Quote from: CRKrueger;397530Hmm, the Ranger not tracking to see what could actually be in the cave is just stupid play.  If the party wipes as a result, so be it.

As for the rest, the characters knew the fairy was leading them astray, but is that really a reason not to go?

You said they were headed to a dungeon.  I don't know if there was a mission or something important and possibly time-sensitive involved, but if not, then why not go?

Fairies are known for doing all kinds of strange things, and lots of times, if you defeat the trap they set for you or outsmart them in some way, you get a reward.   Maybe they figure that if they keep going along with the fairies even if they know it's a trap, the fairies will get bored and leave them alone.  There's lots of reasons why the characters themselves would have a legitimate reason to "fall for it".  Without really knowing what the players were up to, it's hard to level a charge at them.

Did you discuss the actions with your players after the session and ask them what they were up to?

BTW - Taking charge of the characters saying "Nope, your characters wouldn't do that, I'm over-riding that." is one of the most heavy-handed things a GM can do.  The only time I'd ever think of such a thing is when someone is playing someone else's character due to leaving early or something.  Most of the time if the players are acting that disruptively, it's usually a sign that they're bored or just not engaged.  Probably best to do something else if the players just aren't their normal selves that night.

I agree with that. If I was a player and some fairy tried to lead me in the woods I'd say: That way lies adventure and follow the thing.
Getting out of a trap is most of the time more fun than avoiding it.

A lot of this is tied to the lethality of the game you want to run and that the PCs sign on for.

Cranewings, do you feel that the PCs learned something from this?  Did it help establish the consequence of player idiocy?  I tell you true, that 80% of the PC death's that have happened in my GM career, or at least in the last 1/3 of it, have helped shape player expectations for the game we play.  

And we've had a few players who, after maybe a long session of exploring very empty ruins, went over and above in their search for excitement.  After this stupidy leads to PC death a few times, they start to understand that the smart survive.

Quote from: Saphim;397697I agree with that. If I was a player and some fairy tried to lead me in the woods I'd say: That way lies adventure and follow the thing.
Getting out of a trap is most of the time more fun than avoiding it.

A GM definitely needs to account for "plot hook reflex". Proper communication and all that.

I've been running into something of the opposite with my Earthdawn GM... he's been VERY effective at convincing me of the danger of various places/creatures/NPCs... and my PC, being rational and having a long-term goal other than accumulation of wealth, has responded with caution... to the point of frequently running away and evading things.
Yet the GM seems disappointed... "I figured you'd try talking to the horror a bit longer", "I'm surprised you didn't just fly into the ruins", "I'm surprised you didn't try to take the 'cursed' treasure."
The other PCs see the 'certain death' signs and rush on in... but mine argues it's a bad idea.

Maybe I've been playing CoC for too long...

Quote from: Novastar;397643Fuck that noise.

If I failed to describe something accurately, allowing a retcon isn't without reason.

A player doing something they know is foolish, expecting you'll bend over backward (or another direction entirely), just to "not ruin their fun", is a drama whore and should be promptly corrected or punted.

There's "heroic", and then there's "Just bloody stupid".
Your Cleric player was the later, not the former.

Oh I generally don't allow retcon's either, but I do allow more or less 'same round' take backs for the more gross stupidity.   The Dwarf had higher initiative and hadn't acted, so allowing him to announce, after the same round impact of charging the uninjured bugbear (which, as a CR 2 critter is supposedly a challenge for a four character party of second level characters... supposedly), naked, alone and in the dark, to interrupt with a charge was just fine.

On the other hand, the second game session, where the three goblins tackled him into the water and grappled him to keep him from swimming... after ten rounds of drowning there was no way in hell he could go 'but I should have gotten an Attack of Opportunity!!!'.

Yes. He should have. I didn't deny it to him, he just failed to take it.  Too late.

The amusing thing is that he is claiming he prefers Runequest because it is more forgiving/less lethal.  I think he forgot how every character dropped to near death, saved only by the quick actions of their fellow players, at least once, if not multiple times, throughout the RQ campaign.  

And I just flashed back to the most brutal sequence of critical hits I've ever inflicted on a single player in a single round. Chills, man... chills.

So here is a question:

How easy is it to train a new group of players, each with their own expectations of what is lethal, to play your game?

Historically, I usually end up killing at least two characters during the first month of any game I run. After that, usually the players can survive for months and months without another one.

I've already killed one guy's character in this game. They wanted to warn a town about a pending invasion. They took a boat down a river and then ran on foot through a goblin infested forest. Three of the four ran together. They encountered a pretty dangerous monster an overcame it. The fourth guy, a rogue with a shit constitution couldn't keep up, so he encouraged everyone else to go ahead without them... which they did without argument.

Now, the last guy isn't needed to deliver any kind of warning, could have gotten back in his boat and found a safe place to hide. Instead, he set off on foot through the woods at night alone. He encountered a group of 4 goblins, got run down, killed, and eaten. He complained, "I guess that's what I get for doing the heroic thing." I told him, "what heroic thing? They are the ones delivering the warning, they didn't need you to come. You could have left in your boat. Heroic, maybe. Not very tactical."

Quote from: Cranewings;397877So here is a question:

How easy is it to train a new group of players, each with their own expectations of what is lethal, to play your game?

Historically, I usually end up killing at least two characters during the first month of any game I run. After that, usually the players can survive for months and months without another one.

I've already killed one guy's character in this game. They wanted to warn a town about a pending invasion. They took a boat down a river and then ran on foot through a goblin infested forest. Three of the four ran together. They encountered a pretty dangerous monster an overcame it. The fourth guy, a rogue with a shit constitution couldn't keep up, so he encouraged everyone else to go ahead without them... which they did without argument.

Now, the last guy isn't needed to deliver any kind of warning, could have gotten back in his boat and found a safe place to hide. Instead, he set off on foot through the woods at night alone. He encountered a group of 4 goblins, got run down, killed, and eaten. He complained, "I guess that's what I get for doing the heroic thing." I told him, "what heroic thing? They are the ones delivering the warning, they didn't need you to come. You could have left in your boat. Heroic, maybe. Not very tactical."

Well you could tell them you don't want heroics.

Quote from: Cranewings;397877So here is a question:

How easy is it to train a new group of players, each with their own expectations of what is lethal, to play your game?

Historically, I usually end up killing at least two characters during the first month of any game I run. After that, usually the players can survive for months and months without another one.

I've already killed one guy's character in this game. They wanted to warn a town about a pending invasion. They took a boat down a river and then ran on foot through a goblin infested forest. Three of the four ran together. They encountered a pretty dangerous monster an overcame it. The fourth guy, a rogue with a shit constitution couldn't keep up, so he encouraged everyone else to go ahead without them... which they did without argument.

Now, the last guy isn't needed to deliver any kind of warning, could have gotten back in his boat and found a safe place to hide. Instead, he set off on foot through the woods at night alone. He encountered a group of 4 goblins, got run down, killed, and eaten. He complained, "I guess that's what I get for doing the heroic thing." I told him, "what heroic thing? They are the ones delivering the warning, they didn't need you to come. You could have left in your boat. Heroic, maybe. Not very tactical."

Well, first of all, since it sounds like this is your history, your playing a game with a steep power gain curve.  Aside from everything else, I will tell you that makes it tough on player expectation when the power curve slope comes with an actual change in lethality.
Aside from everything else I am going to say, I view that as making it harder for the PCs to learn/harder for the GM to train their expectations.  Because the lethality level changes.

The first thing about teaching new players is that banal, basic first issue.  Communication.  I make it very, very clear what the PC life expectancy is in Celtricia, and why.  And I have this conversation early on, pre character gen.  It sounds basic, but it really helps, or at least so I believe.  For instance, if they understand that only one out of three player characters lasts more than 10 sessions, they respond to that.  
During this, and during the first session, I stress the importance of teamwork to survive.  I talk about a lot of other campaign specific stuff, as well, but that is the more important, i think.  
If anything i said seems off or needs clarifying, please let me know.

Quote from: Cranewings;397877He complained, "I guess that's what I get for doing the heroic thing." I told him, "what heroic thing? They are the ones delivering the warning, they didn't need you to come. You could have left in your boat. Heroic, maybe. Not very tactical."

"Do you know what the definition of a hero is? Someone who gets other people killed. You can look it up later."

Meh, stupidity kills.

And the leading cause of PC death is second-hand stupidity.