The players try to derail the Game Master's plot

>The players try to derail the Game Master's plot

>look! I rolled a nat20! I totally just convinced the guard captain to suck my dick! huehueheuhahaha! You HAVE to let it happen now! I rolled a 20 and whenever that happens on Critical Roll and in the Veeky Forums greentexts i read, something awesome happens. If you DON'T have the guard captain suck my dick, you're a bad DM!"

>The GM pre-prepared a full "plot" and his campaign will fall apart if they don't guide the game along a predetermined series of events

Kinda had it coming desu senpai

>having a plot
nice railroad, you failed writer

>Defying the Game Master

I think more DMs would do well to learn how to bury their stinkers a bit better.

I've seen way too many games peter out in the past because the players were cold on the GM's grand plans but didn't have any other meaningful hooks to bite. Generally speaking I think it's good practice to recognize that if the players aren't actually very interested in fighting the dreaded orc warboss in session 1 they're not going to be any more interested in him in session 13.

Good GM practice is knowing when to end a story a bit earlier than intended, let the heroes complete a weak thread ahead of schedule, and try again with the next one.

Dan the Zombie Man is pretty good at burying stinkers. Like coroners.

In my experience it's more often about tone rather than plot specifics. Some players don't care for a peppy light-hearted tone, others don't care for a gritty realistic one. It can be the 'tone' of how the GM handles the mechanics too - detail-oriented ultra simulationist through to playing very fast and loose and handwaving a lot of stuff. Might even be the GM themselves - a reserved, austere GM who doesn't do character voices can be dull, while others might be put off by The GM Of A Thousand Stereotypical Accents.

Sometimes the group dynamics are poor too. People don't always gel, especially nerdlings.

>Player mockingly apologizes for "derailing my plot"
>The entire party has been 100% predictable in their actions.
Why do they keep doing this?

God I love the recent love for Dan here on Veeky Forums.
Bet I'll get use out of that image since I'm having the BBEG of my current campaign be a Dan expy.

Impeccable taste, user.

The Game Master derails the players' plot

I want Genm to leave.

>eight sessions and twelve fights in
>"What do I add to my attacks again?"

>campaign on its fifth year
>what goes into my damage bonus?
>does combat advantage stack with my feats?
>does dual wielding shields give me +4AC?
>does this count as flanking?
>how do i calculate passive perception?

...

>having a plot

>Not always plotting

EVERYTHING IS DAN

how DO you calculate passive perception.
it is the one thing i can never remember.

...

Your perception bonus + 10

>Then I guess I'm a bad DM. Deal with it fucker.

...

>be dm
>long time player wants to play a wizard
>iknowicantrusthim.zip
>player roleplays his way out of shackles
>roll to see if guards are watching
>8
>"I cast ice storm into the crowd of innocent people"
> guards see you casting and approach, grabbing your hands and breaking your wrists
I know I'm an asshole for doing it Ian, but I've been writing this for weeks and planning it for months. Get out of here with your bullshit.

Let them feel smart

I consider the players derailing the plot to be a success on their part, and am always happy with it. Then again, I don't think of the plot as "how the whole story is going to go", it's "the literal plot of the antagonists". If the plot moved along smoothly, that means the players were sitting on their asses and doing nothing while the bad guys' plans went through and succeeded.

Instead of trying to come up with a story, just come up with a setting, antagonists, their goals, and how they plan to achieve those goals. Then it's just a matter of how they react (or don't) to the interference of the players (or lack of). The "story" is what happens in that back and forth.

ITT: faggots who like railroading and don't give two shits about playing a game

Who is this?

>solve gm's puzzle as soon as he finishes explaining
>he visibly saddens and calls it quits for the day

I mean if you play d20 you kind of deserve this.

>the GM has a plot

It is not the place of the GM to write a plot. It is the place of the GM to furnish a world with ideas and react to the PCs.

"Natural 20" is my least favourite meme

I don't know about OP, but when I say 'plot' I mean plot in the old sense, as in evil scheme hatched by the villains of the setting. The 'plot' is what will happen if the players sit on their arses and do nothing, because the bad guys aren't going to sit around and wait for them.

Well, surely you need at least some hooks and a rough outline. Unless the players come to you with an idea (i.e. "we want to do a campaign where we...") they'll usually be the reactionary ones.

Enjoy sitting at a table while a bunch of deer stare into headlights.

>not improvising shit to make your players' bullshit work to further the game, if not the plot

I have fond memories of an Exalted session that started with the players as mortals breaking out of a prison in Chiarascuro. One guy decided he was over the whole thing and was going to use his shoes as weapons. So I had him exalt as a Chosen of Journeys. We had a grand old time fleshing out the traveler's cult he was going to maintain on the sly, and their use of elaborately decorated weaponized shoes as symbols of their devotion.

Mind you my group then couldn't stick with anything but 3.5 for more than a day, so not a great example.

This is only warrented when you promise it ahead of time. Whenever any of my players want to do something physically possible but mechanically or practically infeasible, I tell them they can have it on a 20. Had one player throw a spear and take out the captain of an airship during a skirmish. On any other roll he would have missed, but I promised it ahead of time.

>the players are a bunch of shitty idiots
more like.

Unless the GM is extremely shit and thinks that he's the best thing since sliced bread, there is literally no reason to try and derail a game.

No, doing something that the character would do and pursue does not constitude conscious derailing of the game.

>the players are faced with a cheap glass mechanically locked door to an apartment complex

>this was two sessions ago and the city is now on fire

>this was in shadowrun

My GM is VERY improv-heavy. It's hard to derail a plan that barely exists.

Nigga this.

Me too. I have mastered the vague planning ahead but never having a plot. I occasionally railroad a little bit but only when I have had absolutely enough of the characters' shenanigans.

Dan the (Dangerous) Zombie Man.

A psychopath who considers himself the "Game Master" and fucking chews that scenery while doing so.

I'll never get bored of saying it, that's one of the best suits in years

The whole series has good suits, honestly, once you get a feel for the aesthetic.

Tbh honest nothing quite beats Decade for me desu

Yeah, but that was 8 years ago, user.

And let me ruin that for you.

I hate you.

...

So, was this a real thread or just a thinly veiled excuse for Danposting?

What do you think, user?

Didn't he get btfo like three times now?

I-it's all part of his plan! You'll see!

All that matters is that his henshin looks sexy as fuck.

>It's a "I rolled natural 20 60 times in a single session at every single exact Moment I needed it" greentext