Author Topic: "Skip to the END": Handling players bypassing the setup for the main villain  (Read 33466 times)

Offline InnaBinder

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Onna table
    • View Profile
It may just be my luck, but I've seen this happen a few times now, so I'd like to talk about how others have handled it.  Through some variety of outside the box thinking on the part of the players, the plot arc the PCs set off upon has been bypassed in favor of "the shortest distance between two points is a straight line."  The dungeon* - with its treasures, clues, and level-up opportunities - is wholly, or at least largely, skipped so that the PCs face an encounter or set of encounters that's over their heads.  Things I try to avoid in the situation include:

a) railroading
b) deus ex machina fixes
c) OOC discussions on the story or game world
d) Nintendo Hard Mode
e) cakewalk final battles. 

Obviously, avoiding all of the above is difficult, to say the least.  Thoughts?


*"Dungeon" here is used in its broadest sense, indicating the series of challenges intended to preface the confrontation with the big-bad.
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics.  Even if you win, you're still retarded.

shugenja handbook; talk about it here

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Well, one option you can have is to establish multiple possible locations for the final throwdown, and then play Schroedinger's BBEG between them(when observed, the BBEG is always at a different throwdown point).

The other alternative is for them to, on meeting the final throwdown prematurely, with nothing to back them up, for the BBEG to stomp their ass and capture them. The nature of the story changes, with the possibility of escaping from captivity(because any card carrying villain must savor his victory or lock them away for a rainy day), followed by the pursuit, and in the process gaining the required amount of power. Or they could be forced to work with him. This option is extremely work intensive though.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
If the party can beat him now they beat him now. If not, maybe they really should have taken advantage of his lack of genre savviness by beating up his minions in increasing order of competence for longer.

Offline ImperatorK

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2313
  • Chara did nothing wrong.
    • View Profile
    • Kristof Imperator YouTube Channel
If they're bypassing loot and XP oportunities, it's their loss. Good luck defeating the BBEG with underpowered equipment and lower level than intended.
And if you don't like that they're progressing too fast, simply let the BBEG escape. Finding and getting to him should be harder than the first time, because now he's prepared and more cautious.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2012, 10:04:28 AM by ImperatorK »
Magic is for weaklings.

Alucard: "*snif snif* Huh? Suddenly it reeks of hypocrisy in here. Oh, if it isn't the Catholic Church. And what's this? No little Timmy glued to your crotch. Progress!"
My YT channel - LoL gameplay

Offline Mooncrow

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 983
  • The man who will be Pirate King
    • View Profile
What tactics are they using, specifically, to bypass the encounters?  Divination tends to make things a little harder to deal with - but generally I what I do is I have a encounter map that doesn't change unless the PC's do something significant (ie. they can take actions to change future outcomes, but the direction they choose to walk in doesn't) and the encounters can be adjusted to whatever path the PCs choose to take.  So, similar to the Schroedinger's BBEG idea, only a little more so. 

But if they're putting the spells and effort into tracking down the BBEG, sure, let them take him on.  Let them get beat if they aren't ready for the encounter, too. 

Offline ImperatorK

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2313
  • Chara did nothing wrong.
    • View Profile
    • Kristof Imperator YouTube Channel
Oh, and there's the option of piling all or most of the enemies they bypassed on them at the same time. I mean, if they sneaked past a group of guards and then attacked the king, he will obviously call for reinforcements and they'll come to help him.
Magic is for weaklings.

Alucard: "*snif snif* Huh? Suddenly it reeks of hypocrisy in here. Oh, if it isn't the Catholic Church. And what's this? No little Timmy glued to your crotch. Progress!"
My YT channel - LoL gameplay

Offline InnaBinder

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Onna table
    • View Profile
What tactics are they using, specifically, to bypass the encounters?  Divination tends to make things a little harder to deal with - but generally I what I do is I have a encounter map that doesn't change unless the PC's do something significant (ie. they can take actions to change future outcomes, but the direction they choose to walk in doesn't) and the encounters can be adjusted to whatever path the PCs choose to take.  So, similar to the Schroedinger's BBEG idea, only a little more so. 

But if they're putting the spells and effort into tracking down the BBEG, sure, let them take him on.  Let them get beat if they aren't ready for the encounter, too.
If the direction they choose to walk doesn't matter in terms of which encounters they're going to face at which point, then - to my way of thinking - the map doesn't matter, because it's really just Schrodinger's Railroad.  I recall several discussions here and on the old boards that indicated this style of DMing where All Roads Lead To Rome is "lazy" or "bad," and would prefer to avoid it as a solution.

Quote from: ImperatorK
Oh, and there's the option of piling all or most of the enemies they bypassed on them at the same time. I mean, if they sneaked past a group of guards and then attacked the king, he will obviously call for reinforcements and they'll come to help him.
At which point we've combined railroading ("you'll face these guards whether you want to or not! So sayeth the DM!") with Nintendo Hard Mode, unless the king gets an on-the-fly nerfbat applied to retcon the encounter into something level appropriate.
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics.  Even if you win, you're still retarded.

shugenja handbook; talk about it here

Offline Mooncrow

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 983
  • The man who will be Pirate King
    • View Profile
What tactics are they using, specifically, to bypass the encounters?  Divination tends to make things a little harder to deal with - but generally I what I do is I have a encounter map that doesn't change unless the PC's do something significant (ie. they can take actions to change future outcomes, but the direction they choose to walk in doesn't) and the encounters can be adjusted to whatever path the PCs choose to take.  So, similar to the Schroedinger's BBEG idea, only a little more so. 

But if they're putting the spells and effort into tracking down the BBEG, sure, let them take him on.  Let them get beat if they aren't ready for the encounter, too.
If the direction they choose to walk doesn't matter in terms of which encounters they're going to face at which point, then - to my way of thinking - the map doesn't matter, because it's really just Schrodinger's Railroad.  I recall several discussions here and on the old boards that indicated this style of DMing where All Roads Lead To Rome is "lazy" or "bad," and would prefer to avoid it as a solution.


If the PC's aren't making significant choices, then why would it have a significant impact on the story?  Railroading is when the PC's significant choices don't make a difference in the story - that's not what I'm talking about. 

Offline InnaBinder

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Onna table
    • View Profile
What tactics are they using, specifically, to bypass the encounters?  Divination tends to make things a little harder to deal with - but generally I what I do is I have a encounter map that doesn't change unless the PC's do something significant (ie. they can take actions to change future outcomes, but the direction they choose to walk in doesn't) and the encounters can be adjusted to whatever path the PCs choose to take.  So, similar to the Schroedinger's BBEG idea, only a little more so. 

But if they're putting the spells and effort into tracking down the BBEG, sure, let them take him on.  Let them get beat if they aren't ready for the encounter, too.
If the direction they choose to walk doesn't matter in terms of which encounters they're going to face at which point, then - to my way of thinking - the map doesn't matter, because it's really just Schrodinger's Railroad.  I recall several discussions here and on the old boards that indicated this style of DMing where All Roads Lead To Rome is "lazy" or "bad," and would prefer to avoid it as a solution.


If the PC's aren't making significant choices, then why would it have a significant impact on the story?  Railroading is when the PC's significant choices don't make a difference in the story - that's not what I'm talking about.
That doesn't disagree with my premise, as I read it.  If the PCs choice of where to go on the map isn't a significant choice, then the map itself isn't significant.  If the map itself isn't significant, then why bother giving the PCs a map or a choice of where to go, since the choice is illusory to begin with?  If the choice is illusory to begin with, that reeks of railroading to me.
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics.  Even if you win, you're still retarded.

shugenja handbook; talk about it here

Offline ImperatorK

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2313
  • Chara did nothing wrong.
    • View Profile
    • Kristof Imperator YouTube Channel
Quote
At which point we've combined railroading ("you'll face these guards whether you want to or not! So sayeth the DM!") with Nintendo Hard Mode, unless the king gets an on-the-fly nerfbat applied to retcon the encounter into something level appropriate.
:???
Err, no. It's not railroading, those are simply reasonable consequences of their actions.
Magic is for weaklings.

Alucard: "*snif snif* Huh? Suddenly it reeks of hypocrisy in here. Oh, if it isn't the Catholic Church. And what's this? No little Timmy glued to your crotch. Progress!"
My YT channel - LoL gameplay

Offline Mooncrow

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 983
  • The man who will be Pirate King
    • View Profile
What tactics are they using, specifically, to bypass the encounters?  Divination tends to make things a little harder to deal with - but generally I what I do is I have a encounter map that doesn't change unless the PC's do something significant (ie. they can take actions to change future outcomes, but the direction they choose to walk in doesn't) and the encounters can be adjusted to whatever path the PCs choose to take.  So, similar to the Schroedinger's BBEG idea, only a little more so. 

But if they're putting the spells and effort into tracking down the BBEG, sure, let them take him on.  Let them get beat if they aren't ready for the encounter, too.
If the direction they choose to walk doesn't matter in terms of which encounters they're going to face at which point, then - to my way of thinking - the map doesn't matter, because it's really just Schrodinger's Railroad.  I recall several discussions here and on the old boards that indicated this style of DMing where All Roads Lead To Rome is "lazy" or "bad," and would prefer to avoid it as a solution.


If the PC's aren't making significant choices, then why would it have a significant impact on the story?  Railroading is when the PC's significant choices don't make a difference in the story - that's not what I'm talking about.
That doesn't disagree with my premise, as I read it.  If the PCs choice of where to go on the map isn't a significant choice, then the map itself isn't significant.  If the map itself isn't significant, then why bother giving the PCs a map or a choice of where to go, since the choice is illusory to begin with?  If the choice is illusory to begin with, that reeks of railroading to me.

Well, if you want to completely map out where everything is and let them in on that knowledge ahead of time, why are you upset that they're taking the warp pipe?  Because that's pretty much an inevitable consequence of doing that. 

And yes, I hate maps - I never use them outside of tactical use.  "Right or left at the fork" isn't a choice that should make an impact on the narrative ( unless they want to do some divination or something else significant in making that choice) 

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Quote
If the direction they choose to walk doesn't matter in terms of which encounters they're going to face at which point, then - to my way of thinking - the map doesn't matter, because it's really just Schrodinger's Railroad.  I recall several discussions here and on the old boards that indicated this style of DMing where All Roads Lead To Rome is "lazy" or "bad," and would prefer to avoid it as a solution.
Main factor in favor of the technique is time. You have limited time to create detail, content, conflict, growth and progression. Without the method, you can easily wind up with upwards of half your created content never being relevant, you just wasted the time and effort that could have gone towards making better quality conflicts which the players DID encounter. Heck, locations don't really 'exist' until players interact with them, or with their knock on effects.

Thats the difference between GMs and module designers. Designers must aim for completeness, but not detail, you must have content for every plausible place the PCs visit within the bounds of the adventure, and advice for the implausible ones. GMs must improvise and act to keep everything going. Matters are mutable in the face of that.

This is not to say the extreme of having every route be the same. You can recycle the starring conflict, but revise the secondary and environmental attributes. You can create a location map, for example, as a static anchor, while having furniture, creatures and activated effects be mutable. And even IC, they are mutable, they can be moved and repurposed for IC-wise, entirely arbitrary reasons. In fact, when making heavy use of the Schrodinger method, you very much want large static things like rooms to be predefined regardless, so you don't slip up and give the game away.

So for example, you could battle the BBEG in this throne room, private labs, bedroom or even his secret chamber. Depending on which location you encounter, you face different complications associated with the same core encounter. The throne room might have waves of mook reinforcements, the labs might have some magical creation of his to be unleashed, as well as environmental hazards to abuse, the bedroom might be strongly warded with personal defenses, and the secret chamber could be brutally trapped. Get to whichever room out of sequence and you just deal with the secondary hazard instead, with a hook included to point you to the right sequence.

Again, this is for the major points of conflict, where you need significant preparation. Random events or minor conflicts can vary, it is sufficient simply that there BE a conflict, not that it be a specific conflict.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline Basket Burner

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • I break Basket Weavers.
    • View Profile
There's a major difference between the King calling for reinforcements and getting them and you absolutely having to fight everything no matter what. In the latter you go to scry and fry only to find everyone packed into the room as if it were some sort of clown car of death waiting for you. In the former the guards have to actually get there.

Offline ImperatorK

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2313
  • Chara did nothing wrong.
    • View Profile
    • Kristof Imperator YouTube Channel
and what did I say? :???
Magic is for weaklings.

Alucard: "*snif snif* Huh? Suddenly it reeks of hypocrisy in here. Oh, if it isn't the Catholic Church. And what's this? No little Timmy glued to your crotch. Progress!"
My YT channel - LoL gameplay

Offline InnaBinder

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Onna table
    • View Profile
Quote
At which point we've combined railroading ("you'll face these guards whether you want to or not! So sayeth the DM!") with Nintendo Hard Mode, unless the king gets an on-the-fly nerfbat applied to retcon the encounter into something level appropriate.
:???
Err, no. It's not railroading, those are simply reasonable consequences of their actions.
The difference I see between these two is merely one of phrasing.
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics.  Even if you win, you're still retarded.

shugenja handbook; talk about it here

Offline Mooncrow

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 983
  • The man who will be Pirate King
    • View Profile
Quote
At which point we've combined railroading ("you'll face these guards whether you want to or not! So sayeth the DM!") with Nintendo Hard Mode, unless the king gets an on-the-fly nerfbat applied to retcon the encounter into something level appropriate.
:???
Err, no. It's not railroading, those are simply reasonable consequences of their actions.
The difference I see between these two is merely one of phrasing.

So, player actions should have no effect on how encounters run then?

Offline sirpercival

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
Quote
At which point we've combined railroading ("you'll face these guards whether you want to or not! So sayeth the DM!") with Nintendo Hard Mode, unless the king gets an on-the-fly nerfbat applied to retcon the encounter into something level appropriate.
:???
Err, no. It's not railroading, those are simply reasonable consequences of their actions.
The difference I see between these two is merely one of phrasing.

I think you're taking the idea of railroading too far.  What, so the party bypasses the guards to the throne room so the guards all of a sudden disappear?  That's some serious suspension of disbelief.
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.

Offline ImperatorK

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2313
  • Chara did nothing wrong.
    • View Profile
    • Kristof Imperator YouTube Channel
Quote
The difference I see between these two is merely one of phrasing.
I didn't say that you should make them fight those guards at all cost. If they manage to bypass them again, for example by killing the king and getting out of there fast enough, they win and everything is okay.

And what Mooncrow & SirPercival said.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2012, 11:03:09 AM by ImperatorK »
Magic is for weaklings.

Alucard: "*snif snif* Huh? Suddenly it reeks of hypocrisy in here. Oh, if it isn't the Catholic Church. And what's this? No little Timmy glued to your crotch. Progress!"
My YT channel - LoL gameplay

Offline InnaBinder

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Onna table
    • View Profile
Quote
At which point we've combined railroading ("you'll face these guards whether you want to or not! So sayeth the DM!") with Nintendo Hard Mode, unless the king gets an on-the-fly nerfbat applied to retcon the encounter into something level appropriate.
:???
Err, no. It's not railroading, those are simply reasonable consequences of their actions.
The difference I see between these two is merely one of phrasing.

So, player actions should have no effect on how encounters run then?
When player actions force Nintendo Hard Mode, I've been given to understand - on these boards and their predecessor - that it's Bad DMing.  When player actions force OOC discussions of the upcoming TPK (or a TPK without discussion), I've been given to understand that it's Bad DMing.  When player actions force deus ex machina fixes, I've been given to understand it's Bad DMing.  When player actions are ignored to create railroading or some variation of cakewalk final battles (because the encounter got adjusted on the fly to be appropriate and suddenly isn't as epic as advertised), I've been given to understand it's Bad DMing.

edit:
Quote from: sirpercival
I think you're taking the idea of railroading too far.  What, so the party bypasses the guards to the throne room so the guards all of a sudden disappear?  That's some serious suspension of disbelief.
What, so the party bypasses the halls of the three story building to get to the throne room so suddenly the guards outside do, too?  I'd have trouble with that level of suspension of disbelief, personally.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2012, 11:04:50 AM by InnaBinder »
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics.  Even if you win, you're still retarded.

shugenja handbook; talk about it here

Offline sirpercival

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
This comes down to something I talk about in discussions like this a lot, and it's one of the DM's best tools: Consequences.

When I run a game, there is almost always an overarching storyline, and there are encounters that I design specific to that, as well as encounters I plan out that can (and will) be dropped in anywhere that's appropriate.  Then, my players are always allowed to do whatever they see fit in the world -- they can ignore the adventure hooks, they can kill the allied NPCs, whatever.  However, whatever they do will have ramifications and consequences on later parts of the game.  If they manage to bypass a lot of encounters, they will get in over their heads and may have to run.  If they act in ways that the NPCs don't like, the NPCs will take issue with this.

The PCs are not operating in a vacuum.  It's well within your rights as a DM to have the events in the world respond to what the players do -- in fact, that's entirely your job as DM, and that is not railroading.  Having a mutable game world means that there are no rails -- rails are static.  I find rails show up when running published modules because the story is much more linearly defined.
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.