Tantalus (but at least I don't have Sisyphus)

 

So the 3-4 way Patron clash I was anticipating, expecting and looking forward to, failed to materialise.

The fickle Xanathar, perfectly in keeping with the Crime Lords paranoid nature, decided not to attempt to steal the item.

Dashing Jarlaxle completely forgot about it as well, he had bigger fish to fry.

Leaving only Force Grey to follow up on it.

To hilarious effect.

And reflecting on this I realised that when you turn over more control of your campaign to the players, these sorts of situations will occur more often.

As much as the Quantum Ogre is lambasted, it does seem that decisions in games like this enter something of a Quantum state/super position, or maybe something more like Schrodinger's Orders.

No matter how much we joke, cajole or discuss potential actions on the discords Patron Channels. They do not become real tangible actionable things until the final orders are submitted.

*********

As I was reminding myself about the myth in this very ham-fisted title, which simply exists because I didn't want it to be 'Blue Balling the DM' or something equally as worthy of a Neckbeardia rpg-horror story.

I realised that the tale of Sisyphus could also be applied to the [Current Edition] of the hobby.

For Sisyphus the DM, that boulder is Game Prep. 

Not the level of prep where one details a starting village and the first few levels of a dungeon, but the level of prep where they are planning out 'story beats', vast expanding worlds and sprawling relationship webs of NPC motivations.

A level of over-prep which leads them to being derided as "failed novelists", as near 90% of the work they put in will never be seen, used or interacted with by the Players (the rock rolls down) and they now have to scramble to fill out the area of the world the players suddenly decided to go.

Hoping, that this time the things they prep will be utilised. 

Back up the hill they go.

As for Sisyphus the Player, that boulder is DM Fiat.

While 'DM fiat' might not be the correct term, I'm using it in the above context as short hand for the arbitrary nature of the games that hand-wavy Rule Zero/Rule of Cool narrative DM's run. Especially, in current edition games where Milestone levelling is used.

Incorrectly I might add, as pointed out by RTFM chairman KraftyMattKraft.

With Milestone levelling, the players have no way of quantifying when and how they level up. 

When saving 1 princess allowed them to level up, but saving 3 princesses didn't. Most allow the player to level up after successfully completing 'an adventure', but what constitutes an adventure is different as the characters grow in power.

Hunting rats in the basement of the local taproom, is an 'adventure' for low level characters.

While, fighting through an evil horde, slaying its Master and closing the portal to the plane of Death and Madness is an 'adventure' for high level characters.

In some cases the Player may be under the impression that completing the current Quest would allow them to level up, but the DM decides to level them up midway through the session. Not because they've earned it, but because the DM thought they'd be too under powered to tackle the Boss Battle they'd created.

What else adds mass to the Players boulder is trying to please the DM.

Player 1 states they are attempting something awesome, the DM decides this is cool and cinematic so allows it to occur.

Player 2 (in the same session or a different session) states they are attempting something similar to what Player 1 has previously done. The DM decides that this will require more effort, or is impossible to happen, not because the conditions of the test have changed much, but because it wouldn't really work for the scene.

Trying to gain Advantage or Inspiration are examples where this sort of thing can occur.

With trying to move these boulders, is it any wonder their games burnout after 6 sessions.

[Next Poast]