Was I too much of a dick?

I was DMing a game, and as I was wrapping it off, I really pissed off one one of my players.

Near the beginning of the campaign, I established that good people went to Elysium when they died, which was like a heavenly, idyllic plain where people were young forever and crops never failed, and animals were all tame and peaceful, etc. At the heart of Elysium is the castle of the king of the gods, who allows only the finest warriors to live in his halls, where they drink and feast and spar eternally, training for the final battle between good and evil. However, each person will be asked whether their strength comes from steel or flesh, and be judged accordingly whether or not they may enter. I'm sure most of you will immediately get where this idea was taken from.

So at the end of the campaign, each of the characters who died, I narrated them standing before the god, petitioning to join his hall.

In-character, they were not standing together, but the players were, so everyone could hear eachother's answers.

So the first walks in. The god says "I hear you are a mighty warrior, but from where comes your strength: your flesh or your steel?" He answers along the lines "Flesh falters, but steel is eternal. Only a fool would put his faith in something that is temporary." The god nods and allows him in.

The next player comes in with his dead character, and is asked the same question and gives almost the exact same answer. The god scoffs and says "I have heard this answer before! Someone gave it to him!" And throws him out of the hall.

Another player, for his first character answered "Flesh" and the god implied that his strength has left him, because his flesh was no longer a part of him. He insisted that he duel one of the god's champions to prove his strength hadn't left him, succeeded and was let in.

His second dead character answered "My strength comes from neither flesh nor steel but from the fires of righteous fury" and was let in instantly.

Cont'd

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/cV0tCphFMr8?t=1m6s
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

So obviously there was no right or wrong answer, and the God just wanted to know that each of his warriors had gained some wisdom during his life, and had a bold enough heart to state his convictions.

But the player who wasn't let in, kept complaining that he was singled out, even though I told him that he didn't succeed because his answer wasn't original.

It really put a damper on the closing mood, and I feel pretty bad about it.

Did I do wrong?

Maybe you should've said to the player "you're really just gonna say what the other player said?" To give him a hint?

>Did I do wrong?

Yeah. It's really stupid and immersion breaking to have the god judge based on originality when people have been dying and coming to be judged there 5ever. And since the players weren't together in character, it's not like his character actually got the answer from the former. Seems like you were playing the god as you for a moment there instead of the in inverse deity.

Nah, it's cool, the metagaming cunt needed to learn a lesson.

It was cuntish

Pretty much this. The fault lies in both of you, OP. Repeating the same sentence was a kinda lame move but even if he's not a very creative person or wasn't in the mood for it the other players could at least help him to come up with a line.

Maybe you should have had them write their answers and give them to you if you didn't want them to copy each other. I understand kind of why you did it, but it was sort of dickish. I mean, when I first read the story I thought the answer would be some form of "strength from within" and sure enough, that was one of the answers. It doesn't seem unreasonable that two people would have basically the exact same answer.

And besides, maybe he couldn't think of a better answer because he agreed completely and was going to answer that anyway.

I'd have given the guy a second chance;

"I want your words, not some parroted mutterings! Speak, or be thrown to Tartarus!"