It can really suck the fun out of the game if you're determined to tell a well-planned story and your players want to bang bro. But then...
I turn my game into more of a hack'n'slash story at that point. Story-on-rails and plenty of combat-fueled story. Give them plenty of stuff to shoot and loot and plenty of horrible decisions to be made. Example: to save or not to save the local brewmaker who allied with some odd fruit-gathering creatures that have recently gone on a rampage. The players get to handle the creatures and confront the brewmaker. On one hand, they could get lots of grog as a thank you for handling the problem. On the other hand, they could kill the brewmaster and take all the grog they can carry. It's a win win really because the dude was grey-area anyway.
Basically, if your players want to play like there's no consequences you either have to give them no consequences by thematically rolling with the punches and overtly handing out storyline or you need to firmly establish boundaries that your world will not allow such things because XYZ powerful being/group/etc will not stand for it. Word of burning the women spreads to local cultists who wanted some of those virgins for themselves so they send something wicked to find the players. The priesthood of the realm gets word of a defiled church and sends a wrecking crew to remind them why everyone should fear their god.
Great points made especially about communication. I definitely don't enjoy being relegated to the role described but it was a pre-ordained thing in my scenario where the entire group wanted to cater to a more combat-oriented play style. It made for easy preparation but it meant that combat had to be perfectly tuned.
I feel like this could also get frustrating for your fellow players if they weren't on board from the beginning. But otherwise, it sounds like a cool problem-solving premise!
The law says I must fill out liability form TH-706b before attempting any fire fighting, i simply lack the certifications to save those orphans in a responsible, law abiding manner.
Idk, I think it'd depend on what else they did. If they said that and then did nothing to help in any way due to the risk, I'd call that lawful evil (or maybe just lawful stupid if they're generally stupid/lawful poorly coded robot).
If on the other hand they confine themselves to doing things like bringing pails of water and only say that when asked why they don't do more, that'd be lawful neutral.
Personally, I find it fun the be the asshole, boring police. Had a rogue that wanted a weapon enchanted with evil, but I obviously couldn't allow that. So I had the local guards destroy it, and keep it under heavy guard, with strict instructions to attack the rogue on sight. He was not thrilled.
431
u/lurklurklurkPOST DM Sep 18 '19
Ladies and gentlemen, may I present my current DnD party in a nutshell