Getting my players to get angry!

[Misfit KotLD]

Maybe some of them are sweet on some burb-dwelling civilians who get carted off or killed. A relative under suspicion of being a d-bee sympathizer (falsely) lands a PC in trouble.

Your question needs a bit more information about the party to get more detailed suggestions.

[Misfit KotLD]

For this one, your plot hooks should hit the characters below the belt. That requires history and personality.

[Prysus]

Greetings and Salutations. I'll agree that doing something personal is usually the best way. Though I'll throw out a random thought from what you've put so far ...

First, for this to work it'll help if they're loyal to the CS (that guy who has given everything for them).

Second, it might be nice if there is a commander or leader who they really trust and like!

Third, follow through with one of the things where their entire unit is wiped out (mass slaughter, didn't stand a chance!). They're the only survivors.

Fourth, they were NOT left for dead! Preferrably badly injured for the cause. They are found and treated at a medical facilities.

Fifth, arrested and persecuted. It's their fault that massacre happened! They disobeyed orders to try in a risky and dangerous maneuver. The CS did their best to give them support, but it was just a lost cause. The characters are blamed for the massacre by the commander listed in two of this list. This gives a good feeling of betrayal.

Sixth, it might be a nice touch if they can learn they were all set up specifically to take this fall. They may or may not have been expected to live. The reason for the setup can vary.

Okay, just a quick idea that sprung to mind as I read this. Note, I didn't really work out the details or anything like that. But sometimes one thing going wrong isn't enough. Sometimes it's just a lot of fun to pile it on. Anyways, random thought, take it or leave it. Keep in mind, the ideas are basically taking what is already there and just putting a couple together and adding a few extra notes. Thank you for your time and patience, please have a nice day. Farewell and safe journeys.

[Noon]

I have game that I am currently running where my players are coalition soldiers. I want to make the game a revenge epic by having them screwed over by the Coaltion and have them going to get revenge (crossing off a list of responsible officers). My problem lies in how to get the players screwed over to the point where they want revenge. What could the CS do that is so bad that my players would want to band together and get revenge?

I'll put it this way: How would you feel if someone was somehow trying to force you to get angry just because they want to and you haven't actually decided you want to, nor granted them any permission to push your buttons?

And if you could control how their characters act, it'd be pointless playing with them - they'd just be your marionettes.

In practical terms you can negotiate with them about a revenge game - but you can't just prescript it.

[johnkretzer]

Greetings and Salutations. I'll agree that doing something personal is usually the best way. Though I'll throw out a random thought from what you've put so far ...

First, for this to work it'll help if they're loyal to the CS (that guy who has given everything for them).

Second, it might be nice if there is a commander or leader who they really trust and like!

Third, follow through with one of the things where their entire unit is wiped out (mass slaughter, didn't stand a chance!). They're the only survivors.

Fourth, they were NOT left for dead! Preferrably badly injured for the cause. They are found and treated at a medical facilities.

Fifth, arrested and persecuted. It's their fault that massacre happened! They disobeyed orders to try in a risky and dangerous maneuver. The CS did their best to give them support, but it was just a lost cause. The characters are blamed for the massacre by the commander listed in two of this list. This gives a good feeling of betrayal.

Sixth, it might be a nice touch if they can learn they were all set up specifically to take this fall. They may or may not have been expected to live. The reason for the setup can vary.

Okay, just a quick idea that sprung to mind as I read this. Note, I didn't really work out the details or anything like that. But sometimes one thing going wrong isn't enough. Sometimes it's just a lot of fun to pile it on. Anyways, random thought, take it or leave it. Keep in mind, the ideas are basically taking what is already there and just putting a couple together and adding a few extra notes. Thank you for your time and patience, please have a nice day. Farewell and safe journeys.

Added to that make sure the commander gave the wrong orders....everybody knows it but since he is the son of somebody high up on the food chain the PCs are left to hang out and dry. So the official Story is they messed up ruining their rep...

[Misfit KotLD]

I have game that I am currently running where my players are coalition soldiers. I want to make the game a revenge epic by having them screwed over by the Coaltion and have them going to get revenge (crossing off a list of responsible officers). My problem lies in how to get the players screwed over to the point where they want revenge. What could the CS do that is so bad that my players would want to band together and get revenge?

I'll put it this way: How would you feel if someone was somehow trying to force you to get angry just because they want to and you haven't actually decided you want to, nor granted them any permission to push your buttons?

And if you could control how their characters act, it'd be pointless playing with them - they'd just be your marionettes.

In practical terms you can negotiate with them about a revenge game - but you can't just prescript it.

No, you can prescript it, but you have to know your players and their characters very well. Then you have to hit below the belt.

[Noon]

Misfit KotLD, so you've had GM's prescript your part in a game before, I take it? And you found it fun? Okayz then...I'd call it participationism, but if you found that fun, fair enough, you'd have others do unto you as you'd do unto them.

[johnkretzer]

Misfit KotLD, so you've had GM's prescript your part in a game before, I take it? And you found it fun? Okayz then...I'd call it participationism, but if you found that fun, fair enough, you'd have others do unto you as you'd do unto them.

Actualy I have to disagree with the intent here. The OP is looking for ways to not prescipt the PCs action to follow along a campaign idea. While I perfer alot more free form games with the players deciding the direction it is not that bad for the GM to set up a scenario for his PCs to react...it is how good railroading GMs railroad their players without seeing the tracks.

He asked how to put his PCs in situration so they will follow the campaign he wants to run...that is fair for a GM to do... Most game are run this way. The gamwes I enjoy( and possibly you) are alot to run for GMs.

If he was prescripting their action then he wouldn't have to ask how do evoke this emotion...

[Misfit KotLD]

Honestly, there's a difference between railroading and setting up the game to illicit a specific reaction. Aiming for a reaction requires knowing the party and what buttons to push. Railroading does not care.

[johnkretzer]

Misfit KotLD, so you've had GM's prescript your part in a game before, I take it? And you found it fun? Okayz then...I'd call it participationism, but if you found that fun, fair enough, you'd have others do unto you as you'd do unto them.

Actualy I have to disagree with the intent here. The OP is looking for ways to not prescipt the PCs action to follow along a campaign idea. While I perfer alot more free form games with the players deciding the direction it is not that bad for the GM to set up a scenario for his PCs to react...it is how good railroading GMs railroad their players without seeing the tracks.

He asked how to put his PCs in situration so they will follow the campaign he wants to run...that is fair for a GM to do... Most game are run this way. The gamwes I enjoy( and possibly you) are alot to run for GMs.

If he was prescripting their action then he wouldn't have to ask how do evoke this emotion...

Thank You, that is the point of this topic. No one is forcing them to go and get revenge, however I am creating a path that will enhance the stake of the game. If I make their losses more emotional their victories will mean more to them than just experience points. All in all - I am creating a villian. Instead of having an "enemy" that simply appears I am allowing the enemy to shape itself before their eyes. I am also adding excitement to the game becuase as of right now - they will never see it coming. Its the enemy from within. My players are expecting to fight magic, monsters, and dbees and they could do this all day with the might of Coalition forces behind them however I want them to rely on their individual prowess by stripping them of their safety canopy (the coalition). How is that railroading?

Heck it is even a better campaign than I thought. It is very similar to a idea I had once. But in D&D...create a campaign world start a normal campaign...than about 4th level have the Dragon Empire(from the Dragon Star campaign setting made by Fantasy Flight games...basicaly D&D in space) take over the planet.

This is not railroading. Events in the campaign world will happen that can have a very profound effect on the PC that are beyond the PCs control. How they react to it is completely up to them.

I take back my early comment from before you are not railroading them. Good luck with your campaign.

[Gamer]

Have to agree railroading is very different from what misfit is describing.
prescripting an event just to create a reaction from the players is not and never has been railroading.
say the players are framed for something they didn't do while on the tolkeen battlefront and are captured, someplace along the way they escape.
The coalition unable to find the party decides to arrest and kill the "traitors" families as an example.
This is not railroading this is creating a campaign plotline and I'd be suprised if every GM didn't do this at least once.
You see such revenge plotlines all the time in movies.
I would never feel railroaded from this, it is just simply the gm tugging at players heartstrings to solicit a responce he needs to get the real story going.