Dream House of the Nether Prince

TerribleSorcery

Should be playing D&D instead
My favourite moment of prisoner-taking was playing Ben L's Through Ultan's Door. It was a FLAILSNAILS game of course, so my character is from Arthurian Britain, somebody is a 19th-century circus-performer illusionist, another guy is a Russian Orthodox priest, you get the idea. And we took some Fleischguilders prisoner and I TRIED to be the good guy about it, but the 18 STR fighter was from Empire of the Petal Throne...
 

Malrex

So ... slow work day? Every day?
This is the worst. For players and DM alike. Like you said, it bogs the game down. Formalities of alignment must be observed, interrogation must be slogged through with or without a pile of opposing skill rolls depending on the system, and then there's the deep inconvenience of figuring out what the hell to do with the captive (drag him along? tie him to a post? send him back to the authorities with a henchman? battlefield execution?).
Both myself and the other DM in our group have taken to very obviously letting non-essential NPC's die before they can get captured. Like the strike to subdue does so much damage that it kills the NPC anyway. Basically the message being "let's keep playing". It's a definite act of DM fiat and no one likes it, but the alternative can be a real drag on the game night.



Some people need a quest to give them the kick in the ass to get going. Sometimes it's the sandbox designer's fault: If all you give them is 'You start here in the middle of a vast cloud of possibilities. What do you do?" you're likely to cause paralysis in the majority of players. It's good to have some kind of recognizable central narrative as a lifeline for the lost to cling onto until they figure out what their own priorities are. Once again, Witcher 3 absolutely nailed this. The Fallout games weren't half bad either.
That said, I'm afraid more and more people really are at the opposite extreme; looking to roll dice and play-act their way through someone else's failed fantasy novel. For them, a sandbox probably seems unbelievably lazy and 'immature'.
My group doesn't see it as a inconvenience. Also for clarity--it bogs down the action or moving forward of the quest of the game but my group views a roleplay opportunity as part of the game. Several times my character has offered a prisoner a higher wage and suddenly I get a (untrustworthy) henchmen which sometimes works out and sometimes doesn't. But having a little back-up can help with the inter-party factions or a little more muscle to carry loot out or sometimes it causes a little chaos if I get backstabbed. I understand that most here don't like to roleplay during the game, so not trying to sway anyone's opinions here, just sharing that we enjoy those opportunities, like an empty room, it breaks up the action a bit. It is interesting to me how we all play the same game, but differently.

I've never understood the paralysis from players when provided options. Are designers going to have to restrict themselves to putting only 1-2 things in a room so players don't freak out with how many things there are to explore in a room? It's just the same thing with a bunch of quests but on a grander scale. Should hex crawls only have 1 hex in them? I thrive in those situations with abundant hooks/rumors/etc.--total freedom to tackle the set-ups/hooks the DM provided that interest me most. I'd counter that the players are the ones who are 'lazy' as the DM, as Squeen says, has developed several layers of an onion--that's hard work.

Makes me wonder if Choose Your Own Adventure books would be popular at all today or if people would just freak out and hate them because they are forced to make decisions for themselves. Give me lions to play with, not sheep.
 

Beoric

8, 8, I forget what is for
I understand that most here don't like to roleplay during the game, so not trying to sway anyone's opinions here, just sharing that we enjoy those opportunities, like an empty room, it breaks up the action a bit. It is interesting to me how we all play the same game, but differently.
It's a roleplaying game. I do both. So did Gygax, although I find his characterizations a bit stock. 1e DMG p. 103:
Other Non-Player Characters: The host of merchants, shopkeepers, guardsmen, soldiers, clerics, magic-users, fighters, thieves, assassins, etc. are
likewise all yours to play. Again, this is simply a matter of assuming the station and vocation of the NPC and creating characteristics — formally or informally according to the importance of the non-player character. These NPCs will have some alignment, but even that won’t be likely to prevent a bit of greed or avariciousness. Dealing with all such NPCs should be expensive and irritating. Consider the two following examples:

The fighter, Celowin Silvershield, enters a strange town seeking aid from a high level magic-user in order to turn an associate back to flesh (after a most unfortunate encounter with a cockatrice). His inquiries at a tavern meet with vague answers until several rounds of drinks have been purchased, and the proprietor generously tipped. Wending his way from tavern to wizard’s tower, Celowin is accosted by a beggar, and he is pestered unendingly until he either pays off or calls for the watch. Paying off will attract a swarm of other beggars. Calling for the watch can be nearly as dangerous, as they could resent a foreigner’s refusal to deem a native beggar worthy of a copper or two. Despite such possible misadventures, the fighter finally comes to the tower of Llewellyn ap-Owen, a wizard of high repute. However, Celowin’s knocking is answered by a lesser person, the warlock Tregillish Mul, the wizard’s henchman. Mul informs the eager fighter that: “Lofty Llewellyn is far too busy to see anyone at this time. Good day!” Unless Celowin is quick in offering some inducement, the warlock will slam the tower door and forget about the intrusion.

Now let us assume that Celowin’s bribe was sufficient to convince Tregillish Mul to arrange an appointment with his master, and furthermore that such appointment is actually timely. Now old ap-Owen is rather testy, for he was in the middle of an experiment which is now absolutely ruined, and must be begun all over again, just because this stupid sword-swinger managed to convince Mul-the-lackwit that something was more important than a wizard’s spell research! Well, this fellow Celowin had better have a good reason for interruption, and further, the pay had better be good . . . . Celowin will have to pay through the nose, in cash and in magic items, to get the magic-user to turn stone to flesh once again. But suppose Celowin has no item which Llewellyn could use? The wizard will take something he cannot use personally, for he undoubtedly has all sorts of henchmen and hirelings who can employ these things, not to mention the possibility of trading or selling. In no event will money ever serve to replace magic items! Furthermore, if no magic is available, then a geas can be laid to get some!

These examples show how varying roles are played without great difficulty simply by calling upon observation of basic human nature and combining it with the particular game circumstances applicable. Once established, it is quite easy to recall the personae of frequently consulted or encountered NPCs. If such intercourse becomes very frequent, considerable additional development of the character or characters concerned, and their surroundings, will certainly be in order. Thus, in many ways, the campaign builds and grows of its own volition and within its own parameters.
I've never understood the paralysis from players when provided options. Are designers going to have to restrict themselves to putting only 1-2 things in a room so players don't freak out with how many things there are to explore in a room? It's just the same thing with a bunch of quests but on a grander scale. Should hex crawls only have 1 hex in them? I thrive in those situations with abundant hooks/rumors/etc.--total freedom to tackle the set-ups/hooks the DM provided that interest me most. I'd counter that the players are the ones who are 'lazy' as the DM, as Squeen says, has developed several layers of an onion--that's hard work.
I think it is common for people to have an easier time if they have limited options, as opposed to a truly open ended scenario. It is sort of like using random tables to get your creative spark going as a DM; constraints inspire. My players are among those who don't do well with infinite possibilities, so I find it is good to have a few obvious ones.

When I'm a player, prefer open ended scenarios, as long as I can infer enough about the local setting to infer some options. Or at least I want the the freedom to choose a path other than the ones that are being spoon fed to me.
 

The1True

My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
My favourite moment of prisoner-taking was playing Ben L's Through Ultan's Door. It was a FLAILSNAILS game of course, so my character is from Arthurian Britain, somebody is a 19th-century circus-performer illusionist, another guy is a Russian Orthodox priest, you get the idea. And we took some Fleischguilders prisoner and I TRIED to be the good guy about it, but the 18 STR fighter was from Empire of the Petal Throne...
What the actual fuck Terrible. You're going to give Squeen a sudden apoplectic aneurism with those 'character classes'! :p I want to bring my Tiefling Disco-Paladin to this party!
 

The1True

My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
Two words bucko. Sleep. Spell. And then begins the intricate dance of Charm Person, threats, offers to defect, and questions of Where Is the Gold?
You hear that you guys?! I'm a full-fledged Bucko now! :D

For sure we can do these things, and from time to time we do. Hell, we even found (definitely not backwards-compatible) rules for leading evil NPC's to redemption in the Book of Exalted Deeds (Ptolus also has a church of redeemed monsters that you can drag penitent NPC's to). But given our average (very sad) 3 hr session these days, this gets pretty tedious when we're trying to clear a dungeon. Especially if we're way down deep and nowhere near somewhere we can drop the prisoner off. That charmed drow 'henchman' is just a backstabbing waiting to happen at absolutely the worst time.
We can tell the DM doesn't want to deal with it by the way he'll throw clearly outmatched monsters at us instead of throwing down their arms. If there's one guy clearly making a stand instead of trying to run, we generally get the message that he's worth saving.
 

The1True

My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
When I'm a player, prefer open ended scenarios, as long as I can infer enough about the local setting to infer some options. Or at least I want the the freedom to choose a path other than the ones that are being spoon fed to me.
Yeah! @Malrex I think this is what I was trying to say. I think we're all in agreement actually, since you say:

I thrive in those situations with abundant hooks/rumors/etc.
None of us want to get dumped in an open world and be told that it is our oyster to do with as we please (mignonette and fresh grated horseradish pls). There need to be at least hooks/rumours/clues to give us some concrete choices. For those who want to be part of something bigger though, the rumblings of a central narrative; the summons from the local magistrate/the mysterious stranger at the inn/the panicked refugee at the gate are a comforting lifeline to be ignored or heeded by those looking to do something with their limited game time.

Makes me wonder if Choose Your Own Adventure books would be popular at all today
I actually think this is what the people you are complaining about would be MOST comfortable with. Action or Roleplay setpieces followed by two or three clearcut choices all leading to further crisply detailed/scripted situations. Basically one laborious step up from the illusion of choice.
 

squeen

8, 8, I forget what is for
What the actual fuck Terrible. You're going to give Squeen a sudden apoplectic aneurism with those 'character classes'! :p I want to bring my Tiefling Disco-Paladin to this party!
Sounds like a wild, heady time---a speakeasy for D&D nerds. Oh internet...I remember well the optimism of the Roaring Aughts.

@Beoric : I rather like Gygax's play example. Trent & Gene say playing at his table was a blast. :)
 

TerribleSorcery

Should be playing D&D instead
What the actual fuck Terrible. You're going to give Squeen a sudden apoplectic aneurism with those 'character classes'! :p I want to bring my Tiefling Disco-Paladin to this party!
Heheheheh nah, it was 2 clerics, an illusionist and a fighter. I think one guy had a special class but it was pretty close to a thief.
 

PrinceofNothing

High Executarch
Staff member
For sure we can do these things, and from time to time we do. Hell, we even found (definitely not backwards-compatible) rules for leading evil NPC's to redemption in the Book of Exalted Deeds (Ptolus also has a church of redeemed monsters that you can drag penitent NPC's to). But given our average (very sad) 3 hr session these days, this gets pretty tedious when we're trying to clear a dungeon. Especially if we're way down deep and nowhere near somewhere we can drop the prisoner off. That charmed drow 'henchman' is just a backstabbing waiting to happen at absolutely the worst time.
We can tell the DM doesn't want to deal with it by the way he'll throw clearly outmatched monsters at us instead of throwing down their arms. If there's one guy clearly making a stand instead of trying to run, we generally get the message that he's worth saving.
Oh yeah I get this. Reconnaisance takes place initially or if some chieftain or bodyguard happens to be taken alive, the party will in fact kill most things they encounter, and subduing things in my game is hard. I am a big fan of random morale so no hints can be gleaned from opponent behavior in that regard.
 

Malrex

So ... slow work day? Every day?
Yeah! @Malrex I think this is what I was trying to say. I think we're all in agreement actually, since you say:
Oh, I was just quoting your post, but felt we were all in somewhat of agreement--I was just being opinionated and not necessarily directing it at anyone. I wish I could find that twitter discussion and post it here but I barely know how to use twitter...very strong opinions about hating sandbox play.
 

The1True

My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
Oh, I was just quoting your post, but felt we were all in somewhat of agreement--I was just being opinionated and not necessarily directing it at anyone. I wish I could find that twitter discussion and post it here but I barely know how to use twitter...very strong opinions about hating sandbox play.
Now I'm curious...
 
Top