Play Like You Have To! > GM Gameology
Ever had to retcon your game?
SneeR:
We've all been there: The dice are rolling terribly, you rule unfairly, you gget your facts mixed up, or the plot just goes wrong.
Sometimes, DMing is not rewarding, and sometimes you walk away wondering if anyone actually had fun in that last session. It's unfortunately bound to happen: Even masters roll a natural 1, 5% of the time.
So my question is this: have you ever had to retcon a campaign?
By retcon I mean saying flat-out to your players, "That didn't happen; this is what happened."
He died? No he didn't
They got lost in the useless, unfun subplot? Not actually.
They sundered the rod and TPK'd? No, turns out its hardness was higher than expected.
Something too uncomfortable happen to a character? No, it didn't.
What exactly did you retcon? Why? How did your players react?
Example:
[spoiler]
--- Quote ---I am forced to recall the first session of one campaign where I needed to railroad the characters into dying so they could come back to life with the ability to overcome some homebrewed demon immunities. Unfortunately, the cool ooportunity to kill the PCs came and went with the big boss demon marching through a battlefield and not killing the PCs. After 2 hours of doing their best to survive, I finally killed them in a hopeless battle with a nameless demon 8 CR above them.
The players came to me and said that they were intrigued by the campaign's premise, but that that first game got sour really fast when it was apparent they were dead 2 hours before it happened.
So, in the next session, I said, "Alright, what actually happened was the big boss demon waded through the battlefield and slew each of you with one casting of her death sphere spell-like ability. All of you died instantly. I want you to forget about everything that happened after that point."
That game is still going 1 year later, and all of my players love it.
--- End quote ---
[/spoiler]
So, what do you think of retconning? Should a DM be allowed to do it? Have you ever seen it abused? Have you ever seen it used to the benefit of the campaign? Tell me what happened, and what your thoughts were!
Bozwevial:
I have a friend who was recently in a game session where the PCs were framed for murder. The scene originally took place in a crowded street. My friend, as a changeling, was going to use a Shadow Hand maneuver to escape into the crowd and then disguise herself. In response, the DM changed the details of the scene so that there were only a few people in the crowd.
That's the sort of retconning I dislike.
Necrosnoop110:
This is one of those things that can work or can come off horrible. Haven't had the need for it yet but wouldn't be 100% against it - I'd only use as a last resort and only if the campaign was effectively unworkable without it. With minor mistakes (we all make them) I usually just tell the PCs flat out I messed up (or even better: "we were doing it wrong") and from now on things will work like x, y, or z.
At times if I've done something wrong I've had them "do over" a situation and I think PCs feel less cheated than "forcing" them to some plot monster's end.
I have decent abilities to ad lib and correct things on the fly. More often than not a "mistake" can be turned into a positive with enough creativity.
Peace,
Necro
Bloody Initiate:
I have a really frustrating memory problem which creates a tendency to completely ditch plans I make without meaning to. I'll plan something awhile but the time I have to wait to make my first move frequently makes me forget and go off on a new line. I don't have to retcon much, but I have gotten good at steering things back from sidetracks. I often have to "show my cards" and explain myself to people so that they can help me remember OR understand why the plot makes on-the-fly course adjustments. Retconning is just a bit too drastic usually though, and I'd rather live with a mistake than rewind. Usually I explain what happened to people later so they understand the fumbles.
I've always preferred to be up front and honest whenever possible. I think this is a good and bad thing when I'm GMing, because it definitely breaks immersion for the players. However I think it's rare for my players to feel cheated or feel as if things are working in a way they shouldn't. Even when I've created a highly-specific takedown for one player (For example if they're getting too much spotlight because of how their character is built) the player didn't seem to resent it.
Ikeren:
Usually small combat thigns, only for the purpose of following rules. "That attack did hit, then, since I screwed up X. Steve heals the 13 damage he took last round, in that case."
I have had serious fumbles; like creating an entire guerilla war plot against the Pythins, at which point the players, in an open world campaign, decided it was hopeless case. I then improvised the next like 7 hours, where powerful magic became the reason and excuse for a lot of bad stuff, but they saw it and saw why. It wasn't because they didn't think they'd have fun doing it, it was because they thought their characters would not do it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version