Corrosive
Gray oozes will always hold a special place in my heart. That’s because I did the whole Inigo Montoya story for my first ever game. It was 3.5, and I was a halfling rogue. My dude fought a gray ooze in his very first combat, wielding his father’s masterwork short sword that I’d spent all my starting money on. My salty ass when it melted.
Of course, we haven’t gathered here today to talk about oozes. Not when there’s a real corrosive monster out there. I am of course talking about those opinionated GMs who make a bad habit of backseat gaming.
At the risk fo splitting hairs, I think this is a slightly different beast than the “quarterbacking” we talked about back in “General Disarray.” That’s more of a player behavior, where table talk and dithering threaten to drag play to a standstill. That can be irritating enough. But when your GM is the one telling you to second-guess yourself, you get a couple of unfortunate side effects.
In the first place, players may begin to rely on the safety net. What difference does daring play make when the guy behind the screen is going to bail you out? The occasional “are you sure?” may be warranted, but you have to take care. Too many warnings and player agency goes out the window. After all, if you aren’t allowed to fail, how can you enjoy the fruits of success?
Then there’s the self confidence issue referenced in today’s comic. GMs get final say over in-game reality, meaning their opinion de facto matters more than yours. So if they happen to think “swing from the chandelier” is a stupid idea, it can feel like a real gut punch: “Dude, why would you mess with the chandelier? I already told you the monster is on its last legs. Just attack!” Suddenly your cool idea becomes a dumb mistake. And that runs the risk of killing creative play.
Finally, the issue of adversarial GMing rears its ugly head. If there are only GM-approved decisions and wrong decisions, then the experience of play shifts. Suddenly we’re no longer talking about brave heroes vs. dangerous game world. We’re talking about players vs. GM. You aren’t fighting dragons at that point. You’re fighting to convince your power tripping buddy that your ideas have merit.
So what do you say, Handbook-World? When does a friendly “are you sure?” cross the line into obnoxious GMing? Have you ever encountered this issue out in the wild? Tell us about all your own corrosive backseat gamers down in the comments!
JOIN THE HANDBOOK OF HEROES DISCORD! Do you want a place to game with your fellow Heroes? How about a magical land where you can post your dankest nerd memes, behold the finest in gamer dog and geek cats, or speculate baselessly on Handbook of Heroes plot developments? Then have I got a Discord Invite for you!
I nominate the grey ooze for the theoretical monster party.
I can just see it ‘translating’ for the shambling mound, driving Magus up the wall with rage. 😀
You have to admit that Magus’s rapier looks tasty.
Shambling mound: “BARUUM HMSH!*” (*Come on, Magus. Let’s hug it out and bury the hatchet.)
Grey Oose: “Yeah, the boss is saying you should put some relish on that rapier and give it to me.”
Shambling mound: “HUUUM?! BARUUM HMSH! BARUUM HMSH!*” (Wha-? Hug it out! I said we should HUG IT OUT!”)
Magus: “You fiends!”
I JUST had one of the chandelier moments this past Easter. We had friends over and lovely weather for Easter Sunday, so we sat outside at our picnic table beneath the sun umbrella and played a one-shot where everyone was transformed into giant bunny-folk for a riff on the Rankin-Bass *Here Comes Peter Cottontail* special crossed with Poe’s *Masque of the Red Death.* (One guest had requested something with bunnies and egg-hunting. I complied.)
One of the harengon racial abilities is a “super-jump” power. The barbarian (now a 6′ angora bunny) charged the line of hobgoblins in the first combat and asked “ooh, can I use this jump power?” I told her, “Sure, but it counts as a part of movement and it’s all level ground anyway. You gain no combat bonus and there’s nothing to jump over.” “Cool! Thanks!”
So she did. It was completely superfluous for the massive bunny to leap up and out 15′ at the end of her run, to then make one battleaxe strike against one foe (which she missed). But I had fun describing the action, she had fun doing it, and in the end EVERY bunny (even the low-hp sorcerer) announced themselves with a thoroughly pointless but fun-in-the-moment leap into the fray to land in an avengers-stance and make their attack. –And that’s how the afternoon passed. The major beats of the story were still followed, people did sometimes silly things, sometimes awesome things, (sometimes both), and everyone had a great time. TLDR: I give folks one “just to be clear, you want to *what*?” and then roll with the consequences.
I think that this is why 5e has Inspiration as a mechanic. You wanna do a pointless but cool thing? Then here, take advantage for later.
For stuff like this where the character might know things players don’t, have a skill check, or at least an Int check, to see if “sludge gray masses eat metal weapons” bubbles up prior to “ahhhh! Kill it!” takes over.
I usually only ask “are you sure” when a player’s stated action runs contrary to something I feel I clearly described as being bad to do, the result of an aforementioned skill check or something the PCs said or discussed in-game 2 minutes ago, like if the bard says “hey, this sign is undercommon for ‘beware gray ooze’ so if you see a gray ooze, don’t use your favorite metal weapon”
To be fair, it’s awfully hard to hear sage advice when the “ahhhh! Kill it!” impulse takes over.
Melting that sword could have opened up a nice quest for a powerful mage to replace the blade with a glowy +2 sword of kobold bashing 🙂
I’ve heard the “I ‘do something’..are you sure ?…wait, I ‘do something else’…are you really sure ?…no,no, I ‘do something entirely different’ ..is that your final answer ?” routine at pretty much every character’s turn 🙂
We had one DM that was a founding member of the “you said it so you do it” society…unless of course your dithering helped his monsters out by changing to a more ineffective attack 😉
I feel like >:( is a more appropriate emoji.
We got as much of a laugh seeing someone frantically trying to change their action without seeing why they should as the DM did, and everyone got their turn eventually so I’ll stick with the 🙂 😉
For experienced players, I think the GM interjecting into the field of play always crosses the line.
If you are new to the game, the system, or the concept, then a little aid in what you can do versus what might be a little over the top can be a nice help to guide a new player along a path of discovering what the games can offer and/or helping especially young players to understand that even in a game, there are limits to how you can interact (unless the system or game truly has no limits, then go wild!)
Any time the DM says, “OkaaAAAaay… ” in that tone of voice (you all just heard it right now) as they roll some dice and make you feel stupid for reasons that only they feel good about, they are the wrong person to be DMing and if a polite or gentle talk with them about it doesn’t help, it is time to find a new DM for the table.
I have definitely played with those types of DMs and I can say that fortunately most of those DMs are either young themselves and have yet to learn better ways to play, or they are really that kind of person and always have been and unfortunately that can ruin a new player experience more than the crunch of some systems.
Don’t give up on a game because of a bad table. Just find a new table to play at 🙂
I did indeed hear it.
Taksies-backsies require an Intelligence or Wisdom check as appropriate, unless it’s info the DM failed to convey.
Naw. You get three taksies-backsies points per day, as per the feat.
My game is based on player agency for the most part. I do have strict “rules” about certain types of play though and if a player is trying to cross that boundary, they don’t get an “are you sure”, they get a “NO”. I don’t mind derring do or other heroic gestures, just make sure you have the stats and equipment to try it. I’ve done the, “you just spent the last 10 minutes looking for a rope to tie to the beam so you can swing across, when you remember you all left all the rope tied across that ravine you crossed awhile ago.”, or asked for a stat check to see if they realize they are about to face plant in front of god and the monsters. Seldom do they get, “are you sure” and that is usually just to make them paranoid 🙂
My favorite way to make players paranoid is to ask them, “How *exactly* do you open the door?” Gets ’em every time.
Oh yes. I’ll have to remember that if I get a chance to run again.
I very deliberately always ask players things like “so wait, do you touch the doorknob?” or “Okay, so you’re using a manipulate action while adjacent to the monster” or “are you moving through this square?” I think it’s more important to avoid Gotcha GMing than to occasionally make a player second-guess their plan. I hate when I go, “okay, that provoke a Reactive Strike” and they go “wait, shit, I forgot!”
That being said, I ask these sorts of questions whenever they take an action, even if there’s no trick. I think it’s funny to see them second-guess themselves. So I am just an obnoxious GM. ;P
(It also both helps avoid the check-ins becoming a tell and helps them learn which actions are potentially risky)
“does your skin make contact with the carpet”
“I… um… yes?”
“okay! so anyways what are your other two actions ^^”
That being said, “Are you sure?” as a phrase seems incredibly unhelpful to me. Am I sure of what?? What exactly are you concerned about? It’s not a helpful check-in, it’s just there to make the GM feel better about a blatant incoming Gotcha.
“Okay, that provoke a Reactive Strike”
“wait, shit, I forgot!”
“HOW MANY YEARS HAVE WE BEEN PLAYING THIS GAME!?”
That’s just an example! But yeah, like, I may know the rules to checkers, but I sure as sin still mess up all the time. That’s fine, because checkers is a competitive game, but most ttrpgs aren’t!
Sort of a tangent, but…
I was running a one-shot out of Heliana’s the other week for a bunch of elementary-age kids at the local game shop. They were all playing dragonborn, of course, and were talking about combining their breath weapons into one super attack against the mimic tavern.
Once we approached the end of our time at the shop, I described how the floor opened up into a massive throat—an obvious weak point, I thought. The kids could fire their super breath weapon down the throat, the dying building would cough them out, it would be a dramatic conclusion to the session.
So the kids fired their super breath attack…at the door.
I did my best to make that as dramatic and cool as the dying building thing. Give your players the best cues you can muster, and do what you can with however they react. That’s my motto.
(I guess the bit where I tried to hint that everyone’s drinks were dangerously acidic fits the prompt better, but I don’t have much to say about it. The kids didn’t realize their own drinks might be dangerous until after they drank them.)
What’s more exciting as a kid? Worrying about the potions you may or may not have imbibed, or describing the draconic version of https://www.watchmojo.com/uploads/share-image/VIDEO-SHARE-65021.jpg?2022-04-21.v2
Way to go giving the people what they want!
Now, I don’t have too many stories about player vs. GM fights but I DO have a story about GM vs. GM conflict.
So, to set the stage: it is Wednesday the day before session. I poke my players, give them a little question to get them thinking about their characters, ask where we want to go, all good stuff. I also drop the comment that “it is highly unlikely I will be running combat.”
This upsets one of the players and we come to the realization that I’m not likely to give them what they want in games. This GREATLY upsets me as they are an extremely fine roleplayer. A little while later, and we come to the agreement that I hand off the entirely jank combat system to somebody who is going to enjoy running it more. For the sake of reference, I’m going to call this somebody “Sheo”.
So, it is the next day and I’m discussing with Sheo what I have in mind: a quick dungeon mainly designed to familiarize them with the game’s systems, with a small bit of light ribbing of Sheo which I am asked to tone down.
Then the game starts. As a reminder, the express reason I brought Sheo on is to deal with the combat side of things that I am not naturally inclined to do and in this particular case got rather badly burned by. First problem, Sheo doesn’t quite get the intricacies of the system yet. Second problem, Sheo and I seem to have differing opinions on our relationship. I brought them on to be an assistant; they seem to be behaving as if we’re equals.
So, what went wrong? Well, a few things: as soon as I hand the scene over, Sheo asks me “hey, can I do a retcon?” I only notice in retrospect that I don’t immediately say no because I’m still in the middle of discussing the prompt for the scene that I was delivering to Sheo. Second issue, one of the players asks “hey are we gonna have a map?” Sheo assumes no. Unfortunately, this is a system that cares about tiles in a fundamental way and affecting them is one of the critical rules bits. Next issue, a player asks to make a check. This is my bread and butter and I understand how this system does it fairly well, since I’ve been doing it for about a year. Sheo DOESN’T and immediately asks to lower the difficulty. The problem with this is that the character in question has a skill explicitly designed to trivialize the exact check in question and raising the difficulty such that said skill doesn’t apply would be incongruent with the premise. (To be more specific, this is a hacking check in a TRON-style cyberspace setting. The setting in question is supposed to have comically low security as to allow Sheo to have as many encounters as it takes to get comfortable with the system.) Thankfully, the players come in to help explain to Sheo the specific rules interaction that is going on, since this system has a fairly novel skill check system.
It is around this point that I realize “okay, no, I’m gonna have to step in and coach Sheo to keep this thing on the rails”.
And then the session ends early anyway due to an unrelated technical mishap. Oops.
Personally, I think a little GM nudging is warranted for…well, avoiding the kind of situations that come up in Monday’s comic. If a player says “I climb the mountain,” the GM not only can but SHOULD say “you remember I mentioned a ski lift, right?” Anything a character would reasonably know but the player apparently doesn’t, the GM should make sure that the apparently-stupid thing they’re doing is on purpose, not because they haven’t realized some important piece of information about the world. Maybe the player just really wants to climb the mountain because their character is a barbarian testing themself against the elements! But you should check that really is why.
“Anything a character would reasonably know but the player apparently doesn’t, the GM should make sure that the apparently-stupid thing they’re doing is on purpose, not because they haven’t realized some important piece of information about the world.”
Definitely agree with this, and also agree with the posters above that “Are you sure?” or “Okay…” without further context is a really bad way to implement it. If there is some reason why what the player is doing would be obviously stupid, make certain that the player knows exactly what the character would know in this situation. And if it turns out that the player had something clever up their sleeve or was pulling a Magus? Then everyone is still clear on exactly what is happening and why.
Thank you for the article. This particular pitfall is one I could easily have fallen into, and I may even have done so before. I’m hoping not.
A monster capable of melting weapons on your very first combat ever? Ouch.
A late comment, but this is the reason I won’t TTRPG anymore.
(TLDR)
“I only game with equals.”
It’s just that simple, if I sit down at a gaming table, everyone there is equal or I walk.
DnD perpetuating the DM’s inequality is why the genre refuses to modernize or integrate technology.
It’s also why we ended up with paid DMs. The position is either abused or it’s boring enough to come with a paycheck. Either way, it needs to go.
A few people have tried to create systems without central CnC, proving DMs are unnecessary, but kiddos are taught hierarchy from birth, so it continues.
CRPGs get around it by offloading the banker’s work to algorithms. If an MMO had staff logging on and treating players like TTRPG DMs do, they wouldn’t have any players left.