5e those situational modifier are heavily restricted. I'm not going to comment on how I feel about that but mechanically that situation wouldn't have rendered him any where near the "slit your throat in your sleep" level of vulnerability.

>>49907347
>>49907261
>>49907275
Having run a 15 year long game of Spelljammers, this is neither impossible, nor even improbable in the annals of gaming.

Weirder shit happens.

File: 1436738064295.jpg (27KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 400x400px

>>49906542
>>49906326
Shut up or fuck off, ideally both in either order.

I am a staunch supporter of what the PCs can do, NPCs can do and vice versa.

However in this story that never happened, the GM made a lot of mistakes:
1) He didn't let the players know well enough that something was changing with the girl
2) The lieutenant can call a bagillion underlings just because he wants to stick his dick in said girl
3) The BBEG gifted a fucking VORPAL blade to a woman he was fucking for the first time: the player character -very probably- did not possess any such item
4) The girl is so far gone already that she chooses to kill the man she loved before for her lover, without even trying to ask him to stop or anything
5) He rolls one perception, which he fails, and then he's stabbed in the back because he failed -ONE- roll to notice the girl creeping up to him
6) There was no indication that she actually loved him, the would-be GM just said that the villain was doing unspeakable things to her -while it clearly was not rape.

But the biggest thing that makes him a faggot is asking for criticism here and then even -trying to justify his actions!! That's something you should -Never- do when asking for feedback.

So you can take your shitty opinion right back from whatever basement you crawled out of and fuck right off, nigger.

>>49900418
/tg/ always takes the bait, always has.

File: the party.jpg (93KB, 853x960px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 853x960px

>>49906787
>>49906942
>>49907087
And how will your masterplan work if your party is composed of these guys?

How do you all build such bad characters that shit like this can happen to you?

I don't mean the op's story, just a bunch of other anecdotes in here. Who the fuck ever gets captured, or loses a fight to anything other than something x3 the strength of what they "should" be fighting?

>>49901515
It was a rogue killing a rogue.

>>49907517
Shocking but some GMs will actually send those "x3 the strength" monsters after you when you minmax, unlike yours. Many will send x5 (or more!) monsters because you minmaxed.

>>49907504
Not weeb enough to know source, but if the players would have just zerged without remorse, cut the throats of the children (better no one else has access to ddivination magic) and have the local guild members attempt to run at different directions and hide.

I mean, you can't argue with murderhobos.

>>49907391
There needed to be appropriate rolls to get past his defenses.
Those rolls should have benefited from bonuses to the situation, whether or not they were mentioned in the cucking section of the 5e rulebook.
There is more to the game than the rulebook can predict and accommodate. (That's the whole point of playing pnp and not vidya)
Once sufficient steps were taken to put her blade in his vital area to execute him, he should be dead.

>>49907517
>lol Why would you ever be challenged in a game or risk failure?
Your post is very appropriate to the thread, good job!

File: 1477077371643.png (78KB, 840x544px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 840x544px

>>49906326
I fucking HATE this old generation of GMs. AGENCY OVER YOUR NOVEL. THAT'S IT.

AGENCY.

OVER.

YOUR NOVEL.

This fucking generation, man. All you care about is your hackneyed fantasy novel plot. Muh plot and muh novel, cliches and railroading, it's so fucked up. I'm glad roleplay is actually fun now and when the players are good the story is great. It used to just be bullshit upon bullshit upon bullshit.

Wow, it's true what they say. You Gen X pieces of shit are seriously delusional beyond hope. And don't give me that "hurr hurr Amazon Self Publishing" bullshit. I KNOW it's this fucking generation of GMs, because that shit only slides in shitty 3.PF games.

The state of how far tabletop gaming has come makes me optimistic. I'm going to stop typing and go work on my homebrew. Have a nice day!

>>49907572
They'd still be sending x3 strength monsters even if you weren't minmaxing. It'd just be easier for them and stick out a lot less.

>>49907593
See >>49900359
The GM made a mistake.
And you have moved the goal posts here. You started with
>If OP had actually ran this game, and the game had save or die effects (or similarly relevant rules) in it, then mechanically OP did nothing wrong, no matter how badly he pulled off the betrayal twist.
Now you are arguing GM fiat, which is a whole other ballpark.

>>49907585
Guys in the image are murder-thieves who are so powerful that they go wherever they want, whenever they want and take whatever they want without anyone managing to stop them. High level party of murderhobos.

They also have no family and no records of birth and no one knows where they came from and from whom. They are absolutely ruthless... until their boss is touched: then they actually start to slow down. Anyhoo, contrary to your party of numbskulls, these guys are real pros at what they do so when they actually go to steal something they will leave no one alive. Doesn't work everytime, there are exceptions, but they were introduced in the show as casually stealing shit from the biggest organized crime group without taking any casualties whatsoever.

But yeah, your tactic wouldn't work against my characters: I've had too many GMs carelessly killing my PC's family for cheap drama so I always play detached characters who are only loyal to the party. That way there is no stupid drama getting in the way from him separating a smug mafia boss' head from his neck.

>>49906326
Just putting it out there that not everyone is cool with their characters dying suddenly, even in story based games (in my experience, especially in story based games). Yes, it happens sometimes in stories and in real life, but if you're specifically playing one character and suddenly that character dies you may be upset at not being able to play him anymore.

If resurrection magic is a thing in that setting+system it's not as bad, and some people like to go for that sort of thing, but character death doesn't go over well with everyone in most games (especially "fail one roll and you die" character death).

>>49907697
>The GM made a mistake.
Implying any of it happened
But if it had, the mistake was in how the save or die was applied, not that it was.

>And you have moved the goal posts here
Nope
>If the game had save or die effects, then mechanically OP did nothing wrong.
I'm saying that since save or die is an accepted element of the game, the GM is not wrong to arrange a save or die situation, even if that specific instance of save or die is one they crafted for the situation.

>>49907698
Yeah, with that case the campaign would have went... Rather differently. Could have still been fun, though I would have had to up combat stats of some villains to make it challenging. (The hard combats in the campaign happened when trying to acquire gear to sabotage the villains covertly.) could have been okay as a hack/slash plot though.

Or a lot of fun if someone else in the group *did* care for their family, and you went and indirectly got them killed.

File: That guy logic.png (166KB, 374x229px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 374x229px

>>49907823
>Or a lot of fun if someone else in the group *did* care for their family, and you went and indirectly got them killed.

Oh, then it would've been even easier to kill all the bad guys. I would just need to convince them that we will avenge the family forever together and kill every last person responsible. Redirecting the anger towards a useful purpose, you know?

I like playing characters more ruthless than the main antagonists.

>>49907794
Now you are the one making presumptions. The GM never said he intended for that to be a save or die situation. And now you arguing if it is acceptable for the GM to set up dangerous situation instead of whether or not he used the rules right. I'll give you a 4/5 bait rating. Good, but I've seen better.

File: laughing marines.jpg (12KB, 385x278px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 385x278px

>>49907087
>(At this point, players look at me like I'm the root of all evil. I grin back, confirming that they may be right.)

Jesus fucking Christ. I realize this never happened and you're fishing for ebin (you)s, but still, how many fedoras do you own, pussy?

You wouldn't know evil if it came and bit you on the tip of your edgelord fantasizing microdick.

File: 1426574187423.jpg (728KB, 1095x795px) Image search: [Google]

728KB, 1095x795px

>>49900133
shoulda roleplayed his friends trying to fix him up and needing to go to the temple and beg/threaten the high priest to save his life, why the highpriest you ask because he was just that fucked up thats why.

and when he heals up, nowitspersonal.jpg

but hey hindsight right, its not like i could have done better.

>>49900133
So, after all this, I'm curious about all the "hints" you say you dropped. Go ahead and tell us, OP.

>>49900133
>fail one check
>die

l m a o

>>49907872
>Now you are the one making presumptions.
Nope
>The GM never said he intended for that to be a save or die situation.
They literally presented it as one, you knob.
The PC made a roll, failed, and died.
What do you call that?
>Ah, that's not a "save or die" it's a Swedish Turnabout Transcyclic Binary Result Random Result!
Fuck you, it was a save or die.

>And now you arguing if it is acceptable for the GM to set up dangerous situation instead of whether or not he used the rules right.
Nope
I've been arguing that if it is acceptable for the GM to set up a "save or die situation", not a "dangerous situation", then they used the rules right.

>I'll give you a 4/5 bait rating.
Right back at you, sweetheart.

>>49908086
>>The GM never said he intended for that to be a save or die situation.
>They literally presented it as one, you knob.
>The PC made a roll, failed, and died.
>What do you call that?
If you read the OP the only reason the player was in that situation alone was because he sudden rushed ahead. They way he is described as going berserk in the OP and other mentions later in the thread by the GM imply this was unexpected. Just because a "skill check or die" happened doesn't mean it was planned. Also "skill check or die" is heavily discouraged in most situations by the DnD game designers.

>I've been arguing that if it is acceptable for the GM to set up a "save or die situation", not a "dangerous situation", then they used the rules right.
Then your original statement did a very poor job of conveying this. Also if you bothered to read the thread you would have know it was in 5e. If you knew anything about 5e you would have realized that was a stupid, pointless and obvious thing that didn't bear worth mentioning. Your mention of mechanics in combination with the redundant argument made it seem like you were talking about something else.

One of the most important things a GM has to do is establish a precedent and set the tone and player expectations.

A character not being able to slit another's throat due to HP is fine. Subverting or ignoring a game's rules in order to tell a better story is also fine. While we're at it, playing a heroic fantasy where the PCs are unlikely to die is fine. Playing a darker fantasy where the PCs are never truly safe is also fine.

So let's say you're playing a heroic fantasy where there's risk, but the PCs are unlikely to actually die, and the players have no reason to believe that throat-slitting can bypass HP. If an NPC suddenly slits a PC's throat and they die, then the player feels cheated; like you arbitrarily changed the rules on them. It's one thing to be a whiner who can't accept the outcome of a die roll, but nobody likes feeling cheated.

>>49908004
There are no hints, because he never gave any, because this is a bait thread using "shit that never happened."

>>49900214

This.

If I knew the DM wanted to fuck my character in the ass and the reason sounds cool, I will spread my cheeks and emphasize every groan and moan.

I don't want to get caught off guard, it keeps me from turning a surprising scene into a shocking, dramatic one.

>>49900133
>Having a 'love interest' other than JUSTICE
Your player had it coming, the beta faggot.

>>49900177
You should have let him react regardless that was poor Dming on your part ya gotta know when to stretch things a bit one roll to kill or not kill a character straight out is generally one of those times.

>>49906982
Yes assassin/rogues are so uncommon that clearly thats the detail that makes OPs story BS Clearly.

Project more anon

>>49908603
Seriously, every one should just play an emotionally void smiting machine completely detached from any ties to the world other that the gear they use to Dues Vult! with. Good on OP for trying to break that pussy of actually trying to make attachments to OPs game world.

>>49908257
>Just because a "skill check or die" happened doesn't mean it was planned.
You are getting awfully fixated on my use of the phrase "set up".
Pretend I said "use a save or die situation" instead.
Does that help?

>Also "skill check or die" is heavily discouraged in most situations by the DnD game designers.
Irrelevant if the use of it is accepted by OP's fictional players.

>Then your original statement did a very poor job of conveying this.
I disagree.

>Also if you bothered to read the thread you would have know it was in 5e.
The minutiae of how the details work of whatever rules of whatever system that OP says they used in their fake story don't interest me, so I skipped those posts.
If you bothered to read the posts you respond to, you would have realized that I posted in broad terms to account for any system.
My point stands and focusing on the dagger rules glosses over the issue of whether or not a "skillcheck or die" event is valid.

>>49907211
>The problem I have with your post, and I suspect Angryanon McFaggot would have as well, is that it presumes that the numbers attached to the weapon are more important than the situational bonus of the PC distractedly murdering his enemy and completely trusting her.

>>49908649
You know that attachment to the physical world is the root of all suffering, right? You're perpetuating the vicious cycle instead of CLEAVING and SMITING.

>>49908489
>If I knew the DM wanted to fuck my character in the ass and the reason sounds cool, I will spread my cheeks and emphasize every groan and moan.
You are my kind of player.
No homo.

>>49908671
>You are getting awfully fixated on my use of the phrase "set up".
>Pretend I said "use a save or die situation" instead.
Well I used "skill check or die" because that's what it was in this situation.

>Irrelevant if the use of it is accepted by OP's fictional players.
According to the OP, they didn't accept it.

>I disagree.
I disagree with your disagreement.

>The minutiae of how the details work of whatever rules of whatever system that OP says they used in their fake story don't interest me, so I skipped those posts.
>If you bothered to read the posts you respond to, you would have realized that I posted in broad terms to account for any system.
>My point stands and focusing on the dagger rules glosses over the issue of whether or not a "skillcheck or die" event is valid.
My issue with this is you also said
>Appropriate rolls should take place, but once you're in a vulnerable spot and the dice turn on you? You're dead, Jim.
What rolls are appropriate are determined by those "minutiae of how the details work". I was pointing out that in the system OP presented in his fake story he did not use the the appropriate rolls.

>>49900543
>"I'll use an npc a player is emotionally invested in as bait!"
>expecting him to react rationally in character instead of charging in to save her when he heard her screaming and bbeg is implied to be doing things to her.
what the fuck?

>>49908883
>Climb the BBEGs dark tower
>Love Interest's cries of fear and anguish echo throughout the tower
>Periodically a cruel, deep laughter can be heard
>Enraged, the party leader finally reaches the top of the tower
>The reason for the Love Interest's cries and BBEGs laughs have become clear
>The BBEG is mopping the floor with her in Magic: The Gathering

>>49908718

Aww, thanks anon!

I've reached that point in my time with this hobby where I'm comfortable with suffering, in fact I enjoy it; winning the hand of the queen feels more deserved if I lost my own hand in an intense torture sequence after being captured by the BBEG, you know? Every story needs tragedy to make the victories sweeter, and I'm comfortable with this meaning the DM hits us below the belt.

But I want to know the DM wants to hit me there, not because I want to be coddled but because I want to properly work out how best to go along with the plan; its really damn hard to push an idea I wouldn't think is fine.

This shit here is why people make murderhobos with no family or friends or history. So that GMs like OP hypothetically is can't fuck them over.

>>49900133
I hope that it's a bait. If not, consider yourself lucky that you didn't loose your teeth.

>>49908992
Diabolic! 10/10 would comfort love interest afterwards.

>>49908992
I'm chuckling but im dying on the inside
>got cucked by a mtg playing fedoratippin daki humpin trenchcoat donning bint
feels bad man.

>>49900133
>>I describe the lieutenant doing the unspeakable to his lover.
The better question is why the fuck the lieutenant was fucking this bitch while the heroes are literally right outside? Was the sex so good they didn't even noticed the bloodbath going on no doubt right outside their room? This is just shitty writing.

>>49906326
I feel sorry for any of your players.
Literally everything you just said its the equivalent of 'rock falls everyone dies is perfectly fine and valid'

>>49906326
>1. State opinion
>2. Pad opinion with accusations that anyone who feels otherwise must be a kid
>3. Win argument
it's genius

File: 60555676.jpg (26KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 600x400px

>>49908794
>Well I used "skill check or die" because that's what it was in this situation.
Well, I was referring to your fixation on whether it was "planned".
You did not address that, but fine.

>According to the OP, they didn't accept it.
Did OP establish whether they had previously not accepted such situations in their game, or are you referring to the one instance?

>I disagree with your disagreement.
I accept your disagreement with my disagreement, but do not agree with it.
And in a shocking twist, it's because I just realized the core disagreement:

In response to St. Anger the Incoherent, I posted:
>>49906765
>If OP had actually ran this game, and the game had save or die effects (or similarly relevant rules) in it, then mechanically OP did nothing wrong, no matter how badly he pulled off the betrayal twist.
I thought this was clear enough that I meant:
>If OP had actually ran this game, and the game had save or die effects (or similarly relevant rules) in it, then mechanically OP did nothing wrong by using such an effect, no matter how badly he pulled off the betrayal twist.

However, I did effectively post:
>If x and y, then mechanically OP did nothing wrong.
But even if x and y were true, he did so something mechanically wrong.
So, yeah.

OP did something mechanically wrong.
But it was using that specific "one roll or die" mechanism[should have been two rolls?], not using such a mechanism in general, especially if such a mechanism had been previously used in this fictional game.

For

File: PURE UNADULTERATED HANDHOLDING.png (506KB, 720x528px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 720x528px

>>49905316
OP Here, >>49905388 was right, there was some extreme hand holding going on.

>>49909122
The worst part is that she's changed forever.
>The night after the princess' safe arrival back home
>The hero visits her and plants a soft kiss on her lips
>Some soft chuckles can be heard
>Suddenly the princess sighs
>"I'm sorry, hero. It's just.... it's not the same anymore"
>"I can't stop thinking about BBEG-kun, how we teased and stimulated me like no man before"
>"I'm sorry hero, but I cannot live without his deck"

>>49909196
Technically, it's the equivalent of:
>'*rolls dice* "Rock falls everyone dies."' is perfectly fine and valid
Which is slightly better.

>>49909336
>Well, I was referring to your fixation on whether it was "planned".
>You did not address that, but fine.
I've been up for too long and that didn't click sorry. >>49900543

>Did OP establish whether they had previously not accepted such situations in their game, or are you referring to the one instance?
Mostly this one instance but I strongly doubt save or dies off skill check would be accepted in any group since they are not at all balanced for that.

>using that specific "one roll or die" mechanism[should have been two rolls?]
It is more that he had an effect trigger when it shouldn't have. Vorpal is only supposed to go off when you roll a "natural 20" (so rolling the 20 face on a 20 sided die) on an attack roll. Now it's easy to see how this mistake could happen. Lots of effects are tied to "natural 20s" such as auto hits and it being the basic "critical threat" range. Some weapons have an expanded "critical threat" range so one might confuse vorpal as working of the critical threat range if they haven't read it in a while. God knows I've seen and made plenty of mistakes like that playing DnD. Assassins get and ability to automatically score a critical hit, so if you think critical hits trigger vorpal well the result is obvious.

>>49906326
But the story was dogshit too, faggot.

File: Fuckyou.jpg (87KB, 1200x1350px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1200x1350px

>>49906787
>>49906942
>>49907087
And just like the other guy said, the PCs are now conditioned to no never have a family, you fucking faggot.

This is the reasons players are like this. Shitheads like you. And then you bitch and whine about it, "Whaaaa why do they never want a family?!" Fuck you.

>>49907403
>15 year-long Spelljammer campaign
...You know what? Compared to that claim, OP's almost believable.

>>49900133
If this is real OP is a cunt.
It's probably not though, I'm guessing this is just a bait thread.

File: hqdefault.jpg (10KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 480x360px

>>49910641

In my experience I've found PC familes are mostly a no-win scenario.

Two things happen with PC family members. The first is the GM just kills them off-"screen" for the sake of cheap drama, effectively severing you from the characters which ground you to the world. Ideally that role should be filled by other players; it's always more interesting when the players are dedicated to each other instead of NPCs. But i can still be fun to have a person you're willing (or unwilling) to do things for.

The second thing that happens is the GM doesn't touch them, and your encounters with your family are basically just playing house with your buddy. This is usually at worst awkward or at best just really boring. It's just living out your domestic fantasies; go find a girlfriend if you want to snuggle with someone.

Of course a good GM can make PC families work. Several times one of my GMs incorporated my character's family members into the game. It can still lead to tragedy but personally I'm fine with that. I find well-written tragedy much more interesting and satisfying than well-written domesticity.

File: 1476406675353.gif (2MB, 525x295px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 525x295px

>>49909372
>deck

>>49911038
Yeah. It IS possible, but its so rare, and the first one happens so fucking much people are conditioned away from it.

>>49911038
>>49911741

I've never experienced the DM trying to kill my character's family, which is a damn shame because it sounds so fucking common and I want a little cheap drama in my Penny Dreadful-tier storylines.

Last time I made family the forefront of my character background, the DM decided it was so interesting she turned my character's daughter into a plot point and the mom a setting mover-and-shaker who was the equal (and rival) of the primary antagonist.

I just want one severed head sent to my character's doorstep, is that too much to ask for?

>>49909173
>The better question is why the fuck the lieutenant was fucking this bitch while the heroes are literally right outside? Was the sex so good they didn't even noticed the bloodbath going on no doubt right outside their room? This is just shitty writing.
This. Plus unspeakable things heavily implies rape, not consensual sex. If OP wanted his player to respond appropriately he should have said they were having sex instead of "lieutenant doing unspeakable things to love interest."

>>49911871

You're under the assumption OP didn't want the players to assume the lieutenant was doing something horrible to the girlfriend.

He makes it very clear he wanted to blindside the player with the revelation the girlfriend was actually on the other side now. But for a myriad of reasons all explained in depth in this thread, he fucked that up.

>>49906326
if you don't care about dice you can go LARP. leave pen and paper to people who don't want to change the core mechanics to fit their lack of DM-skills

>>49906587
true. he should become a writer and stop annoying people face to face.

>>49906750
>NOR would I pull the "LOL, SOME RANDUMB GUY SAVES YOU BECAUSE I DON'T WANT YOU DEAD" shit either
you did exactly that to your NPC

>>49900133
You've just created another murderhobo PC. You've destroyed his trust in you, in GMs, in the NPCs you or they create and in the world you or they present.

And this is being optimistic, this event will probably color how the other players see this game, see NPCs and GMs as well.

>>49912053
>You're under the assumption OP didn't want the players to assume the lieutenant was doing something horrible to the girlfriend.
Which is retarded especially since the GM was supposedly implying that she had betrayed them beforehand.

Regardless of this whole story vs gameplay bullshit, killing a PC for the "story" is a complete dick move.

>>49900434
Not that guy, but as the guy who was saved I'd feel cheated. If literally everyone else died fair and square, and I get a get out of jail free card for no reason I'd actually bring it up with the GM. GMs shouldn't play favorites.

>>49915273
This is what happens when you forget you are playing a game, not writing a soap opera.

>>49900509
> I let the player save or die rather than just kill them by pure fiat. Aren't I an amazing DM?
Wowie OP you sure are a great person and this totally real, totally not bait, plot twist was a masterwork worthy of Lord GRRM, greatest fantasy writer of our tine.

>>49906542
There is no way you are that good a writer. HAHAHA, if you can do that and everyone claps and bows then sure.

But that wont happen. You ass pull bullshit b/c you are an arrogant piece of shit that thinks he knows better.

why the fuck are they having pretend sex while a group of soildiers is killing all the men.

The lieutenant thinks he is going to die? no one would stand back and waist all their resources to trick one guy to cut his throat, while pretend fucking the guys gf.

That is ridiculous.

This is some heinous cheating hentai trolling

>>49900133
>thinks rolling a successful stealth check is an automatic coup de grace

This is terrible bait.

>>49915749
I didn't even think about this.

>Under Siege
>Asks GF for one last quickie
>Doesn't finish in time
>GF mad cause coitus interruptus

>>49915273
Unless, and this is a BIG unless, it is with the FULL KNOWLEDGE and BLESSING of the player in question.

File: 1440820739378.jpg (78KB, 338x305px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 338x305px

>>49915273
>Coddled millennials actually believe this

>>49914727
As the thread has revealed, the GM is a colossal retard

>>49916181
But he's not wrong.
A GM killing a PC for "story" is almost always a complete dick move.
PC deaths shouldn't be scripted unless it's planned with the player, which is a rare exception.

File: BLagoon_box.jpg (60KB, 783x432px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 783x432px

>cuckolding the player
don't do that.
>>49900621
>We were playing 5e
Vorpal "daggers" don't exist in 5E. The Vorpal sword is a legendary weapon in 5E that nobody sane would give to their lover, it's one of the most powerful magical items in all of existence. Granting the most powerful legendary enchantment to a dagger just to pull the rug under the player is contrivance at best.

File: 126546315.gif (801KB, 245x254px) Image search: [Google]

801KB, 245x254px

>>49907087
Personally, I think that you are doing a good job man.

Kudos to you: I'd play in a believable game where there is an organized crime group who acts like one, by coercing and free application of brute force.

>>49900400

The worst thing about Game of Thrones is how poorly set up its twists are. Most of the "twists" in Game of Thrones are actually just very unfortunate events that haven't been given the narrative space they need to build a proper sense of dread. They don't put old information into a shocking new light. A bad twist is when a particularly unfortunate possibility happens very quickly and without buildup. A good twist is when new context causes seemingly innocuous events to retroactively become the build up for a sudden reversal of fortune.

Related: A tragedy is not just when something very bad happens to a person. A tragedy is when someone's own flaws destroy them. For a tragedy to have any potency, it must in some way be the character's fault. That's not to say that the tragedy has to be somehow karmic. It's fine if the "fault" that leads to the tragic end is something that's actually praiseworthy, but the victim of the tragedy has to have some kind of hand in actually causing it. Otherwise it's backstory, not plot.

>>49904847
This is basically the point I'm at with my current DM. It always happens when a new player joins especially.

>DM whines that all our characters are orphans, every new game won't shut the fuck up about how we should have some relatives at least once.
>We always make murder hobo orphans because we know what will happen if we have any kind of living family in our backstories at all.
>One new guy caves and makes a character that has a family, just a mother and his brother in a random no-name village.
>Can practically hear the DM getting a stiffy under the table when he notices.
>The entire first session is basically us getting railroaded to whatever no-name village his family is in, then watch it get pillaged, burned to the ground, and all it's inhabitants murder-raped in very graphic detail.
>We're not allowed to, say, fight the pillagers or make any attempt to stop them, the DM just ignores our dice rolls, tells us "No you don't" if we try to do anything, and basically just makes us unable to do anything simply because he says so.
>We could be level 10 heroes of the planet and we're literally unable to do anything to stop 5 level 3 Orcs from razing a village while we just stand there and watch.
>New player makes his next PC a murder orphan
>DM moans that everyone's murderhobo orphans.

He's really not a bad DM to be honest. He just seems to hate characters with families with a burning passion.

>>49917157
A DM that pulls something like "no you're not allowed to act" is a bad DM in my book.

>>49917183
Agreed.

>>49917157
>"No you don't."
That is your cue to leave, Anon.

>>49907698
Well, it's pretty well known where they come from. It's just not worth the trouble of dealing with it, on account of the human bombs.

>>49917183
>>49917484
>>49917487
Really, he's a great DM normally.

He just seems to hate PC families with a raging passion.

>>49900133
Here's my problem with all this, even if she agreed with the BBEG's ideology, and ended up falling for the lieutenant, you'd have to be purely irredeemable to just off your former lover in cold blood like that.

Standing inbetween him and your new man, that's believable. But someone evil enough to dispatch of an old lover without hesitation? That's not a PC's love interest, that's a CE whore so vile most succubi would gag.

File: shrug_by_cap_tan-d5rx9no.png (367KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

367KB, 500x500px

>>49900133
I would personally have made it so the bbeg forcefully shape-changed himself and the players lover, so that when the player busted in to exact revenge he beat the shit out of his own ladyfriend. This would provide an opportunity for the bbeg to escape/attack and made room for the drama you wanted without getting mr. player murderfucked.

>>49918320
>He's a great guy, honest, I just need to listen better.

This is what you sound like chief. Your GM is trash and you deserve better.

>>49918641
I'm saying he'sfine outside of this one specific thing, which we specifically avoid.

>>49900254
>This comes off as incredibly coddlish and unrealistic

First off, it's supposed to be a game for fun.

Second off, if you're going to orchestrate a character's death while using their love interest as the finishing blow, the least you can do is give them the heads up to keep things fair.

Third off, you need to step away from the table. I've dealt with enough shitty GM's to know the stink a mile away and your players will thank you, assuming they haven't already decided to leave.

>>49918678
>"He's a very sweet guy once you get to know him, it's just that he gets angry when I don't have his dinner ready."

Seriously, fucking stop it. No GM worth his salt would ever tell their players that they can't do a thing because he already decided how a thing will go down.

>>49918830
Which is exactly why we don't put ourselves in that situation he's in and warn new players not to.

>>49919046

Sweet Christmas anon can you possibly sound any more like a battered wife?

>>49919067
You're projecting an awful lot anon.

>>49900133
honestly the only part i wouldn't be okay with is instant death for not realizing that the love interest turned to the dark side.

She should protect him, but not in that way. Instead of obliterating the attacking character, have her get in the way and inconvenience him / stop him from killing the BBEG.

It's easier if she's a spellcaster or something. Cast defensive spells on the BBEG, cast CC spells on the PC. Their end goal should be to escape the fortress without being brutally murdered by the party, because by the time the party gets to the BBEG's bedroom, shit's hit the fan too hard.

>>49918320
The obvious response is for every character to start having disposable families, acting completely blasé when they inevitably get horribly murdered. Do this until your GM gets the hint.

>>49919075
Kek

He's right m8, you sound like a complete cuck bitch for your GM

No amount of P-P-P-PROJECTION screaming will change that

>>49900133
As a DM, I think you were right by killing him in a one-shot, you should've really taken your time to describe how she suddenly holds the PC and stabs him multilple times, maybe telling him something along the lines of "I have to do this" or even "i loved you, once".

Maybe you should'nt let her heal the bad guy and have run away, but maybe let the party find her later and tell them how she saw her lover dying honorably while trying to protect him, then the session would've focused on the intrigue of what really happened in that chamber...next, you let the damsel escape, confirming her as a new BBEG.

I'm in favor of "story over gameplay" i was a dramatic twist and you had been hinting at it for a long time, if it makes sense inside the story world, it's perfectly valid. Adventurer's die, and hell, this one was a non-bullshit way to die, some die in ridiculous ways.

File: 12373296_10156299167620265_1837837891660364701_n.jpg (15KB, 300x260px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 300x260px

>>49919292

>maybe telling him something along the lines of "I have to do this" or even "i loved you, once".

I actually fucking gagged reading this

Otherwise 1/10 your bait is weak

File: disappointed anime man.png (248KB, 456x480px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 456x480px

>>49919292
Good grief.

>>49919292
(you)

>>49919305
No man, seriously.

The PC fucked up. He made a bad decision, he decided to rush into battle ALONE.

Think about, you're fighting your way through the enemy fortress, and suddenly you hear your lover cry...of course you'd become impatient, but, this is D&D, it would be perfectly valid to suspect it was a trap meant for him.

"Cover me! I will rush ahead and this!"
"Wait!, Don't you see it's a trap!? He wants you alone!"
"I can't possibly stay here while he's hurting her, we must do something"
"Then we must ALL rush, or at least one of us should go with you"
"Then decide quickly! I can't afford that much time!"

Then the rogue could sneak up with the guy and with two of them in the same room they could've prevented the backstabbing easily.

See? It's not bullshit, the players roleplayed badly, and now they're whining with numbers and shit because they made a bad decision as characters, not as players.

It's perfectly valid, it makes sense. I know the rules are there, but the rules are meant to serve the DM, not the other way. Remember rule zero.

>>49919365
(you)

>>49919377
Okay I get it, yes I was baiting for (You)s, thanks a lot, I needed my dose of attention.

File: tfw he tries to bring friends.jpg (15KB, 200x174px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 200x174px

>>49919365

Anon at least put some effort into it.

>>49919388
You're welcome anon, it's a harsh doggy dog world out there.

>>49919289
Whatever helps you sleep at night friend.

>>49919365
You seem to be missing the core issue.

If there had been a battalion of troops/monster/elite soldier waiting for him, leading to a one sided fight for survival until the others could get there, nobody ITT would have batted an eyelid.

Instead, he got one shotted with barely a roll, for doing something completely in character and which came right the fuck out of the blue.

That's like saying you should expect to face an enraged wolverine when you start your car in 1980's Ireland; sure, you shouldn't be blasé about it in general, but in context it makes absolutely no fucking sense to be wary of that specific eventuality.

>>49919409
I sleep with my GM who sucks my balls every night, whereas you suck your GM's while desperately rationalizing why you're too much of a pussy to find a better one :^)

>>49919399
No man, I'm seriously not baiting. What was the problem with that?

OP wanted to make a plot-twist with the PC's lover, and the conditions were ideal. The PC was blinded with rage, alone, and not paying attention to his lover. Imagine if she was trying to hold him as to stop him from killing the BBEG with his fists...would you call for a grapple roll? No, you would instantly go "she grabs you, to stop you from brutalizing the BBEG while crying and asking for mercy on his behalf." or would you go:

"She tries to hold you"
Okay, so there's an AOO because she doesn't have the feat
Okay now she makes a melee touch attack
Okay now let's do a contested strength roll

You think that's okay? You think it fits? You think it was supposed to be that way?

I'm all against narrativist bullshit, but the rules are guidelines, a DM has the power to decide what happens. Character death is not player's death.

File: bai-heresy.jpg (18KB, 360x361px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 360x361px

>>49919365

>>49906750
>I care about GOOD stories, with GOOD endings
Write a book then you fucking faggot, killing a pc because of le epic plot twist is fucking horrible writing in a game where everyone is supposed to have agency

>>49919427
>came right the fuck out of the blue.
The GM had been dropping hints, though, that's what he said in his opening post (OP).

>>49919427
The OP said he had hinted at her betrayal.
And you know PCs suck at catching hints, this should make them learn how important it is to pay attention. I know the twist was a bit to edgy, I know RPGs are not supposed to be novels or movies where the players are only spectators, I know that. But I also know RPGs are used to tell a story, and this particular twist brought out a lot of possibilities.

The BBEG would've changed, the general situation of the game world had changed a lot. The "plot" was moving forward, hell, the other PCs could even just revive the fallen PC and that would be it, no need to make another character.

You "died" once. That's it. Get up and fight again, don't just start whining, do you like that kinds of players?

File: hicks_smoke2.gif (1MB, 348x186px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 348x186px

>>49919459

>I'm all against narrativist bullshit
>thinks it's okay for a GM to go "no you can't do that" for the sake of cheap tragedy

How am I not supposed to think this is bait? Of course, I keep responding.

>>49919488
OP says he's been dropping hints. He's given absolutely no indication what those hints were and even if he did I guarantee you they never suggested she'd just outright kill the poor sod for no reason.

>>49900133
>XD MAKE LE CHECK BRO
>I got a nat 1
>XDDDDDDDDDDDD U DIED
>HEY FAGITS YOU SEE THAT DUDES CORPSE ON THE BED XD DOESN'T THAT PISS U OFF!?!?!
>HEY WHAT DE FUCK RULE 0 RULE 0 RULE 0 YOU CAN'T DISAGREE ME AM BEST GM, WHY MJAD U JUST DIDN'T GET MY EPIC HINTS
>That was utter bullshit, i died because he failed one check?
>YEAH DUDE BUT GET THIS XD IT STORY IMPORTANT FUCK YOU
Eat a bag of dicks, skin yourself and eat your skin, run naked into a pool of acid and die, please.

>>49919488
The GM did a lot of things, most of them stupid. Like forgetting how a fucking vorpal blade works.

It wouldn't surprise me if the hints he gave were completely retarded shit.

>>49919459
Dude fuck off, this is the most rocks fall and you all die bullshit i've ever fucking heard, killing characters due to a single failed check is a fucking terrible idea, this was not a key part of the narrative, the character didn't need to die, but because the dude got unlucky the time he put into the character, the relationships made through that character all get erased because of a single dice roll, there are way fucking better ways to do this.

>>49919497
>and this particular twist brought out a lot of possibilities.
Only problem being the death of a character that didn't need to happen, was determined by a single check and ended up doing fuck all because the person the betrayel would affect most is now dead.

>>49919593

Don't forget the fact no one in the party actually got the opportunity to see who it was who killed the guy. The only reason they knew it was the gf was because the GM actually told them out of character

>>49919453
>My GM's pretty good, aside from this one minor flaw in his style that never comes up anyways and isn't that big a deal
>REEEEE HE'S THE SHITTIEST DM ON EARTH, STOP PLAYING WITH HIM BECAUSE IT'S OFFENDING ME REEEE

Fucking millenials.

>>49919488
Usually when I hear "How did you guys not notice those hints I was dropping, it was obvious", 99% of the time they weren't obvious at all to anyone but the GM, and only because he wrote the hints to the twist and the twist itself, and to the players nothing was off in the slightest.

>>49919520
nat 1 is a critical failure so yeah, those tend to get you killed

>>49919686

No, it's not.

The only place a natural 1 matters is on attack rolls (where you auto-miss, nothing else) and saves (where you auto-fail, nothing else).

>>49919643
Nice p-p-p-projecting there anon :^)

It doesn't mean we're offended just because we think it's hilarious and pathetic that you're too much of a pussy to stop sucking your shitGM's crusty balls, we just want to laugh at you :^)

>>49919708
>I-I-I-I-I'M NOT MAD, H-H-HONEST.

Also

>we

>>49919686
Show me the rule stating that, beyond that you're taking the liberty of a failed check way too fucking far, this is some "you stab yourself in the throat bullshit"