Did I go over the top, or did the player?

[Epically]

Hey guys, we had a problem in my last game with a veteran player, so I just wanted a broader opinion from outsiders.

I've been DMing for maybe 6 months, if that, now. Currently on my 4th or 5th Ravenloft specific session.

What happened in game was the players came across staff of the serpent (adder). Before they identified, one the players had extracted the poison to test what it was through his herbalism. I announced it was death poison. Player announced he wanted to keep the jar "just in case" to which i said that's fine.

Later on in the game the player extracted more of the poison. I asked the player to make a 1% powers check, because you're knowingly extracting a death poison (never annoucing, even when asked, if the extractin was for purposes to look for a cure). Player then had a huge spat and called me an incompetent DM and said I can't handle veteran players. Resulted in player announcing that he swallows the whole vial of death poison and left.

Was I out of line for issuing a 1% powers check?

[ewancummins]

You are the DM, and therefore you are by definition right on rules calls.
Since you are asking for feedback, though:
I would have handled that differently. I don't think merely collecting some snake venom is worth a powers check. That would be true IMC even if the PC intended to keep the stuff for a vague 'just in case' and not for making antivenin. Only actually poisoning someone, or at least trying to do so, would warrant a powers check. Merely possessing a quantity of poison isn't ‘powers check worthy’ in and of itself. It is the deliberate act of murdering somebody with poison that may draw the attention of the DPs.

On other hand, the player’s reaction seems over the top. I don’t know your DMing style. I wasn’t at the table, and I don’t know either of you, so it’s hard for me to judge why he reacted like that. Did he ask you to reconsider it? Did he say something like ‘’could we talk about this during the break or after the game”’—or did he just get angry and have his guy commit suicide right then and there? Did you take a moment to listen to his reasoning on the matter, or just overrule him right away? Has arguing and rules lawyering been a problem at your table, or is this kind of disagreement unusual? PC suicide and quitting the game seems like a disproportionate reaction to a DM ad hoc judgment that had a 99% chance of not affecting his PC. Were there problems with this player before? Have you had similar clashes or arguments with other players?

Note- I roll powers checks in secret, so my players never know—unless they fail and figure it out when changes occur. Of course, this also gives me a little more time to consider the circumstances, work out the effects, etc. I’m pretty experienced at running Ravenloft, so I’m confident that my players will find my rulings fair and sensible on things like Powers Checks. As you get used to running RL, I think you’ll develop a strong sense of how you want to handle these things, and you can communicate that sense as needed to your players. It takes some time to get used to powers checks, curses mechanics, and all that extra Ravenloft stuff.

YMMV, as always

[Jester of the FoS]

I've played with many incompetent DMs. There have been many bad calls, some that have cost me characters. And sometimes I've had three or four times as much rule or game knowledge as the DM.
I've argued. I've shouted. I've whined.
I've never called a DM incompetent. And I've never waved my greater knowledge in a DM's face.
That's a huge dick move.

Good riddance. Find a new player, won't be hard to get a better one.

[alhoon]

No, asking for a -1%- PCheck for extracting a deadly poison isn't an act of DM impotency nor justifies a huge scene and namecalling.

IMO, 1% for extracting poison is harsh. I would give the 1% when the player used the poison to attack or up it to "grievious assault" or even murder if he used it out of combat. Not for extracting it though.

Of course, I wouldn't call the DM names over such a minor issue.

[Epically]

The character was LE. OOG, I knew that the player was extracting the poison for the CN rogue in the group. Helping the rogue poison foes is, in my opinion, fairly evil, but not evil enough to constitute more than 1%.

Like I said, I'm still extremely new to RL, but I thought that was pretty straight forward. :-/

[Rock of the Fraternity]

Given that bit of background information, I don't think a Powers Check was uncalled-for.

The player's response was over-the-top, in my opinion. And remember: even a highly experienced player can be a munchkin and a rules-lawyer.

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

Yeah, I probably would have waited until he used the poison for the powers check, but that's debatable. What's not debatable is that the DM is the referee and decides the rulings. What's also not debatable is to treat the people playing a game with you with respect and to act like an adult and not a tantrum-throwing toddler. You may or may not have made a wrong rules call, with a very minor effect, big deal. Your player went beyond the line.

(Of course, all we have to go on is your side of things, and you may not be objective, but that's how it sounds based on what you wrotw.)

[starfalconkd]

Wow.
I'd like to say that whether you were right or wrong in asking for the powers check (you were right) his reaction was utterly ridiculous. Throwing a temper tantrum like that isn't the response of a veteran player, it's the response of a brat. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing, even with getting vehemently annoyed, or arguing. Drinking the poison and storming out is just petulant and stupid.
Be thankful you are rid of a bad player. Don't feel bad as this obviously had nothing to do with you, this person clearly has issues. Just move on.
If he comes back, by the way, and you allow him to join your game again, I recommend being very clear that this type of behavior is not acceptable. What he did was highly disruptive to the game and ruins everyone's experience.

[Manofevil]

Off topic and I've no clue where you went with the game afterwards but if you and your PCs are still dealing with the staff, you could add an extra curse to it. Maybe the more venom a character extracts from the staff, the more that character feels the need to taste that venom. See you could just write that into the game. Make for interesting play. You could also bring the character in question back as an NPC dead thing of your choice. See, you can build off this.

[Epically]

To be honest, I've been thinking of just calling it quits with DMing all together. I was running night of the walking dead earlier on in the campaign. Here's a snippet of a different player playing.

They arrive in town during a funeral. After the funeral, the necro is in the church. Since they've arrived, they've been called "outsiders" and have received a fairly bad reaction. The necro decides he wants to read the book on the podium to find out if it's an evil god they're worshipping, even after I told him he recognises the deity symbols as LG.
Regardless, still tries to read the book. Conversation plays out something like this:

Villager: "What are you doing?"
Necro: "Reading the book."
V: "You can't do that, only the priest can."
N: "Yes I can, you can read it in any church."
V: "Not here. Only the priest can."
N: "I can read what I want you bunch of heathens."

At this point, the villager calls for the sheriff, who comes in and enquires what's going on. Necro then calls the the sheriff a heretic and continues to see he can read the book.
Sheriff warns the outside if he keeps this up, he'll lock him up for the night for disturbing the peace, especially on the day of the funeral. He quietens.

Now, surely at this point you have the same view as me, which the village currently has a huge negative reaction towards the necro.

Later on they're at the inn, and the necro tells the fighter/cleric (who is half-elf) to put his hood on and let know one see his face. I asked why, to which he said non-humans have bad reaction adjustments (which his charactor did know), so he should hide his face. I said, doing that is just going to as bad a reaction, because he's acting shadey and openly secretive. Argued that people in those times did that kind of thing all the time to which I said yes, but they don't get the best treatment because people don't trust them because they have no idea who they're talking to.
This went on for about 10 minutes until I just said GM ruled it, it's happening, we're continuing. Bit of a huff, and we continue.

After they settle in, 3 of them go off to find a blacksmith, while the necro sits in the inn, reading a small book he got from the church. Know where he's reading this book? There's one other person in this inn, also reading. He goes and sits RIGHT NEXT TO HIM, and starts reading, without saying a word to the guy. Guy is obviously creeped out and doesn't talk to him much, and Necro doesn't understand why.

Later he decides he wants to go to the cemetary. He finds the priest and starts asking about how many crypts and masoleums, how many family ones there are, who's died recently, etc etc. I said to player, you realise you are asking incredibly creepy questions to a person you met a few hours ago, and you're status in this town is only getting worse. Player knows.

Last thing, which was the ice on the cake, where I just lost it and he ended up quitting was they found the sheriff at a crime scence. The crime scene was inbetween two houses, dried blood splattered on the walls, a large pool of dried blood, and a single piece of red licorice in the centre of the pool (a couple of the players heard a rumor that the sheriff at found a piece of red licorice at 4 seperate crime scenes).
The necro, no word of a lie, announces he's going to eat the licorice. He then asks me if he needs to make a powers check. I flipped it at this point and told him no, he didn't need to make a powers check but he did need to make a retarded check because it was the most moronic thing I have ever seen in gaming. I then just told him it it's more than obvious he is purposely disrupting the game at this point. He said he was because I had been picking on him. I told him no, I reacted accordingly to the actions you've done since entering this down you have never been in before.
He argued again, and then left. We played for a little while longer after that, but the mood was long gone for all players and me.

My DMing never works out now I have practically no one to play with.

[Mortavius]

It sounds to me like you have a difficult situation there. I sympathize; I just went through one myself.

On the subject of the Powers Check, another way to look at it would be this: Would you punish a player for collecting daggers? After all, a dagger can be used to kill someone quite easily. I personally, would not. To me, it's the action that matters. When the PC takes that dagger and stabs the innocent peasant in the chest while sleeping, now that's worth a Powers Check.

I find Powers Checks are really tricky things. An individual DM has to decide what's evil and what isn't, in some cases. For example, some would argue that the use of poison is evil, no matter what. But why is that? Poison itself is generally no eviler than a sword; it's certainly not a thinking entity (again, generally). So if you had a character who scrupulously only ever used poison on evil monsters, is that the same as the assassin who uses it on innocents?

It boils down to a DM judgement; in my games, I generally go with the intent behind the action to rule if there's a Powers Check. Hopefully that might help you a bit, at least.

[Jester of the FoS]

Reading what else you've written you do come off as a bit of a rookie DM. Which is fine, as everyone was a rookie sometime. But a true veteran player would help you be a better DM, enabling you and not picking a fight.

If you want to be a better DM you have to keep at it. And do some reading. Read the DMG, even guides for other game systems.
Look for a copy of Robin Laws' book on good Gamemastery.

You can grab a copy of the Pathfinder book here

I'd recommend working with the players. They're playing to have fun, and you're there to enable their fun.
Not everything has to be logical all the time, and sometimes you can overlook actions. Think of it like planning a movie. Ask yourself "is the scene, or encounter (role-playing or a fight), or moment interesting? Or would it be in the deleted scenes on the DVD? Sometimes, if the result would be detracting, you just let it slide.

Likewise, if the players are doing something silly, don't point that out as the DM. Never criticize their plans or action. It's their characters, and they like to have some control. Instead, speak through the NPCs or have them react in your place. When someone throws a hood over their face in an inn have the barmaid comment. "Why does your friend have a hood? He's not a wanted man, is he?"

[Jester of the FoS]

On the subject of the Powers Check, another way to look at it would be this: Would you punish a player for collecting daggers? After all, a dagger can be used to kill someone quite easily. I personally, would not. To me, it's the action that matters. When the PC takes that dagger and stabs the innocent peasant in the chest while sleeping, now that's worth a Powers Check.

Collecting daggers could be part of a physical collection. Or for self defence. If you're collecting poison, the only reason is pre-meditated murder. Even if attacked, poison coated daggers means you're going for a kill not giving attackers a chance to flee.

[Epically]

Using poison on a blade, is like using a rusty bayonet. It's highly illegal, appointed by the Geneva Convention, because if they survive their wound, they could easily die from something like tetnus; which makes the death more painful and inhumane.

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

OK, so it's becoming clearer and clearer that you and your players want different things from this campaign. You've got an LE character, a CN rogue, and a Necromancer, whose alignment you didn't give, but based on behavior, I'm guessing CE. This is clearly a party built for one of three purposes:

a) A thoughtful exploration of the nature of evil, playing out the slide into damnation
b) A journey of redemption, repentant former bad guys trying to change and do good, while fighting their evil instincts.
c) burning villages, amassing power, having fun, and kicking butt.

I'm guessing the players want C and you want A or B. That ain't gonna work.

Playing evil (or even CN) characters in Ravenloft is a very difficult prospect, even for the most experienced players and DMs. The setting just isn't built for it. The rules, and most modules, including NotWD, assume the players are the good guys. The powers check system is meant to be a warning to heroes straying from the straight and narrow. From the sounds of things, nearly everything these guys want to do is going to merit at least one powers check, if you strictly enforce those rules.

Now, no one's going to stop you if you and your players want to use the Ravenloft backdrop as a playground for a group of loveable bad guys taking out their aggression on the clueless populace. But you've all got to be on the same page. I recommend sitting down with your group and talking about what kind of campaign you are all looking for. If you want The Others, and they want Pulp Fiction, no one will be happy. Either you need to accommodate them, by loosening up on the moralizing and "realistic" responses to their sociopathy, or they need to work up some new characters that fit your world. Maybe you can even find somewhere in the middle to meet.


(I will say that regardless of the style you're going for, you've given the half-elf quite a Hobson's choice there: "They don't like Half-Elves, so you'd better hide your face, but they don't like people hiding their faces, so they aren't going to trust you." That sort of thing may be realistic, but it effectively says, "You can't play the kind of character you want to and still be involved in the social parts of the game." And besides, it's just a half-elf. It's not that bizarre.)