GMs, Fight The Urge To Take Things Away From Players

I tend to spend a lot of time in forums and social media groups where players and Game Masters congregate. And every day or so someone runs in with wild eyes and their hair sticking up at all angles, on the verge of panic because it turns out that a player character has an ability that is wrecking house, or they gave their PCs magic items that have seriously upended the balance in their game. Then, without fail, they start asking all of us how to take those items and/or abilities away from their players.

I want to be very clear, here... do not do this. Nothing will frustrate your players faster, or mar their trust in you more, than feeling like they cannot rely on you to hold up your end of the social contract for this game.

That said, if you find yourself in this situation, consider the following steps.

No, give me that back!

Before we get into the nitty gritty this week, don't forget to sign up for my weekly newsletter to get all my updates right in your inbox. Also, if you've got a bit of spare cash that you'd like to use to help keep the wheels turning, consider becoming a Patreon patron!

Lastly, to be sure you're following all of my followables, check out my LinkTree!

Step #1: Re-Read The Rules in Question

It says what, again? Really?

This is the first step because it's one nearly everyone skips, and it can solve a majority of problems in a lot of situations. If an ability like sneak attack or smite is giving you fits as a Game Master, make sure that you're reading it carefully, and that your player has been running it correctly. A lot of the time we misread a class ability, item description, or feat, and then it becomes far more potent than it should be due to a misunderstanding.

As an example, I once shared a table with a player who wanted to use the Panther Style combat feats in Pathfinder. The way they work is that when you trigger an attack of opportunity for moving through an enemy's space, you may counterattack them if they take that attack of opportunity against you. It's a useful ability for speed-based characters with a high armor class to get in extra shots on several enemies while rushing through a crowd.

What it does not do, however, is allow you to trigger all of your possible counterattacks at once when an enemy attacks you. It's one counterattack per attack of opportunity against you, and most foes you fight only get one. However, this player insisted that he should get 6 free attacks on an enemy, and that they should all resolve anytime he received an attack of opportunity for any reason, rather than due to movement as the feat states.

If something seems really overpowered to you, look it up. There's a good chance the player isn't reading the rules correctly.

Step #2: Look At The Big Picture

Don't get too close to things.

If it turns out the rules are being run correctly, and the ability, magic item, etc., does do what you think it does, then step back and take a big picture look at your game. Try to gain a sense of perspective, and ask if something is really as potent as it first appears when you look at it from your god's eye view.

For example, your wizard may be able to wipe out a single encounter by using a combination of their highest level spell as well as several metamagic feats... but while that's impressive, is it that game breaking when there are 4-5 encounters that are going to happen in a given session? You can ask the same question about barbarian Rage, paladin smite, magic items that have daily charges, and so on, and so forth... any ability that can only be used a certain number of times per day has a cap built in. And that cap is usually enough to carry the day in one or two encounters, or to solve a handful of problems, but it has limitations beyond that.

Even if an ability can be done as often as the circumstances present, like sneak attack, take a look at what it's actually doing. Sneak attack damage allows a character to deal extra damage to a single foe under specific circumstances... even if such an attack kills a foe, is that such a big deal when there are 4-6 enemies on the board? Even slaying as fast as they can, the sneak attacker can only be in so many places at once... and the circumstances for that ability to work won't always be present whenever they attack.

As someone who's been a Game Master, and written my share of modules, even the most powerful player abilities are rarely as potent as we think when we look at them in regards to the sheer amount of nonsense they're going to have to face down over the course of a campaign.

Step #3: Modify Your Challenge Accordingly

Numbers... got to change the numbers...

Once you've checked the rules, and examined the ability or item in question, and you've determined that it is, indeed, a powerful ability that still doesn't mean you should re-write the rules to take it away from your players. Instead, modify the challenges you're presenting.

To reiterate, this does not mean immediately presenting only enemies and scenarios that render powerful or potent abilities unusable. It simply means that you need to put a few extra bells and whistles in to make sure the game doesn't become a cake walk.

For example, say your barbarian fighter has a devastating ability to deal a lot of damage to any foe they charge. Cool, let them do that! But instead of just putting one enemy on the board, give them a couple of mobs to deal with. That way everyone gets to participate, and while the blood is still going to flow it isn't just letting Rogar run in and one-shot the enemy tank. If you have a sorcerer whose area of effect spells are really potent, let them blow up a crowd of foes from time to time... but ensure there's cover strewn around, and that enemies are widely dispersed enough that it isn't enough to immediately end the entire battle. If the fighter got hold of a flametongue far earlier than you expected, don't make all their enemies immune to fire... but once word has gotten out that Kristoff the Red bears a blade of fire, maybe have enemies drink potions to offer them some limited protection if they were planning on taking on the party.

Bonus Step: Alter, But Do Not Remove Items

Most of the examples up to this point were about class abilities, feats, etc. However, sometimes you get a little overly generous with magic items because you want everyone to have fun, and you realize too late that you might have screwed yourself over in terms of presenting a challenge.

Ideally, you should alter the threats your players face, making these items a necessity, or providing some challenges they simply cannot defeat. Perhaps the barbarian who acquired frostbrand has been tearing through many of the bandits with it, but when it's time to fight the leader we find that they're a demon in disguise, and the greatsword's icy aura is nowhere near as potent against them. A normal blade, however, would have been utterly insufficient to pierce their hide! Mayhap your rogue acquired a ring of invisibility, and while it's enough for them to sneak around guards and undead minions, it does not hide them from the dragon's keen senses. And so on, and so forth.

However, if you feel like you really messed up and gave your players something far too powerful, and it's going to break your game, make modifications to the item instead of coming up with some reason that it gets stolen, broken, or commandeered by an NPC.

For instance, consider putting a minor curse on an item that explains why it was found so early in the game. Perhaps the Iron Bands of Binding that were found only work on evil outsiders, making them potent when facing demons and devils, but less so the rest of the time. The deadly dagger the rogue found has been a life saver, but it turns out that it only functions in areas of dim light or darkness. The enchanted suit of armor the fighter has used may seem great, but the armor is actually woven with a thread of cowardice, and it offers less protection the more injured its wearer is.

You get the idea.

Lastly, if an item is particularly rare, powerful, or unique, consider making it intelligent (though perhaps it was asleep until just now). This doesn't lessen its powers, but it does turn the item into something of an NPC that players will have to contend with in order to continue using its abilities. This can add an extra hurdle to unlocking the item's full powers, and make it a more engaging aspect overall.

All of these choices are infinitely better than just having an item stolen off someone's hip while they're at the bar, or finding it missing from camp in the morning. Because your players are going to want it back, and to punish the thief, often to the point that this will utterly derail whatever campaign you were trying to run in the first place to rectify this situation.

Recommended Reading

If you'd like to check out some more stories with lessons for Game Masters in them (or just some GM advice in general), I'd recommend some of the following:

- Game Masters Shouldn't Leave Players Twisting in The Wind: While this particular incident happened at a Werewolf: The Apocalypse LARP, it's a lesson that I think can be applied across all RPGs; don't let your players chase their tails for no reason.

- 100 Tips and Tricks For Being a Better Game Master: 10 years of tested advice from this blog, boiled down into a simple, easy-to-digest list for GMs new and old alike!

- How To Ruin a Promising LARP in 3 Easy Steps: A game that had great promise, but which was ultimately laid low by the way the folks running it handled (or didn't handle) things.

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday. To stay on top of all my content and releases, make sure you subscribe to my newsletter at the bottom of the page!

Again, for more of my work, check out my Vocal archive, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife or my latest short story collection The Rejects, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!

Alignment's Roots Go Deeper Than We Might Think (How Much Stuff Do You Lose Pulling It Out?)

Since I recently started doing my Alignment Deep Dives series, I've been thinking a lot more about alignment as a concept. Because while it doesn't exist in all games, and it's been mostly de-fanged in the 5th Edition of Dungeons and Dragons, it still has quite a lot of teeth in my preferred game of choice, Pathfinder. And while I've seen a lot of people saying they want to remove alignment from their games entirely because it, "just gets in the way," I thought I'd take a moment to go down that rabbit hole. Because I've found the roots go a lot deeper than we tend to think... both mechanically, and otherwise.

So, if you're someone who is serious about yanking alignment out by its roots, here are some things you're going to have to change, re-write, or re-conceptualize.

Trust me, in the end it's just not worth the effort.

First, The Obvious Stuff

There are a lot of obvious parts of the game that rely on character alignment to determine certain effects or limitations. Paladins must maintain their lawful good alignment, barbarians cannot be lawful, clerics must remain within a step of their deity in order to maintain their connection to their powers, druids must remain neutral, etc. This is the most obvious thing alignment is used for, and honestly I think it's about as far as a lot of players and DMs think of it; it's just an impediment that stops them from playing certain characters, or which restricts the actions they can take in-game without dealing with consequences.

No, Geoff, you cannot play a barbarian/monk with Way of The Great Ax.

 

And sure, alignment does do that. It also stops players from claiming to be good characters on one hand, and then casting spells with the Evil descriptor on the other hand. It makes it clear that certain actions, use of certain items, and even certain classes require you to maintain a certain philosophy and behavior. If you're going to be an antipaladin, a bloody jake, etc., then you've got to devote yourself to that.

To be very clear, alignment doesn't actually stop players from taking in-game actions. However, if you are a character that requires a certain alignment to maintain your powers, then altering too far in any particular direction might mean you face consequences for those actions. And if your character doesn't depend on alignment at all? Well, they might consider their actions necessary for the greater good, or they might think of good and evil as philosophical concepts rather than anything physical. The character may not even think in terms of good and evil, but only in terms of what is expedient and efficient. That doesn't stop them from being good or evil, but it means they themselves are not concerned with those labels since it doesn't affect their life in any meaningful way. And unless there's a local spellcaster, they'll probably go their whole life without ever having someone use a spell to check and see what their alignment actually is.

Another consideration is that eliminating alignment either removes or severely undercuts many abilities in the game. From smite, to domain powers, to specific spells and magic weapons, alignment is one of the major guiding forces that underwrites them, or makes them useful at all. So if you get rid of it, you either get rid of these things, or you need to re-write them. From the holy avenger, to holy/unholy weapons, to spells like holy smite and chaos hammer, they cease to function without alignment to determine their effects.

But alignment affects far more than just the party. It is a huge part of the cosmos at-large. Without it, entire aspects of the game just fall... the hell... apart.

When Heaven and Hell Are Real

In the Golarion setting (as in a majority of other settings I've seen for fantasy RPGs), there is a planar multiverse. And without fail there are planes that are attached entirely to certain alignments. So there are planes that are wholly good or wholly evil, wholly lawful and wholly chaotic. Most games have at least one heaven, and at least one hell, though Golarion has the hells and the abyss, as well as heaven and the celestial realms, among other places.

Go then... there are other worlds than these.

Alignment is predicated on the idea that there are places, beings, actions, and things that are wholly good, or wholly evil (wholly lawful or wholly chaotic as well, but that tends to get less play in most games). Good and evil are facts in these settings, not philosophies, or opinions. Because if that were not the case, how could demons and devils exist? How could angels, celestials, and other beings that are wholly determined by the aligned energies that spawned them? How could the realms they are from (and even the gods who command them) be truly good or truly evil if good and evil were up for debate, rather than cosmic facts of the universe? And if we get rid of these places, and the creatures that live in them, then what becomes of their results on the world? With no angels or devils we have no aasimar or tieflings. We lose the celestial and infernal bloodlines, and all the things that draw power from them. Because the alignment of these outsiders is their main, defining attribute... without it, their reason for being sort of fades away.

Perhaps the biggest example of why alignment is often necessary is the idea of divine judgment. When characters die, they go to the afterlife they've earned/deserve based on their actions... but what determines whether those actions were good, evil, lawful, chaotic, or otherwise? What determines whether they were proper adherents to their particular faith, or people who just said the words and never followed the dictates of their deity? The very idea means there must be actions that are good or evil, and that the gods have a checklist they can use to grade someone to determine where they end up.

For divine judgment to function, good and evil must be facts. If you remove alignment, it throws that aspect into chaos, and removes that basic building block.

You May As Well Go Back To The Drawing Board

This rabbit hole goes a lot deeper when you stop and ask just how many creatures, outsiders, antagonists, and even nations (in the core setting, at least) are resting on a foundation of alignment. From Cheliax's obsession with devils, to Nidal's embrace of dark powers, to the Worldwound itself, so many of these things rest on good and evil being real, tangible facts in the setting. While some of these aspects might still function without alignment, others are going to topple right over like dominoes that hit an unfortunate breeze. And as anyone who's ever tinkered with a mechanically complex game knows, the more things that fall over, the more you're going to have to do to back fill what you changed... which could come with its own unexpected consequences.

Do you need alignment to play fantasy RPGs in general, and Pathfinder in particular? Absolutely not! Just because it's a traditional element doesn't make it required to play in the slightest. But if you want to rip alignment out of a game where it already exists, actually has a function, and is sewn into the fabric of the setting, all you're going to do is rip the lining out of your blanket, and drop all the fluff on the floor.

And that isn't going to get you anywhere. Trust me.

I say this as someone who writes and tinkers with RPGs as a living... you are just going to make a colossal amount of work for yourself if you try to remove a functional alignment system. Instead, if it is such a problem for your table, consider playing a game that doesn't use alignment at all, or where it's a completely vestigial thing that will have no effect on the game. Or, if your only issue is a relatively minor component of how alignment works in your Pathfinder game (the aforementioned barbarian/paladin multiclass), dig through the rulebooks and ask questions on the forums... chances are good there's actually a way to do what you want without changing a single aspect of the rules as they're written.

It might be obscure, and it might be in the reams of optional rules that have been written for the game, but I can practically guarantee you that it's out there, and it's an option. Don't go in to remove an organ that's connected to so much stuff if there's a way to do what you want without elective surgery.

 

Also, before we go, I wanted to let everyone know I've got a new novel out from Eric Flint's Ring of Fire Press! If you've got a soft spot for cats, and you'd love a hard-hitting noir mystery set on the mean streets of New York City, then Leo's adventure in Marked Territory is definitely one that you don't want to miss.

Seriously, go get your copy today!

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday!

Again, for more of my work, check out my Vocal archive, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife or my latest short story collection The Rejects, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!

DMs, Learn To Take Your Foot Off The Brake

About a year and change ago, I was grumbling that no one was running LARPs for Changeling: The Lost out in my neck of the woods anymore. All of my friends sitting around the table agreed that it would be great if someone would step up and start a new game. Since all eyes were on me, I realized that since I was the one who spoke the desire aloud, I was the one who now had to make it a reality if I wanted it to happen.

And that was when the brainstorming began.

I spent the next several months laying the ground work for the setting, digging up all the digital copies of the books that I had, and talking to my players about the sorts of things they wanted to see. I incorporated those things into the overall sandbox, and started putting out the word that I was looking for even more players to populate the game once it was ready. As more folks expressed interest, though, I kept getting the same question over and over again.

"So what are the house rules you're using?"

And my answer was, with the exception of clarifying which double-printed merit I was using, none. I wanted to run the game as the book laid it out. If folks wanted to give their characters a certain fighting style, I was all for that. If they wanted to put together a bizarre combination of seeming and kith, or if they wanted to join an entitlement that was usually kept under lock and key, I would work with them to make sure they found an in for their character.

In short, it was my job to facilitate the characters my players actually wanted to have, and I did not see how laying out dozens of pages of provisos and conditions was going to help that.

At first I didn't think anything of it when my players smiled, happy that I'd told them absolutely, they can use this ability that's clearly in the book as long as they pay the XP cost for it. But it happened so many times that I started to realize something... practically everyone who signed up to play in my game is used to a storyteller saying no. Not, "as long as you use this responsibly," or, "eventually, once you've earned it," but just a flat-out no. No to mechanics that already exist in the book, and are more often than not a core part of the game. Mechanics that, on a larger scope, are just ripples in the pond in terms of the what they can do.

I would like to take today's entry to reach out to all the storytellers whose reaction is to say no. This message is for you.

Take Your Foot Off The Brake

Let the players drive. You're here to facilitate their fun.

For all the DMs out there who like to hold tight to the reins, and who are even now leaving comments about how you had to change X, Y, and Z mechanics because of your game structure, group, setup, etc. just stop, and take a moment to listen to what I've got to say. Don't get defensive, or make justifications, just listen to what I've got to say here; one DM to another.

First of all, as I've said before, if you are running a homebrew setting that deviates from the core material of a game in certain, meaningful ways, then obviously there are going to be absences or restrictions in order to make sure the setting and rules agree with each other. If your DND game takes place in a world with no angels, devils, or demons in existence, you don't have tieflings and aasimar as character options. That's simple cause and effect, and not what I'm talking about.

What I am talking about is balancing the scales. Whenever you change a game from how it's written and presented, you need to ask yourself what you're giving your players, and what you're taking away from them. Because every change that affects what mechanics players can use, what sort of characters they can play, etc., is directly taking away their options and limiting their choices. So, to compensate for taking something away, ask what you're giving them in return.

It might be something simple, such as running a world that's a majority human, but you make a bunch of different bloodlines so that different humans all have different and unique templates. You might want to run a Pathfinder game without guns or gun-capable classes, but instead of just ignoring the lore you rewind the world's timeline and run the game before the discovery of black powder so that players can experience the last days before Aroden died and the setting of Golarion was plunged into chaos. Whatever you're taking away needs to have a specific rationale, and it needs to be compensated for in some way if it impacts your players' choices.

Also, Let Your Players Feel Special

It's what keeps them coming back for more.

I said this back in If You Don't Want Your Players To Win, Get Out of The DM Chair!, but it bears repeating here. Every villain you field, and every challenge you present, is supposed to be overcome. The goal is not for you to stymie your players, or to make them bleed for every inch of ground they cover. This isn't a game of attrition where you grudgingly give your players a victory every now and again (unless they specifically signed up for that, naturally). Generally speaking, the players are supposed to win when all is said and done.

And, in line with that, they should feel special when they're doing it... because they're the main characters of this story!

I have lost track of the number of storytellers I've met who, because they were frustrated that their players were actually accomplishing the challenges they put in front of them, decided to start eliminating options or refusing to allow certain classes and abilities out of the core books of their games. I've seen World of Darkness STs who have dialed firearms down to pea shooters so they didn't "destroy" encounters too easily, Dungeons and Dragons DMs who have out-and-out refused to let rogues get their sneak attack because it's "too overpowered," and Pathfinder GMs who ban paladins entirely because they can't deal with smite as an ability.

If the reason you restrict things as a dungeon master or storyteller is so that the players don't win too easily, may I suggest instead that you stop giving them a steady diet of nails, and then act surprised when they hit them with a hammer?

But this is literally the problem I was made to solve!

Let's go back to Changeling for a moment. The game is a modern fantasy or modern horror, depending on how you spin the flavor, but that means it exists in the modern world. If you want to build the ultimate swordsman, or the most dangerous gunslinger, there is absolutely nothing stopping you from putting together a laundry list of abilities that turn you into death on two legs for any mortal opponent, and which would make you a significant threat even to other supernatural enemies.

What would I gain, as a storyteller, from stopping a player from pursuing those abilities?

Sure, it would mean I don't have a wizened Doc Holliday or an ogre version of Inigo Montoya to deal with, but what have I given my player in exchange? Nothing. It's possible that a player who wanted to field one of these concepts might play something different, but will their heart be in it the way it would have been if I'd said yes? Even if that yes came with conditions that staggered out their badassery, ensuring they had to complete training and character arcs to become that thing they sought? Probably not, because I asked them to settle for their second choice... and why? Because I didn't want a character that could shoot too well, or buckle too much swash?

This is a secret I have for all my fellow storytellers who can't take their foot off the brake; you always have a bigger trump card up your sleeve than your players do.

If a player builds a sniper, make a Predator for them to stalk and be stalked by. If you have a Conan, give them a brute mauler to contend with. If the player builds their character to be a shadow player of wealth and influence, create a corporation to act as their nemesis and challenge them. Don't negate their strengths outright, but present them something that challenges them. You can literally make anything, and you have access to unfettered resources! This goes double for tabletop games over LARPs, because it means everyone at the table will have a need to bring out their strengths, and they'll all get a moment to shine while pushing along the plot.

Does it take more work to do this? Absolutely. Can it get frustrating? Sometimes. But when you are the storyteller, your job is to facilitate everyone else at the table playing their characters and sharing in the story, not to take away their pens because you don't like the color they wanted to write in.

Closing Note

To make sure I'm crystal clear, here, I am not saying that DMs who homebrew their games are doing it wrong. I'm not saying that restricting player options means you're a bad DM. I am not saying there is only one right way to play a game. We can all literally do whatever we want, as long as it makes our tables happy.

What I am asking is for all the dungeon masters and storytellers to take a step back, and ask what reason they're using to justify changes at their tables when those changes negatively impact their players' options and choices. Are you legitimately making those changes because they improve the game, and make the setting or story better? Or are you making those changes to eliminate things you personally don't want to deal with, or because you think someone might misuse it in the future?

Because if it's all about you, then you might want to check with your players to see how your proposed changes impact them. The game should be about them and their characters, after all, because without the main characters all the setting and plot in the world won't make a single lick of difference.

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday! I have a feeling it will stimulate some spirited conversations, but this is something I felt should be put out there.

For more of my work, check out my Vocal archive, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife or my latest short story collection The Rejects, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!