Post by Jess on Oct 29, 2019 10:21:04 GMT -5
This is going to be a stream of consciousness kind of post, as I try to figure out what is bothering me.
Know that I am not mad. I am at a loss for how to handle a design/gm/roleplay issue. Feel free to read the whole thing and then give input.
I am having trouble gauging how PCs will react to things, and feel like there is a laissez faire atmosphere in town that means unless I force conflict down throats, conflict is either ignored or brushed off. "Meh, a dude stomping into town and killing people is someone to whom we should give components." "Eh, after getting told that this is a bad idea, Imma give blood to people I don't know who say they are going to use it for alchemical experiments a second time" and so on.
From the point of view as a writer and the person directing NPC actions, this makes it nearly impossible for me to field anything threatening or intense. And punishing a blasé attitude gets me pushback. So, like... I don't know. Andrew Rosenthal put this in the forefront of my mind in that "Didn't really feel like a biiiig impact in the town attitude or climate afterwards - wished more folks would've been willing to go in that direction with later RP. " Like, I don't want everyone chewing the scenery and screaming and wailing in the streets, but a moment of malaise or pride for Kal'Vas?
This campaign has been an exercise in not having the culmination be world-threatening. 3 of our 4 campaigns had world impacting outcomes, with 2 of those being nearly world ending. (Released the Dark Gods, Started A World Wide War, Literally Ended The World as We Knew It and Destroyed the God.) If you continue ramping up and up, you don’t have anywhere to go, and as such, nothing this campaign is geared to threaten the world. At the most, the falling of the Star, if left unchecked, would have killed hundreds on the Island, but nothing outside of that. That all being the case, I feel like some players’ attitudes towards small threats has become, “Whatever, let it happen, at the end we can just stab it to death.” Which means putting things out for conflict, at the outset, kinda gets ignored.
I am not sure how to adjust what I am doing. I get grumbling and complaints if there are real consequences, to the point where Joe makes fun of me for being a Santa Claus GM (give the players what they want, with sunshine and puppy dogs no matter what). As a GM, this is disheartening, and I am at a loss as to what to do about it. It’s a two sided issue, which definitely means that a good portion of this is my fault as a writer. And I come down on either side of this on occasion. I don’t want players just stabbing people because they might be evil, as that makes it difficult for us to have ongoing interesting antagonists, but I also don’t want players to ignore or complacently go along with villains.
Some of it may be a What Side Of The Line Are You On? Issue. We have had players step out to start running content and then get surprised and frustrated by how players interacted with some things. A good example is players avoiding obstacles that they could see out of game, but technically weren’t visible in-game (traps). When the player was getting really upset about it, virtually every NPC was like, “yea, they do that, you gotta program Mods to account for players just not-roleplaying the danger.” And, on the one hand, we have gotten pretty good at doing just that, but on the other hand, it is disheartening to have to do.
At the end of the day, it makes it difficult to predict what players are going to do, and while we laugh about that, it actually gets very frustrating after a while. Sure, it is neat when players find an answer that you have not thought of. That I LOVE. I truly do. It is neat as hell. Like when we had the players have the option to side with the “good guys” who were making a weapon that could neutralize a dark god, or the “bad guys” who were pointing out that, if this weapon was finished, it could also be turned against the light gods. The players picked a third option that startled me, but had the resources to pull it off and I’ll be damned but they got it DONE. That was awesome!
But when we launch an NPC that is a possible villain, and players just scream “FUCK YOU” (literally) at the top of their voice and stab them, then there goes the content that that guy was supposed to start. Yea, we can just say, “it’s immune, fuck you back” but from the player side that is frustrating and annoying and disheartening. But then we send out something that is meant to be obviously evil and threatening, and people just ignore it, or treat it like, “We are the most powerful things on the planet and we will stomp this while laughing and drinking cause we never lose cause we are the players!” Which makes it difficult to gauge any content at all.
The options I can see in forging ahead are not really what I want to do. If I want people to take things seriously as a threat, I feel like I have to start putting in real, difficult, consequences. But I, you may be surprised to learn, SUPER HATE CONFLICT and don’t like people mad at me, so I don’t like that. “Well fuck it” some people will say to me. “Do it, people need to figure it out!” And then those… Exact… People… Get… Mad…
So... Thoughts? What would you do to fix the issue? Do you see an issue at all? Am I just mad? Is this real life? No it’s just fantasy. Caught in a landslide in an escape from reality. Opppen your eeyyyyyyyyyeeeee, look up to the skkkkyyyyyy
Ok, I’m done. Sorry bout that. :-D
Know that I am not mad. I am at a loss for how to handle a design/gm/roleplay issue. Feel free to read the whole thing and then give input.
I am having trouble gauging how PCs will react to things, and feel like there is a laissez faire atmosphere in town that means unless I force conflict down throats, conflict is either ignored or brushed off. "Meh, a dude stomping into town and killing people is someone to whom we should give components." "Eh, after getting told that this is a bad idea, Imma give blood to people I don't know who say they are going to use it for alchemical experiments a second time" and so on.
From the point of view as a writer and the person directing NPC actions, this makes it nearly impossible for me to field anything threatening or intense. And punishing a blasé attitude gets me pushback. So, like... I don't know. Andrew Rosenthal put this in the forefront of my mind in that "Didn't really feel like a biiiig impact in the town attitude or climate afterwards - wished more folks would've been willing to go in that direction with later RP. " Like, I don't want everyone chewing the scenery and screaming and wailing in the streets, but a moment of malaise or pride for Kal'Vas?
This campaign has been an exercise in not having the culmination be world-threatening. 3 of our 4 campaigns had world impacting outcomes, with 2 of those being nearly world ending. (Released the Dark Gods, Started A World Wide War, Literally Ended The World as We Knew It and Destroyed the God.) If you continue ramping up and up, you don’t have anywhere to go, and as such, nothing this campaign is geared to threaten the world. At the most, the falling of the Star, if left unchecked, would have killed hundreds on the Island, but nothing outside of that. That all being the case, I feel like some players’ attitudes towards small threats has become, “Whatever, let it happen, at the end we can just stab it to death.” Which means putting things out for conflict, at the outset, kinda gets ignored.
I am not sure how to adjust what I am doing. I get grumbling and complaints if there are real consequences, to the point where Joe makes fun of me for being a Santa Claus GM (give the players what they want, with sunshine and puppy dogs no matter what). As a GM, this is disheartening, and I am at a loss as to what to do about it. It’s a two sided issue, which definitely means that a good portion of this is my fault as a writer. And I come down on either side of this on occasion. I don’t want players just stabbing people because they might be evil, as that makes it difficult for us to have ongoing interesting antagonists, but I also don’t want players to ignore or complacently go along with villains.
Some of it may be a What Side Of The Line Are You On? Issue. We have had players step out to start running content and then get surprised and frustrated by how players interacted with some things. A good example is players avoiding obstacles that they could see out of game, but technically weren’t visible in-game (traps). When the player was getting really upset about it, virtually every NPC was like, “yea, they do that, you gotta program Mods to account for players just not-roleplaying the danger.” And, on the one hand, we have gotten pretty good at doing just that, but on the other hand, it is disheartening to have to do.
At the end of the day, it makes it difficult to predict what players are going to do, and while we laugh about that, it actually gets very frustrating after a while. Sure, it is neat when players find an answer that you have not thought of. That I LOVE. I truly do. It is neat as hell. Like when we had the players have the option to side with the “good guys” who were making a weapon that could neutralize a dark god, or the “bad guys” who were pointing out that, if this weapon was finished, it could also be turned against the light gods. The players picked a third option that startled me, but had the resources to pull it off and I’ll be damned but they got it DONE. That was awesome!
But when we launch an NPC that is a possible villain, and players just scream “FUCK YOU” (literally) at the top of their voice and stab them, then there goes the content that that guy was supposed to start. Yea, we can just say, “it’s immune, fuck you back” but from the player side that is frustrating and annoying and disheartening. But then we send out something that is meant to be obviously evil and threatening, and people just ignore it, or treat it like, “We are the most powerful things on the planet and we will stomp this while laughing and drinking cause we never lose cause we are the players!” Which makes it difficult to gauge any content at all.
The options I can see in forging ahead are not really what I want to do. If I want people to take things seriously as a threat, I feel like I have to start putting in real, difficult, consequences. But I, you may be surprised to learn, SUPER HATE CONFLICT and don’t like people mad at me, so I don’t like that. “Well fuck it” some people will say to me. “Do it, people need to figure it out!” And then those… Exact… People… Get… Mad…
So... Thoughts? What would you do to fix the issue? Do you see an issue at all? Am I just mad? Is this real life? No it’s just fantasy. Caught in a landslide in an escape from reality. Opppen your eeyyyyyyyyyeeeee, look up to the skkkkyyyyyy
Ok, I’m done. Sorry bout that. :-D