>>96703307
Next time, don't tell them where the BBEG is

>>96703307
>my players are idiots
No pun intended but so are you.

>>96703307
Maybe you'll learn not to put the carrot (BBEG) in front of the piggies (your players) next time.

>>96703307
>>all lev 1 players try to fight the BBEG
>>TPK
Based. You did the right thing anon.

>>96703307
They touched the stovetop and got their grubby little hands burned. Now start a new game and show them the stove again. If they still reach out for it, get new players.

>>96703307
Critical Reddit is for faggots.

>>96703307
There was a million ways to solve this, for example, players could be captured instead of killed and next session would be an escape adventure.
Also, try running a one shot instead of something so ambitious, you can put three general threats and let your players choose
>to the north an abandoned mine, is said a creature has taken refuge there and the jewels cannot be retrive until it's killed
>East there's a bandit camp, there's a big reward for the head of their leader
>To the West, near the ocean, someone has spotted a walking corpse with gold covering his body

>>96703804
you are such a retarded faggot holy shit
>erm, you shouldn't make the players lose after they take a course of action that you told will result in them losing. You should give them a headpat and treat instead

>>96703307
>le beeg
Your players are retarded but so are you.

>>96703804
Just actually kill yourself.

>>96703804
>for example, players could be captured instead of killed and next session would be an escape adventure.
Why does this spinless capture instead of kill thing always get suggested even when they have absolutely no reason to capture you?

>they know that the BBEG can be killed only by the MacGuffin, somehow, but they don't know where the MacGuffin is, what it looks like, or why the BBEG is ONLY weak to this retard bullshit item you made up
>they also know exactly where the BBEG is
The smart thing would be to have the BBEG kick the shit out of them and mock them to teach them a lesson and SHOW them he's invulnerable to normal attacks, you decided to throw a faggot hissy fit and TPK them instead. Kys

>>96703307
Death is an important consequence of adventuring when you are retarded. You could have them reroll if you think they can handle the responsibility of thinking in the future; if not I recommend dropping them. If you do have them reroll, consider having the BBEG reanimating the original party as the bungling Saturday morning cartoon villain squad they were clearly meant to be.

>>96703804
Death is the only solution for PCs this stupid. If you tell them they need 'x', and they don't believe you as GM, they deserve whatever stupid shit happens to them. As far as the game goes, the GM's word is law, and ignoring flagrant 'you need *X* to accomplish *Y*' is signing away any justification to complain about the results.

File: ListenToMe.png (172 KB, 345x342)

172 KB PNG

>>96703307
>McGiffen
It's MacGuffin or MCGuffin

File: RCO014_1582300393.jpg (496 KB, 1332x2048)

496 KB JPG

>>96703307
>play stupid games
>win stupid prizes
Yeah, checks out. Like, as much as I could rag on you for hinging their ability to win on a specific item, I give a little credit for at least letting them kill themselves against a guy they were told they likely couldn't beat.

Granted, I would have rubbed it in their face far harder by having the final boss outright let them live on the brink of death specifically so they understand how feeble and powerless they are before having his minions drop them off in a ditch back near town just to humiliate them. Cause if they're going to be angry at me, I'd like to have earned it a bit more.

>BBEG
go back

>>96703804
This
>inb4 consequence
They lost the fight, they are captured [possibly beaten and humiliated, maybe permanent injuries, like losing an eye]
That's also consequence, only the players will learn and have a chance to continue and everyone will have more fun out of it

Also if you don't want players to interact with something don't give them clearly defined info on that
You should have been vague on bbge and more clear on what do they gain by inspecting the town

Yes, your players lack basic understanding about the game but so do you
Hope your next session goes better

>>96704930
>be told the villain can only be beaten with a specific item
>decide you’re just going to go kill him right now at 1st level
>obviously die
What does capturing them actually change in this scenario? If they break out, they’re extremely likely to just try and kill the guy again right then and there instead of just escaping his base.

>my players are idiots

all players are idiots

>>96703307
>level 1 players know exactly where the bbeg is
>they know who he is
>they know how to get there
>they are able to reach the bbeg at level 1 without difficulty
>they learn about the mcguffin without learning how it works or why it's actually nessicary
I'm guessing they just wanted to get your shit campaign over and done with

>>96704605
>reads stupid capeshit

>>96703307
The story would be more believable if you described a detailed rape scene where the bbeg fucks them all to death mr garrison style

>>96703307
it sounds like you deserve each other.

>>96705621
Do you have something you’d like to say, anon?

>>96703307
>>tell the players they need to kill the BBEG
>>tell the players the BBEG can only be killed by the McGiffen
>>show them the map
>me: you are here, the BBEG is there.
this isn't how ttrpgs work. try again. hint: next time tell them where the stuff you wnat them to do is instead of telling them where the stuff you DON'T want them to do is.

>>96704238
>>96704350
>Lvl 1
What consequence? Doing another character with the same level and gear?

>>96703804
>There was a million ways to solve this, for example, players could be captured instead of killed and next session would be an escape adventure.
And op definitely should've chosen one of those other methods if he and his players are cockless faggots.

>>96705981
Dying at level 1 is only a waste of time, doesn't really punish the players at all and they don't learn anything.
Level 1 is when you have some leeway for experimentation and making mistakes, you go tpk when they have something they will actually regret loosing.

>>96703307
Critical Reddit is for faggots.

You amped them up to kill the antagonist so they wanted to go kill the antagonist. Maybe start them with some kind of evil lieutenant and then breadcrumb them to your "bbeg"

>>96706751
/tg/ is a reddit colony now, we have redditors like puckee crossposting regularly
>>96705125

why did you tell them where the villain was? how did their characters discover this information? why was there a particular town you wanted them to visit? why was there only a single specific villain in the game?

>>96704605
man comic books are such dogshit now

>>96710722
Even as someone who occasionally still reads them, cape comics have been shit for a very long time

>>96703307
that never happened

>>96710793
Seems like it, I used to be subscribed to some guy who made fun of sjw comics but as far as I know he doesn't even review comics anymore because they are so dead it's not even worth trying

>>96703513
You're the idiot here for seeing such obvious bait and still falling for it.

>>96704238
you shouldn't make courses of action you don't want taken be ariticial loss conditions

>>96712836
>ariticial loss conditions
The fuck is going up against an extremely powerful monster/villain without doing any work to improve your chances or take advantage of his weaknesses an 'artificial loss condition', you drooling retard?

>It's an rpg, you can do anything.
>GM prepares two options, one of which is certain death
Next time you want them on rails, don't tell them about the forbidden sidetrack.
>>96703364
fpbp

>>96703364
lol

>>96703307
Bait thread. But if not,

>>fleshed out characters lev 1 characters
That's a bad thing. Level 1 characters have nothing to flesh out. They're about to go on their first adventure.

>>96713092
it's kind of like in writing the adage goes show and don't tell, possibly made worse by the issue that it's not possible to show things that don't make sense even if you insist on telling that's how they are

>>96703804
If I drive a car 120 mph into a brick wall in a ttrpg and the story does a backflip to save my life I will conclude that theres no stakes in the campaign and the DM is a faggot

>>96715872
this

>>96703804
Bait but ill bite
Being captured can be a death condition too, what the fuck is with you retards thinking captured leads to a breakout session everytime?

>>96715872
You could end up in the hospital for months. There, a consequence.

>>96703307
None of that happened. You just made it all up to shitpost and to get an argument going.

>>96704538
Hello i will take one McGriffon with a Large Fries and a Big Choc-y shake

>>96716798
Is an example, no need to get autistic about it. Te idea is leaving level 1 as the place to fuck up and learn instead of just starting everything again from zero which usually doesn't teach anything and makes characters disposable.

>>96718302
if you are level 1 and still go up to the final campaign boss while explicitly told you need an item to beat him, outright death is the only result. they didnt go to the item, they skipped straight to the boss.

>>96718378
Yes, and you learn nothing.

>>96718302
>fuck up and learn
>learn
>nah man i dont need the must-have mcguffin that is a requirement to put down his barriers and weaken him or something so i can attack him in the first place

>>96718422
Clearly they didn't get it the first place, so you need to communicate the information in a better way, otherwise they'll think it was just RNG or something stupid like that.

>>96718488
if you read what OP so kindly wrote for us he told them 294 times that they explicitly need the thingy to kill the guy
also
>488
off by 1

>>96711656
>You're the idiot here
No pun intended but so are you.

>>96703307
OP, many mistakes aren't really mistakes yet until you refuse to own up to them and fix them. It's probably too late to fix your game, but you can still apologize and try to do better in the future.

>>96705856
>>Lvl 1
>What consequence?
Yes, exactly. They are level 1 nobodies. There are no rumors or deeds or value to them. They have no information, no ransom value, and apparently are deranged lunatics. For what reason would they not be smeared into a fine paste against the wall by someone who is Evil™?

>>96717332
There is a very thin line between metaphorical death or not, and you can clearly draw one in this example. If the hospitalization takes the character out of the story long enough for it to end before that character can come back, you've metaphorically killed him. If he can come back in time to resolve everything in the plot just fine with no permanent deformities, you saved his life and the hospitalization aspect is irrelevant.

>>96715847
>it's kind of like in writing the adage goes show and don't tell
You know, that's a perfect example of why OP did the right thing. The party went up against the bbeg and they got wiped without him breaking a sweat - that's a perfect demonstration of his power and now the players can go into the campaign with a new party and a better understanding of what they're up against.

>>96719858
Since OP is very vague, you don't know what the big Bad does with people, he may send them to the mines to work since the character are at least healthy enough to work.

>>96719980
the only reason the party had to think this was a bad idea was something the op told them so badly none of them believed it instead of showing it

>>96720224
You know what? That's actually a great counter point. I was thinking of them just hanging around in an James Bond style contraption where the villain walks away like a retard and later gets shocked that the heroes are alive because he didn't just kill them, but slavery just literally never entered into my mind. I give you the point, anon.

>>96720521
The only good advice for this is: talk. If your group is about to do something really fucking stupid after you told them "don't" is because there's something they didn't understand, so a failure at communication. Best way to address this is asking "alright, what are you guys expecting to happen exactly?"

>>96721806
Assuming OP didn't leave anything out, it's pretty easy to see where the communication issue lies imo. OP seems to have built the game to focus around leading the players around various quests and towns to become more experienced and attaining the appropriate treasure and loot with the ultimate goal being to challenge the villain once they're all prepared, while the party was expecting confronting the main bad guy themself to be the focus of the campaign and figured that going to other towns and looking for magic knickknacks would be superfluous to that goal. In other words, the GM wanted the party scaled up to the big boss as experienced campaign-strengthened adventurers, while the players expected the big boss to be appropriately scaled down to them as starting adventurers.

>>96722060
>while the players expected the big boss to be appropriately scaled down to them as starting adventurers.
Yeah, but I think the bigger issue here is "why would they expect that?" If the DM is even being somewhat truthful about the lore, he is giving them ample warning to say "Hey, this will not meet your expectations and you will die," and they misunderstood or even willfully ignored that, showing a much more stubborn side to them. It'd be one thing if he said it once and they went in and died anyways, cause then there could be argument for "Well he said it wrong or said it offhandedly or while they weren't paying attention," but it sounds like he did nothing but hammer it in over and over.

>>96722918
Yeah, I was mainly trying to give both parties the benefit of the doubt on this one because it's easy to presume malice where lack of foresight is more often the case. I'm personally more inclined to believe that the other players didn't take OP's warning seriously because they seriously overestimated their capabilities, and not because the OP screwed up his warnings. But I thought I'd go a bit further into taking an educated guess on why anyone would be stubborn enough to expect their level 1 party could take on the campaign boss so soon while I was at it.

>>96703307
there must be something in the water. maybe it's all the microplastics (which are stored in the balls).
>veteran group of players, some with over a decade of experience
>they are mercy/military lost in stalker-like woods
>give them tons of hints to locations where they can scavange, meet people or find treasure
>they completely ignore all content and try to rush through everything ASAP while also being overly careful
>"a building with a noise inside? RUN!"
>"an NPC? RUN AWAY!"
>"a hunt for the way out? IGNORE EVERYTHING FUCK FOOD FUCK SLEEP"
>barely make it out
>complain they got the bad ending where everyone dies in the end because they didn't stop the horrors

>>96723017
That's fair and I appreciate the impartial approach you're taking, but all in all, this is rather hard to defend them on assuming all information provided by the DM is true and fair.

>>96723403
You should always remember something being clear to you (who know the answer) may not come off as clear when you communicate it to other people (who don't know the answer).
Is the bane of most puzzles in dungeons.

>>96703307
Critical Reddit is for retards.

>>96716798
If they're captured, but securely so where there's no chance of escape, then that's just a drawn out death with extra steps. Much better to just kill the characters so that you can start fresh with new characters instead of roleplaying being stuck in jail.

>>96723633
That just gets into the age old puzzle design question that plagued adventure games: If the player didn't solve the puzzle, who's fault is it? The player for being stupid, or the designer for being cryptic?

I think we can se that aside here because it was mentioned and stressed so many times, that unless you want me to believe he gave the same EXACT clue the SAME way multiple times, that I think I'm willing to push this onto the players. The players should humbly accept their foolishness and improve.

>>96722918
>>96723017
assuming malice enough to even mention it as something to dismiss is stupid in this instance

miscommunications like this happen because of inexperience about what different themes and story beats are implying, which is equally likely to be a gm issue or a player issue however the gm is more responsible to prevent them

it reminds me of this game one of my firends told me about being in where they were basically star trek expies, they arrived at some sort of medical disaster quarantine station and tried to fix things themselves because that's what the enterprise crew would do, but then the gm got butthurt that that wasn't what they were supposed to do at all and of course they failed at what a fully staffed medical station failed at since they're not medical gods, but every expectation leading up to that made it seem like the appropriate action, and i really think that was the gm's fault for not communicating expectations properly, especially since i can't imagine what else that kind of quest would lead to, were they supposed to just shrug and leave after being presented with a mystery? i have no idea

>>96730424
>assuming malice enough to even mention it as something to dismiss is stupid in this instance
You don't have to assume any malice here. Several people were told several times not to do something and they did it. You can 100% presume this is a player consequence, not a GM failing.

>however the gm is more responsible to prevent them
Sure, but only in the sense that he has to make any hint or foreshadowing clear enough that a reasonable person could catch it. If someone is being ignorant or foolish, that's not on the GM that's on the fool. Or will you say that the GM MUST make sure that all players are successful in all endeavors, and that players would NEVER accuse the GM of malice to protect their ego?

There is far too much shielding of player actions going on in this post.

>>96732354
you don't seem to get that the goal is to increase social cohesion within the group, not to decrease it deliberately out of autistic spite

>>96703804
That's railroading.
You're better off running the session, having them die very quickly, and then ask them if they want to treat that as a premonition of what will happen, or if they want to roll new characters.

>Players are level 4, about to be 5
>Meet beautiful magic woman in a swamp (who is actually an ancient swamp hag)
>Magic woman asks them to kill "BBEG"
>Promises them all +1 magic armor of their choice when they succeed
>Players find "BBEG"
>It's a newborn infant
>with its farmer mom
>dad is out in the woods hunting
>
>
>
>Players decide they will go kill the dad first and then kill the mom and then murder the newborn
>session ends

WHAT THE FUCK DID I JUST DISCOVER ALL OF MY PLAYERS ARE FUCKING PHSYCHOPATHS JESUS FUCKING CHRIST???
>"That +1 armor will be nice plus I think the hot magic lady might sleep with me."

I need to get these guys some potions of detect magic so they don't "accidnetally" sleep with a swamp-hag. Actually, maybe I should let that happen because jesus fucking christ.

How do I convince my players to not murder babies? I did not not not expect this and I have 5 days to figure out and plan a solution.

>>96732841
Personal opinion: Just let them do it and let the dice fall where they may.
Actual answer: If you're that personally opposed to it, just have a serious and honest talk about why you're so dead set against them doing this, even if it means handing them the "right" answer. Despite the memes, most players aren't interested in fucking up the game just to piss the GM off. They're just acting off the limited information they're given, and if you have the chance to give them a fuller picture you should take it.

File: 7429492812_7cb5c900ca_b-4(...).jpg (290 KB, 1024x919)

290 KB JPG

>>96732841
A lot of trouble would have been avoided if you had a Session 0 and set expectations for the game. Problem is that the Players are thrown into a new world without agreeing to any tone at all.
>>96732888
Nice GET

>>96732841
I'm going to assume pathfinder/dnd? What alignment/classes are the players? If one's a paladin you should definitely be prodding him about his conscious here. Even then, if anyone's even a single step above evil they should have a gut feeling something's not right; either morally or logically.

BBEG?

>>96732841
Mate, one of my players murdered a child during a game of runequest, in order to stay concealed in a hostile town.

Know what?
It was a golden opportunity.

Because as soon as they stole the magic cow they were there to lift, the daft bastards ran off through a haunted wood.

>Cue supernatural encounter with the vengeful ghost of the child you just murderedand/or a forest spirit taking it's form

The player in question shat himself, because he went off to gather firewood or pick herbs or something, and came across what appeared to be a stag; he tries to shoot it with a javelin, but it turns around, and it has the face of the six year old boy he drowned.

It chased them fully out of the woods, to the point of exhaustion, and might have killed them if not for the Magic Cow getting stressed out and dispelling the spirit with it's enchanted silver horns, which were thematically appropriate, but I will never tell them were made up on the spot to prevent what would have been an anticlimactic TPK.

Also, the parents sent Babeester Gor cultists after them after; if you've played King of Dragon pass, you will understand that this is very, very bad.

They pretty much spent the rest of the campaign feeling justice, which derailed it.

But still; I had fun.

>>96732918
>had a Session 0 and set expectations for the game

I had thought I did that? I told them the world was mostly "horror" (and we've talked some about "temptations"), so they'd be pitted against liches and demons and hags and devils. The swamp-hag is just one of the minor main baddies.

I guess I expected 1 or 2 of the players to be like "Oh we totally need armor and this is easy" and that the other players would be like "Um.... easy because it's killing a baby?" But instead all of them landed on the first one.

Maybe they are just fucking with me because the next session is next week. I just don't know how to be ready if they are indeed NOT fucking with me.

>>96732941
5e 2024 mostly, though players have been taking 2014 spells too. We just said everyone is "a good guy" because eventually the campaign is goinig to deal with a devil wanting the players to help conquer a good kingdom. Players are an evoker, a ranger/fighter, an assassin, and a war cleric of Tyr.

>>96733039
Did the new 5e edition remove alignments? Because I'd be tapping that sign if it's still got them. Even if the players are retarded and are totally buying this chick at face value, their character's morals are probably gonna be a bit conflicted. Hard to imagine murdering an entire family for personal gain without hesitation as anything but an evil action. Especially if the baby is the only one who's supposed to be the BBEG.

>>96732957
That might be the best "out" if they actually go through with it. Add to the "horror" element, the "beautiful magic woman" fashions a necklace out of the infant carcass and wears it around her neck.

>Sleep with her now, incels!

Maybe it also causes Fear on them anytime they think of harming the hag.

Thank you. Still though, maybe my players are all nuts.

File: Evil laugh.png (48 KB, 307x351)

48 KB PNG

>>96732421
>Social cohesion is when I win in spite of my stupid actions, and de-cohesion is when I lose because of my stupid actions.

>>96732841
>>96733039
So I thought of a few outs for you that you can implement, one of them even secretly.

1. The overt method: Something I find helpful as a DM is that you can more overtly guide the characters to help them understand their actions and remember details to help steer them more towards what they think their character would do. For example:
>You choose to kill the baby? Okay, just to make it clear, your character would remember X and Y about the evil hag. Your character also knows that this appears to be a regular, defenseless baby, and you haven't seen the couple do anything evil yet, though they might be hiding something. Do you still choose to do this?
I find players react better when you sort of just make them remember more details cause they might have hyper focused on one or two.

2. Change the story: Make it so that the baby is actually a demon, not the couple's child. It basically implanted false memories into the couple to assume the form of the baby as a long-term plan of infiltration. Maybe hints could be given that none of the other village people recall actually seeing the wife pregnant, and the child seem to have come out of nowhere. That hag wants the baby dead simply because it's a rival and getting in the way of her plans.

3. Introduce a new NPC that has run into the hag before to warn them and give them cryptic clues. I think this one is weak, but it's still an "out," and if you have any players that look towards your reactions to decide what to do, it may give them a good signal not to move forward with this.

>>96733190
no, social cohesion is when the table gets along, social spite is when you backseat the social group into hating each other with your dumbass ideas

File: 6312872.jpg (729 KB, 1920x1280)

729 KB JPG

>>96718293
Did someone order a McGripen?

>>96733778
Okay, explain how that view of social cohesion does not naturally conflict with maintaining integrity in a game and/or game world, especially when the players do something that winds up with them unhappy due to them missing clues?

>>96732841
>After committing a great atrocity, our heroes turned villains are now cursed and must seek redemption.
You need to play Lamentations of the Flame Princess with this kind of lead in.

>>96733960
explain how you can blame a failure of communication on multiple listeners who all got the same impression instead of the single speaker who created the wrong impression in everyone

File: Mandella Effect Berenstai(...).jpg (45 KB, 640x320)

45 KB JPG

>>96734338
>explain how you can blame a failure of communication on multiple listeners who all got the same impression instead of the single speaker who created the wrong impression in everyone
Because the speaker did enough due diligence on his part to communicate the thing, and it is EXCEPTIONALLY common for multiple people to be retarded all at once despite overwhelming evidence otherwise: Pic related.

Explain how your view of social cohesion does not naturally conflict with maintaining integrity in a game and/or game world, especially when the players do something that winds up with them unhappy due to them missing clues?