|
Post by archon on Feb 6, 2011 10:46:58 GMT -5
Dont get me wrong if my players can actually "think" their way around the undefeatable problem then I think that my mission is accomplished. Most players just want to "hulk smash" their way through everything. If you show creativity and thought then the impossible situation might become very possible indeed and it makes me really happy as a GM when this happens. However you must realize just how rare this actually is. Usually its just "OMG smashing didnt work, TPK, bitching about how hard the problem was."
The more thinking that occurs in my games the better. Dont get me wrong for every impossible encounter there will be quite a few that the players can overcome with various degrees of effort. My job is not to styme my players at every turn its to provide fun.
|
|
|
Post by xenocide on Feb 6, 2011 19:00:41 GMT -5
lol, i know exactly what you mean. just sayin that my job in a group generally falls to the smart guy character, be it the good rogue (not the one that likes to do nothing more than stab things and steal from allies "cuz they can") or the wizard, heck i've even thought about toying with finding a good build for a 4.0 warlord (sadly idk if it will work.) i play the thinker in our group (or renfire [aka talon.])
another thing that pisses me off is a lack of originality. the rogue ALWAYS being played by the same character, for example
|
|
|
Post by thedoctor on Feb 8, 2011 9:01:29 GMT -5
so you guys think putting characters up against what's essentially a Kobayashi Maru is a good strategy? what does it most accomplish? team building, straightening out a rebellious party, teach them some lesson, see how they handle it to gain insight into their minds, or (and be honest here) just to screw with them?
|
|
|
Post by Drozgul on Feb 8, 2011 16:13:27 GMT -5
Insight of course is the best answer here, as it's good to get a feel for how players like to handle problems. In doing this, a GM can better provide a story in game that they know the players will enjoy.
For instance, if the players open up a difficult fight in one way every time, it becomes easy to see how they prefer to fight, and how best they work together against terrible odds.
BUT, it works best as a plot device no different from the film(s) you refer to for your no-win situation. You are giving the players what should be a rare opportunity to re-chalk rules a bit and really stretch their imagination in order to make the impossible become possible. In essence, in my mind, there is no such thing to me as a storyteller as a "no-win" in role-playing. Especially since sometimes survival can be viewed as success, but a triumph over the "impossible" even at great cost such as losing a party member, can act to set the tone of the rest of the game.
Also, an "unbeatable" nemesis can act as a great recurring villain, staging multiple challenges to a party that they progressively learn about; not unlike any of the old mystery series such as Sherlock Holmes, or even puzzle action like MacGuyver.
Knowing that a good many of our players derive their playstyles, character builds, and even plot hooks from the movies and series they watch, as well as reading material, it's useful to know that what catches their eye will also be great building blocks to stretch their imagination further.
Sometimes it does sound like a terrible course to take, I agree, but all of your suggestions may be achieved through a no-win, but every party has the potential for Captain Kirk-like moments that will allow for, if nothing else, the party will be able to see who is a good leader and who is just gonna wear a red shirt.
|
|
|
Post by thedoctor on Feb 10, 2011 8:12:38 GMT -5
didn't say it was a bad idea. not intentionally anyways. i like to try to argue both sides of an idea in order to get insight into it.
|
|
|
Post by archon on Feb 27, 2011 22:32:22 GMT -5
I tend to use the no-win situation to make my players think. Occasionally its just to remind them that they are not immortal when they get too uppity tho. Besides if players dont think that they can be defeated where is the drama of conflict?
|
|