Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Dying Utterances...

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 8, 2005 9:43:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Do your players accept when a defeated foe(ie 0 hp or less) issues a
dramatic dying utterance before expiring(ie will they suspend disbelief ala
the end of Jedi, Darth Vader, kind of thing)? "Ha ha, little do you know,
adventurers, I am not the one who killed your liege.. *gasp*sputter*die*"
Whenever I try to do the dramatic dying utterance thing, one of my players
has his character sticks a sword in the guy's throat, making speech somewhat
difficult... I have to tell them, he's done, he's just gasping his last
gasps in order for them to "let" it happen.

I don't want there to be pieces of paper with the guy's deepest darkest
secrets written on them, and I'd prefer not to do the whole "spirit of the
dead guy" thing. Anyone know of somewhat less hokey ways of handling this
without essentially forcing a dying utterance on the characters?

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right

More about : dying utterances

Anonymous
a b α HP
June 8, 2005 9:43:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> Do your players accept when a defeated foe(ie 0 hp or less) issues a
> dramatic dying utterance before expiring(ie will they suspend disbelief ala
> the end of Jedi, Darth Vader, kind of thing)? "Ha ha, little do you know,
> adventurers, I am not the one who killed your liege.. *gasp*sputter*die*"

They'd accept it, but why would he do that?
That's one of the lamest evil overlord behaviors ever.
Mere spite isn't the great motivator it's supposed to be and, even if
it were, it would be more spiteful to deny them the knowledge.

> Anyone know of somewhat less hokey ways of handling this
> without essentially forcing a dying utterance on the characters?

Think beforehand about what clues the [deed] they're investigating left
behind. Let them gather those clues. Tracks, signs, psychological
profiling, divinations, witness accounts, logical deduction ...
anything.
Otherwise it's like Hercule Poirot solving murders by listening to the
dying gasps of the first suspect "The butler did it ...
*gasp*sputter*die*"

Silveraxe.
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 8, 2005 9:43:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

The three adventurers stood around their fallen nemesis. The battle had
raged for a seeminging eternity, but eventually, dark lord Phaazangoran
had been struck down with a deadly blow from Baltar the Ranger.

Phaazangoran lay in a spreading pool of his own ichor. His eyes
flickered as a final peace seemed to spread over his evil features. He
looked up at his enemies.

"Look!" cried Conrad the elf, "the foul creature is trying to say
something"

With a hissing whisper, Phaazangoran, prince of the stone roper bards,
spoke his last curse:

"Mmmmmmnnnnnnnnnaaaa-a-a--------rrr-rr-rrrrrrrrrrrrr-r-rr"
Related resources
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 8, 2005 11:27:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Silveraxe" <avidroleplayer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118225362.588826.229220@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> They'd accept it, but why would he do that?
> That's one of the lamest evil overlord behaviors ever.

Yeah, I know, but our campaign is one tinged by the dramatic. Our evil
badguys have NOT seen enough Bond films. Yes, in the name of dramatic play,
the BBEG's are willing to give away entire nefarious plans right before
leaving them in the prototypical nudge nudge wink wink inescapable trap and
a lone guard. ;) 

I'm making it sound a bit more "comical" than it really is, but I'm not
above a BBEG laying out the plan somewhat in order to leave clues for the
good guys. As I'm sure you understand, no *REAL* bad guy is going to lay it
all out for the good guys, not even a little bit. The problem with that is
that without at least SOME place for the good guys to get information, they
won't see the big picture.

They don't trust NPC's unless they are OBVIOUSLY on their side, so that
rules out spies unless they get the spy information from a trusted source,
and typically they are hundreds of miles from a trusted source when in the
midst of an adventure. The whole "festidious notekeeper" bit is out for any
REAL villain, even though I deigned to do that one time. What to do, what
to do....

> Mere spite isn't the great motivator it's supposed to be and, even if
> it were, it would be more spiteful to deny them the knowledge.

I was thinking something more along the lines of being intentionally misled
by someone the PC's are SUPPOSED to trust, but is working for the other
side, and the one BBEG is pissed that he got turned on by the OTHER BBEG.
Something like that anyways.

I have a setup right now where one PC's parents were killed by a
dragon(she's a first time player, give her a break). At some point in the
near future, the party is going to fight the dragon they think killed her
parents. In a completely unrelated part of the campaign, I have a nation
set up that operates much like Nazi Germany(in almost every respect), which
is, because of a war of attrition between many OTHER nations, eventually
going to find itself in a serious power vacuum as far as the rest of the
world goes. Anyways, I had this idea to have had the Nazi-country have done
similar exterminations of undesirables, including a village that got in the
way of some plan they had a few decades ago. Being primarily wizards, they
could make an illusion of a green dragon to cover up a cloudkill-type spell
and nobody would be the wiser, except that the dragon they blamed it on did
a little digging of his own and found out the whole plan, unbeknownst to the
Nazi guys. If I do this, I need to have some way of transferring that
information from the Dragon to the PC's. Thoughts?

> Think beforehand about what clues the [deed] they're investigating left
> behind. Let them gather those clues. Tracks, signs, psychological
> profiling, divinations, witness accounts, logical deduction ...
> anything.

Divinations are the one thing I personally don't like about a game like
this, since if it works, it gives away the whole plan. With a divination
type spell, the entire plan of the bad guys is laid out in one fell
swoop(more or less).

In this particular instance, the REAL bad guys in question would make VERY
sure to leave no traces that could be questioned. So I'm left searching for
a way to transfer the information from someone who really knew. Maybe the
dragon found out because some haughty bad guy thought he was going to kill
the dragon, but failed. Maybe the dragon found their records somewhere,
when he found out he was blamed for it. I'm not sure. Right now this is
JUST a rough idea.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 8, 2005 1:28:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Bull wrote:
> > Do your players accept when a defeated foe(ie 0 hp or less) issues a
> > dramatic dying utterance before expiring(ie will they suspend disbelief
> ala
> > the end of Jedi, Darth Vader, kind of thing)? "Ha ha, little do you know,
> > adventurers, I am not the one who killed your liege.. *gasp*sputter*die*"
> > Whenever I try to do the dramatic dying utterance thing, one of my players
> > has his character sticks a sword in the guy's throat, making speech
> somewhat
> > difficult... I have to tell them, he's done, he's just gasping his last
> > gasps in order for them to "let" it happen.
>
> I guess you could go by the fact that speech is a free action and stabbing
> someone in the throat is a partial action, therefore the bad guy gets to do
> his speech.
>

That's where I would go.

> Throw a spanner in the works and have the bad guy say to the stabber
> "Why betray me? I thought we had a deal *splutter**die*"

Oooh, that's quite nasty! I like it!

- Justisaur
June 8, 2005 1:51:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 8 Jun 2005 03:35:11 -0700, "Murf" <rob_murfin@hotmail.com> raised a
finger to the sky and proclaimed:

>The three adventurers stood around their fallen nemesis. The battle had
>raged for a seeminging eternity, but eventually, dark lord Phaazangoran
>had been struck down with a deadly blow from Baltar the Ranger.
>
>Phaazangoran lay in a spreading pool of his own ichor. His eyes
>flickered as a final peace seemed to spread over his evil features. He
>looked up at his enemies.
>
>"Look!" cried Conrad the elf, "the foul creature is trying to say
>something"
>
>With a hissing whisper, Phaazangoran, prince of the stone roper bards,
>spoke his last curse:
>
>"Mmmmmmnnnnnnnnnaaaa-a-a--------rrr-rr-rrrrrrrrrrrrr-r-rr"

[wipes a tear from his eye]

--
Either way, I hate you Count Chocula, if I didn't already.
- Drifter Bob, rec.games.frp.dnd
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 8, 2005 4:12:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> Do your players accept when a defeated foe(ie 0 hp or less) issues a
> dramatic dying utterance before expiring(ie will they suspend disbelief ala
> the end of Jedi, Darth Vader, kind of thing)? "Ha ha, little do you know,
> adventurers, I am not the one who killed your liege.. *gasp*sputter*die*"
> Whenever I try to do the dramatic dying utterance thing, one of my players
> has his character sticks a sword in the guy's throat, making speech somewhat
> difficult... I have to tell them, he's done, he's just gasping his last
> gasps in order for them to "let" it happen.

I have long since pointed out that I permit Dramatic Necessity to
allow Dialogue For No Cost. This permits THEM to have dramatic
speeches/conversations in combat, and dramatic dying monologues.




--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 8, 2005 9:50:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
>
> Do your players accept when a defeated foe(ie 0 hp or less) issues a
> dramatic dying utterance before expiring(ie will they suspend disbelief ala
> the end of Jedi, Darth Vader, kind of thing)? "Ha ha, little do you know,
> adventurers, I am not the one who killed your liege.. *gasp*sputter*die*"
> Whenever I try to do the dramatic dying utterance thing, one of my players
> has his character sticks a sword in the guy's throat, making speech somewhat
> difficult... I have to tell them, he's done, he's just gasping his last
> gasps in order for them to "let" it happen.
>
> I don't want there to be pieces of paper with the guy's deepest darkest
> secrets written on them, and I'd prefer not to do the whole "spirit of the
> dead guy" thing. Anyone know of somewhat less hokey ways of handling this
> without essentially forcing a dying utterance on the characters?

On the RARE occasion when I need to do something like
this, I usually preface the scene with something like:
"And he monologues: 'Ha ha, little do you know...'"
That puts them on notice that what's happening is
purely for dramatic effect, and won't have any in-game
consequences (i.e., he's not casting a Quickened Bestow
Curse on them or anything lame like that).

For the most part, though, I try to have my NPCs say
their piece *before* they get killed. Adds a touch of
realism, you know. And in a case like the one you
describe, saying it a round sooner might...just
MIGHT...have kept the villain alive a little longer.
("Hold on a second, guys! Don't kill him yet! Not
until he tells us who the *real* murderer is!")

-Bluto
June 9, 2005 12:44:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

> Do your players accept when a defeated foe(ie 0 hp or less) issues a
> dramatic dying utterance before expiring(ie will they suspend disbelief
ala
> the end of Jedi, Darth Vader, kind of thing)? "Ha ha, little do you know,
> adventurers, I am not the one who killed your liege.. *gasp*sputter*die*"
> Whenever I try to do the dramatic dying utterance thing, one of my players
> has his character sticks a sword in the guy's throat, making speech
somewhat
> difficult... I have to tell them, he's done, he's just gasping his last
> gasps in order for them to "let" it happen.

I guess you could go by the fact that speech is a free action and stabbing
someone in the throat is a partial action, therefore the bad guy gets to do
his speech.

Throw a spanner in the works and have the bad guy say to the stabber
"Why betray me? I thought we had a deal *splutter**die*"
June 9, 2005 4:26:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 07:27:25 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
dared speak in front of ME:

>"Silveraxe" <avidroleplayer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1118225362.588826.229220@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> They'd accept it, but why would he do that?
>> That's one of the lamest evil overlord behaviors ever.
>
>Yeah, I know, but our campaign is one tinged by the dramatic. Our evil
>badguys have NOT seen enough Bond films. Yes, in the name of dramatic play,
>the BBEG's are willing to give away entire nefarious plans right before
>leaving them in the prototypical nudge nudge wink wink inescapable trap and
>a lone guard. ;) 
>
>I'm making it sound a bit more "comical" than it really is, but I'm not
>above a BBEG laying out the plan somewhat in order to leave clues for the
>good guys. As I'm sure you understand, no *REAL* bad guy is going to lay it
>all out for the good guys, not even a little bit.

Fictional serial killers have a strong precedent for taunting the
agencies set to track them down. Is that completely false, or just
overdone?

As for your players, they seem rather uninterested in the 'big
picture.' Perhaps the solution to your problem doesn't lie in finding
creative ways to spill the beans, but in simply making the pictures...
smaller.


--
Address no longer works.
try removing all numbers from
gafgirl1@2allstream3.net

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com&lt;<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 9, 2005 10:31:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Kaos" <kaos@invalid.xplornet.com> wrote in message
news:85nfa1t7ti0mpjgr91snti4tmqne78p231@4ax.com...
> As for your players, they seem rather uninterested in the 'big
> picture.' Perhaps the solution to your problem doesn't lie in finding
> creative ways to spill the beans, but in simply making the pictures...
> smaller.

That is something I never really considered, to be perfectly honest. We
started this campaign with little more than the laudable goal of playing D&D
once again(as we did in college), and I had all of ONE DAY to come up with
the basics for the entire campaign. So I went with the very tried and
somewhat true campaign goal of defeating the impossibly megalomaniacal BBEG,
with undead army and fancy magical artifact to boot, I give the BBEG a name,
and put the characters on a path that would lead them smack into the middle
global conflict and world destruction. Now that the path has been set, the
world is GOING to happen around the characters, regardless of their wanting
or not wanting to see the bigger picture.

Now that things are happening to literally change the world, the characters
have little choice in what they do. Even if they make it a point to avoid
this war, they are going to be affected by it, in rather substantial ways.
I don't think I can, at this point, make the picture small enough for them
to really get a good handle on. However, I'd like to hear any thoughts you
have on narrowing the campaign goal a tad from "saving the world". ;) 

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 9, 2005 8:04:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <85nfa1t7ti0mpjgr91snti4tmqne78p231@4ax.com>,
Kaos <kaos@invalid.xplornet.com> wrote:
>Fictional serial killers have a strong precedent for taunting the
>agencies set to track them down. Is that completely false, or just
>overdone?

Some of the real ones did it too, like Jack the Ripper and IIRC the DC sniper.
But it probably is overdone in fiction; AFAIK relatively few serial killers
taunt the cops.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
June 9, 2005 8:19:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 06:31:50 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
dared speak in front of ME:

>"Kaos" <kaos@invalid.xplornet.com> wrote in message
>news:85nfa1t7ti0mpjgr91snti4tmqne78p231@4ax.com...
>> As for your players, they seem rather uninterested in the 'big
>> picture.' Perhaps the solution to your problem doesn't lie in finding
>> creative ways to spill the beans, but in simply making the pictures...
>> smaller.
>
>That is something I never really considered, to be perfectly honest. We
>started this campaign with little more than the laudable goal of playing D&D
>once again(as we did in college), and I had all of ONE DAY to come up with
>the basics for the entire campaign. So I went with the very tried and
>somewhat true campaign goal of defeating the impossibly megalomaniacal BBEG,
>with undead army and fancy magical artifact to boot, I give the BBEG a name,
>and put the characters on a path that would lead them smack into the middle
>global conflict and world destruction. Now that the path has been set, the
>world is GOING to happen around the characters, regardless of their wanting
>or not wanting to see the bigger picture.
>
>Now that things are happening to literally change the world, the characters
>have little choice in what they do. Even if they make it a point to avoid
>this war, they are going to be affected by it, in rather substantial ways.
>I don't think I can, at this point, make the picture small enough for them
>to really get a good handle on. However, I'd like to hear any thoughts you
>have on narrowing the campaign goal a tad from "saving the world". ;) 

So the picture has been cast; is it possible, though, to concieve of
it as a mosaic - thereby allowing the PCs to focus on the smaller
pictures that compose the larger one?

Perhaps something like "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" - a story
about three gunslingers pursuing their own goals (in this case, a
large sum of gold) amidst the backdrop of the civil war. (With
apologies if summing up the plot of a classic spaghettie western seems
condescending.)

--
Address no longer works.
try removing all numbers from
gafgirl1@2allstream3.net

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com&lt;<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 10, 2005 1:35:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Sea Wasp wrote:
>
> I have long since pointed out that I permit Dramatic Necessity to
> allow Dialogue For No Cost. This permits THEM to have dramatic
> speeches/conversations in combat, and dramatic dying monologues.

I do this too, and encourage my players to drop in a clever little one
liners after they kill stuff (never the same one twice, though).

"Ohhh, that's what these look like on the inside..." - 18 STR Barbarian
who just
critted a gnoll with his greataxe
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 10, 2005 2:20:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 00:26:42 -0600, Kaos <kaos@invalid.xplornet.com>
scribed into the ether:

>On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 07:27:25 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
>dared speak in front of ME:
>
>>"Silveraxe" <avidroleplayer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:1118225362.588826.229220@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>> They'd accept it, but why would he do that?
>>> That's one of the lamest evil overlord behaviors ever.
>>
>>Yeah, I know, but our campaign is one tinged by the dramatic. Our evil
>>badguys have NOT seen enough Bond films. Yes, in the name of dramatic play,
>>the BBEG's are willing to give away entire nefarious plans right before
>>leaving them in the prototypical nudge nudge wink wink inescapable trap and
>>a lone guard. ;) 
>>
>>I'm making it sound a bit more "comical" than it really is, but I'm not
>>above a BBEG laying out the plan somewhat in order to leave clues for the
>>good guys. As I'm sure you understand, no *REAL* bad guy is going to lay it
>>all out for the good guys, not even a little bit.
>
>Fictional serial killers have a strong precedent for taunting the
>agencies set to track them down. Is that completely false, or just
>overdone?

Overdone. Real serial killers (well, the Zodiac at least) have been known
to deliberately taunt law enforcement.
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 10, 2005 12:27:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 9 Jun 2005 21:35:11 -0700, "decalod85" <decalod85@comcast.net> scribed
into the ether:

>
>
>Sea Wasp wrote:
>>
>> I have long since pointed out that I permit Dramatic Necessity to
>> allow Dialogue For No Cost. This permits THEM to have dramatic
>> speeches/conversations in combat, and dramatic dying monologues.
>
>I do this too, and encourage my players to drop in a clever little one
>liners after they kill stuff (never the same one twice, though).
>
>"Ohhh, that's what these look like on the inside..." - 18 STR Barbarian
>who just
>critted a gnoll with his greataxe

How about making dying utterances for someone else?

Sacrificing minions: Is there any problem it CAN'T solve?
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 11, 2005 5:03:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
[...]
> I don't want there to be pieces of paper with the guy's deepest darkest
> secrets written on them, and I'd prefer not to do the whole "spirit of the
> dead guy" thing. Anyone know of somewhat less hokey ways of handling this
> without essentially forcing a dying utterance on the characters?

Of course. Realize that "telling stories" is *not* part of
your job, as GM.

--
Peter Knutsen
sagatafl.org
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 11, 2005 5:07:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Kaos wrote:
> Fictional serial killers have a strong precedent for taunting the
> agencies set to track them down. Is that completely false, or just
> overdone?

As far as I know, serial killers of the organized sub-type
often end up teasing the cops, even if they don't do it
early in their career.

> As for your players, they seem rather uninterested in the 'big
> picture.' Perhaps the solution to your problem doesn't lie in finding
> creative ways to spill the beans, but in simply making the pictures...
> smaller.

Or in making the PCs suffer the *realistic* consequences of
ignoring the big picture, until they *learn* (or die -
either way the problem is *solved*).

(Of course this relies upon Jeff Goslin actually
understanding what realism is, and that is almost certainly
not the case).

--
Peter Knutsen
sagatafl.org
June 11, 2005 5:07:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 01:07:32 +0200, "Peter Knutsen (usenet)"
<peter@sagatafl.invalid> dared speak in front of ME:

>Kaos wrote:
>> Fictional serial killers have a strong precedent for taunting the
>> agencies set to track them down. Is that completely false, or just
>> overdone?
>
>As far as I know, serial killers of the organized sub-type
>often end up teasing the cops, even if they don't do it
>early in their career.
>
>> As for your players, they seem rather uninterested in the 'big
>> picture.' Perhaps the solution to your problem doesn't lie in finding
>> creative ways to spill the beans, but in simply making the pictures...
>> smaller.
>
>Or in making the PCs suffer the *realistic* consequences of
>ignoring the big picture,

Which certainly fits under my 'mosaic' proposal for making the
pictures smaller.

>until they *learn* (or die -
>either way the problem is *solved*).

What makes you think that dealing with the consequences of the big
picture unerringly results in a 'learn or die' situation? That
doesn't seem very... realistic to me.

--
Address no longer works.
try removing all numbers from
gafgirl1@2allstream3.net

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com&lt;<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 11, 2005 7:47:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Kaos wrote:
>
<snip>
>
> Fictional serial killers have a strong precedent for taunting the
> agencies set to track them down. Is that completely false, or just
> overdone?

Maybe not so overdone. Add the BTK killer in Wichita, Kansas, starting
in 1974.

Letters, a call to report the crime, a poem, a word puzzle, the
victim's I.D.'s, postcards, a computer disc, various packages...

http://www.kansas.com/mld/eagle/news/special_packages/b...


Arivne
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 11, 2005 8:47:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Peter Knutsen (usenet)" <peter@sagatafl.invalid> wrote in message
news:42aa1bec$0$67260$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk...
>
> Jeff Goslin wrote:
> [...]
> > I don't want there to be pieces of paper with the guy's deepest darkest
> > secrets written on them, and I'd prefer not to do the whole "spirit of
the
> > dead guy" thing. Anyone know of somewhat less hokey ways of handling
this
> > without essentially forcing a dying utterance on the characters?
>
> Of course. Realize that "telling stories" is *not* part of
> your job, as GM.

I might be tempted to refer to such a position as "cute"(like how one would
refer to a child's curiosity at the wonder of a flushing toilet, for
instance).

I know you're one of those "purist" nazis around here, so I won't bother to
try to reason with you. Suffice it to say that if the DM *DOESN'T* "tell
stories" at least in the very broadest of senses, the campaign becomes a
simple matter of action and reaction, which, to me, is a very linear and
predictable campaign.

I view my role in our game, as DM, to be the person who "makes things
interesting", for lack of better phrasing. Among my tools for making things
interesting are special traps and tricks, combats, NPC encounters, and yes,
even the telling of stories. I like to think of my job as that of director
and pitch man. The players are free form actors, the NPC's are my extras
and "ensign expendables", but without me to provide the framework, the movie
wouldn't get made.

Sometimes there is no way to handle something in the game EXCEPT to tell
stories. This is no more clear than when the PC's are on the outside of a
situation looking in. If the PC's do nothing, the story unfolds, regardless
of their being present or not. For example, if they happen upon the site of
a large battle and pause to watch for a few moments. They aren't doing
anything, just seeing what happens, and when they're done, they'll move on.
If the presentation of that scene is NOT "telling a story", I don't quite
know what you would refer to as such.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 11, 2005 10:04:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> Peter Knutsen (usenet) wrote:
> > Jeff Goslin wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Anyone know of somewhat less hokey ways of handling
> > > this without essentially forcing a dying utterance
> > > on the characters?
> >
> > Of course. Realize that "telling stories" is *not*
> > part of your job, as GM.
>
> I know you're one of those "purist" nazis around here,
> so I won't bother to try to reason with you. Suffice
> it to say that if the DM *DOESN'T* "tell stories" at
> least in the very broadest of senses, the campaign
> becomes a simple matter of action and reaction, which,
> to me, is a very linear and predictable campaign.

I recommend against going this route, Jeff. Peter's a kook, but he
can still wipe the floor with you on his worst day. Besides, if you
did, some people who would very much rather not would end up arguing
positions similar to yours, and I have their best interests and mental
stability in mind when I advise you to just drop it.

--
Nik
- remove vermin from email address to reply.
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 12, 2005 12:47:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Nikolas Landauer" <dacileva.flea@hotmail.com.tick> wrote in message
news:1118527456.3a099e3588d354350d9270542675a4a3@teranews...
> > I know you're one of those "purist" nazis around here,
> > so I won't bother to try to reason with you. Suffice
> > it to say that if the DM *DOESN'T* "tell stories" at
> > least in the very broadest of senses, the campaign
> > becomes a simple matter of action and reaction, which,
> > to me, is a very linear and predictable campaign.
>
> I recommend against going this route, Jeff. Peter's a kook, but he
> can still wipe the floor with you on his worst day. Besides, if you
> did, some people who would very much rather not would end up arguing
> positions similar to yours, and I have their best interests and mental
> stability in mind when I advise you to just drop it.

I have no intention of arguing this point with him, because I know it will
be akin to bashing my head against the wall and right now I have a very nice
brick pattern on my forehead already.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
a b α HP
June 12, 2005 8:56:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Kaos" <kaos@invalid.xplornet.com> wrote in message
news:85nfa1t7ti0mpjgr91snti4tmqne78p231@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 07:27:25 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
> dared speak in front of ME:
>
>>"Silveraxe" <avidroleplayer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:1118225362.588826.229220@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>> They'd accept it, but why would he do that?
>>> That's one of the lamest evil overlord behaviors ever.
>>
>>Yeah, I know, but our campaign is one tinged by the dramatic. Our evil
>>badguys have NOT seen enough Bond films. Yes, in the name of dramatic
>>play,
>>the BBEG's are willing to give away entire nefarious plans right before
>>leaving them in the prototypical nudge nudge wink wink inescapable trap
>>and
>>a lone guard. ;) 
>>
>>I'm making it sound a bit more "comical" than it really is, but I'm not
>>above a BBEG laying out the plan somewhat in order to leave clues for the
>>good guys. As I'm sure you understand, no *REAL* bad guy is going to lay
>>it
>>all out for the good guys, not even a little bit.
>
> Fictional serial killers have a strong precedent for taunting the
> agencies set to track them down. Is that completely false, or just
> overdone?

I think it would depend on the psych profile of the serial killer in
question. In the case of the DM, that is entirely up to you if they decide
to leave a particular clue or message that 'they did it again'. Again for a
variety of reasons, attention being the most popular one; seeing their
media-given name on the headlines for yet another tragety. Also up to the DM
if they have a 'logical' reason for their action or if it's compulsed.
As for fictional characters in murder/thrillers doing it, it makes for
good tension builders (if somewhat over-applied) making the reader/viewer
want to see what happens next.

> As for your players, they seem rather uninterested in the 'big
> picture.' Perhaps the solution to your problem doesn't lie in finding
> creative ways to spill the beans, but in simply making the pictures...
> smaller.
>
Agreed. Like maybe some otherwise unimportant cronie bragging about his
'big assignment from the boss' (translation: BBEG) for the players to shake
down for some (possibly) useful information. Hopefully, it'll encourage the
players to capture and interrogate rather than maim and destroy

--==--
Jerry Chesko
!