So I was thinking if I GM and when all the tokens are dark side tokens. Not to use them at all so the players can't then use light side.

Dirty move?

yep. your job is not to stop the players, but to facilitate their enjoyment. stop thinking in d20 terms...

So I was thinking if I GM and when all the tokens are dark side tokens. Not to use them at all so the players can't then use light side.

Dirty move?

Yes, unless your job is Antagonistic GM. As GM it is important you keep up the flow of the game, so it is just as important that you spend DS tokens as the players spend LS tokens. How would you feel if the players did the same to you?

Not only should you not hoard... you should spend them like water. Drag them through the mud. Make one section of the session a mini Empire Strikes Back, where nothing goes right for the PCs. Then they will have light side tokens back, and spend them like water.

Dirty move.

I had a GM (D20 by the way) that made it his mission to try and kill a character a session. He did not like one of the players, a good friend of mine. So he let him live until the last session, the end of a epic game we were playing. He did every dirty, stinking, cheat (kinda like not letting players use Light Side Tokens...) he could think of to kill my buddy, causing a complete group kill in the process. He then proceeds to brag to other players and GM's how he killed us all. Needless to say it was one of the worst experiences in gaming I have had. I Have NO problem dying, in the cause of a good game or story. To die like that, in a cheap dirty manner, just stinks to high heaven. We dumped that GM, and found another one. Our new GM turned out to be one of our best friends, could tell a great story, and when a character died in his story it meant something.

So no, I don't think that is cool...at all.

It depends, I suppose, on what kind of game you are running to some extent, and your style of GMing.

If your view is that you are playing AGAINST the players, and you truly want them to fail, then that is your prerogative.

But if you are playing WITH the players, that is, if your goal is for everyone to have fun and NOT to "win", then this seems like an odd way to play.

And even if you are trying to "win", this seems like a kind of meta, real-world way to go about defeating your players.

Personally I would ask myself, "is this fun for my players? Will they have a good time if I do this?"

But I do recognize that some GMs don't think this way and aren't GMing for this reason. The question remains though, just from a social perspective: why are your players invested? What do they want out of the experience?

Dirty move - it's from an antagonistic mindset, which should totally not be the case when it comes to GMing.

I don't know if you have any experience with Fate, Savage Worlds, or Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay but these "story points", for lack of a better term, are an economy that works best for both sides when there's constant motion. You want your characters to be heroic. You want them to matter. In my humble opinion a good GM is a facilitator of fun and narrative progression, rarely an adversary. There's plenty of room in the mechanics to add a little...gm flair here and there...that's what misfortune dice are for ...but going out of your way to prevent your players from having access to Destiny Points is a quick path to a Bad Time. And anyways, those points aren't benefiting you either if you just sit on them like a hen. It's a wasted resource and mechanic at that point.

TL;DR do not invest points in the Dark Side talent "That Guy".

I wont call it dirty, but I would think of it perhaps as unproductive or as neglecting a fun aspect of the system. I've always found the use of "story points" as a great way of making the game feel more dynamic, and blocking them takes that experience away. I think Keeop described them and their roll well.

Yeah, if a GM I was playing with did this, at the very least there would be a talk afterward. If it turned out that he was doing it on purpose instead of due to inexperience, it would be the last time he GMed or even gamed with the group.

Remember, the gaming group is playing with you, not for you.

If you want o do this then just don't use the force points. Be upfront about it.

Dirty move.

I had a GM (D20 by the way) that made it his mission to try and kill a character a session. He did not like one of the players, a good friend of mine. So he let him live until the last session, the end of a epic game we were playing. He did every dirty, stinking, cheat (kinda like not letting players use Light Side Tokens...) he could think of to kill my buddy, causing a complete group kill in the process. He then proceeds to brag to other players and GM's how he killed us all. Needless to say it was one of the worst experiences in gaming I have had. I Have NO problem dying, in the cause of a good game or story. To die like that, in a cheap dirty manner, just stinks to high heaven. We dumped that GM, and found another one. Our new GM turned out to be one of our best friends, could tell a great story, and when a character died in his story it meant something.

So no, I don't think that is cool...at all.

stupid.

If a GM wants to kill a player he could just.

"As you walt under the bridge a dragon lands on it and the bridge falls on your face - you die."

If you play against your players as a GM, then you're not suited for the job. It's quite alright to make life miserable for the PCs as part of the story and death can be part of that. But if a hero dies for no good reason, the story is shite and that all falls back on the GM.

But many authors focus their books around making life miserable for their main character and then everything revolves around them trying to deal with it.

As many have said here, it is a dirty move, but it is more that the spirit of a good game of EotE is more a cooporative story-telling adventure rather than an antagonistic relationship of the players VS the GM. Spending the points increase the odds of hitting a triumph or a despair (depending on who is spending), which is to say something awesome, or a very cool complication, is more likely to get added to the game. This is a good thing. There should be a good back and forth. There is no such thing as burning too much destiny.

Whether it is a dirty move or not would depend solely on your gorup's opinion. Each group to their own.

When I GM I like to use DS destiny points are regularly as I can. I like the players ot have LS destiny points available to enocurage them to be heroic so I have to spend the DS ones, and I also like the extra potential for failures and threats to complicate their actions because failure and threat can be just as interesting as success and advantage if it's done right.

Regards,

Shane

Whether it is a dirty move or not would depend solely on your gorup's opinion. Each group to their own.

When I GM I like to use DS destiny points are regularly as I can. I like the players ot have LS destiny points available to enocurage them to be heroic so I have to spend the DS ones, and I also like the extra potential for failures and threats to complicate their actions because failure and threat can be just as interesting as success and advantage if it's done right.

Regards,

Shane

If it was a group decision not to use destiny points at all, then that would be fine. What the OP described is quite different, as the situation as posted implies that the players want to use destiny points, but the GM is denying them access by blocking the flow back to the players.

Which is a dirty move that the players shouldn't tolerate.

grftI'm going to dissent with the majority opinion and say that it's NOT a dirty move. In fact, depending on how you do it, and how often you utilize it, it's an excellent GM tool that all you close-minded folks should be considering!

The rate at which the tokens flip can help control the tone of the game (either in general or for a particular session). Do I think you should be hoarding them on a regular basis? Heck no. Not hoarding them from time to time is a GOOD thing.

Consider: You're running an adventure where the heroes explore an ancient temple that feels cut off from the Force (given the focus of EotE, they're looking for treasure). The temple is populated with some sort of creepy minions... cultists, space zombies, statues that come to life... whatever. First thing: it may not be appropriate to have the minions and traps boosted by DSPs.

Second, depending on how you run the table, a particular "horror" tone may begin to form. "This doesn't feel right. This is too easy? What's going on?" If the PCs are aware that you're hoarding, they may begin to wonder why and many start worrying about what's behind the next door. Not a good thing in every adventure, but an awesome option if used properly.

Now, the heroes get to the center of the temple and meet The Big Bad (competing treasure hunter, ancient awakened Dark Side spirit... who cares?). Knowing that he's bolstered by so many DSPs, the Big Bad is *scary.* (Heck, if I were ever going to introduce Darth Vader into a game, I would recommend this tactic so that he debuts to a reputation that matches is movie feel).

The nice thing now, though, is that the heroes get to retaliate in heroic fashion, and you've created an epic battle!

That's just one example of how I can see hoarding being a good thing. On the other hand, I can also see the exact opposite -- spending an tokens pretty much immediately -- being equally good to help set the tone.

None of these tricks should be used consistently, but rather as appropriate.

Hope at least some of you made it to the end of this.

I try not to hoard, but I easily forget that I have the destiny points... and then I see the faces of my players when things go south and I realise they have no destiny points left ... and when I start using them, well, they get even more scared. Poor players.

I don't think "dirty" is particularly the word I would use, my choice would be something a little less kind. "Dirty" implies that you're somehow getting away with something, which isn't the case here. This is more along the lines of some little kid taking all the toys so no one else can play with them; everyone else will get tired of childish pettiness and stop playing with you if you keep up the "me vs them" mentality.

In my opinion, one of the worst mistake you can make as a GM is having a 'me versus them' attitude. Be a fan of the players, put them in tough situations, but don't do this.

The GM is there to make things dramatic. Timing and resources go a long way towards that. You want those despairs to come up as often as possible so you can throw a curve ball at the group.

The best encounter (or game design for that matter) takes into consideration the emotions that a player (or group) will go through. Generally you want something like this for your stand out set pieces...

PCs are Afraid.

PCs are feeling powerful as they overcame their fear.

PCs are Surprised.

PCs are Relieved.

PCs are Surprised (again) and Afraid (even more than before)

PCs are Triumphant.

In a more specific scenario it would translate to this:

PCs stumble into an Ambush of Imperial Stormtroopers, they initially don't know how many or where they're coming from.

They blow through it with a clever counter attack of their own

Imperial Shock Troopers (think Stormtroopers with Rocket Launchers) arrive as reinforcements.

After a hard-fought battle they defeat the Shock Troopers. (You could stop here but...)

Just as the party catch their breath the wall to the building they're in explodes and they're under attack from an AT-ST!

The PCs retrieve the Shock Trooper's missile tubes and use them against the AT-ST to defeat it.

I color coded the above scene to demonstrate where Dark Side (Red) and Light Side (Blue) would be typically spent. This is why you need to make sure they're flowing back and forth, not so either side can 'win' but so you can really push the story to the mechanical limits and have the PCs come out (just) on top.

I rarely play an RPG as a player. I've been the primary GM for my group for years. With that being said, I can't even imagine the thought process goes into a GM even thinking about hoarding the Destiny Pool. To hoard the destiny pool would suggest that the GM is trying to ensure that they have an advantage over the players or, at least, do not want the players to have the advantage over the GM by manipulating the course of the game.

If this were the case, I don't get it. If anything, the game is already "stacked" in the GM's favor. From the get go being that the GM controls 99% of what goes on in the game to begin with. So, to even fathom the thought of making the game even more stacked against the players is beyond me.

I know that there are some GM's out there purposely try to make the players games hell. Playing RPG's is supposed to be a fun experience for all and if the GM intentionally make it hard, complicated, bad, or not fun, then that GM will not have a player base for long... And in my opinion, they should have a player base at all.

.... not so either side can 'win' but so you can really push the story to the mechanical limits and have the PCs come out (just) on top.

Exactly!!!

Like AndrewTano, the word I'd use isn't "dirty," but something a lot less generous.

Since the GM has full plot control anyway, they really don't have a reason to hoard those Dark Side Destiny Points, and should be spending them frequently, either to upgrade an NPC's skill check or a PC's difficulty. It's one thing only only keep a couple of them as Light Side Destiny Points (say 2 out of a pool of 6 Destiny), so that the PCs have to exercise some caution in spending them, but the GM should never let a Destiny Pool stay all dark for very long.

Destiny Points in EotE are one of the primary ways the players have to help directly influence the story, so the GM hoarding them is akin to saying "I don't want my players to have any major input into the story." It's not quite full-blown railroading, but it comes awfully close since it's denying the players a valuable resource that the game was designed for them to have.

Yeah, not dirty or cheap or anything. Just dumb.

On the one hand you are keeping a resource from the players, but at the same time you are keeping that resource from yourself. At that stage, you should just take Destiny Points out of the game, since no one is using them.

Now, hoarding them throughout a session only to unleash them at the appropriate scene can work, if you go to lengths to describe the impending doom and influence of the dark side leading up to it. It depends on how it is done. I wouldn't completely shut spending them down, just limit it to less than the players spend. If they spend 3, then I can spend 2. That ensures that I have enough for the big moment without completely halting the flow of points.

Most times, though (as others have said), there should be a robust back and forth.

grftI'm going to dissent with the majority opinion and say that it's NOT a dirty move. In fact, depending on how you do it, and how often you utilize it, it's an excellent GM tool that all you close-minded folks should be considering!

Can't say I agree with your examples. All of them can be achieved in other ways that doesn't mess with the point or purpose of the Destiny pool.