[TofW] Question about the creature of the well

[Hermes Serpent]

If the corruption test is because the area is blighted and a failure (low Wisdom) means they start getting weird visions and thoughts plus a feeling of lassitude.

I described the similar scene in Rich's scenario and told each of them that they felt drawn towards the locus of the thoughts and their Shadows-weakness was pushed to the forefront of their thoughts and they could hardluy think of anything else except dealing with that.

I guess that resistance by the players depends on them feeling railroaded and having no free will which players always hate. Maybe the player response depends upon how it's presented to them.

[Heilemann]

I have to say the very idea that the spell-bound characters would be rationalizing with each other, "Hey, are you thinking what I'm thinking?"-like is sort of preposterous to me. And this from an Elf!

[Rich H]

I have to say the very idea that the spell-bound characters would be rationalizing with each other, "Hey, are you thinking what I'm thinking?"-like is sort of preposterous to me. And this from an Elf!

I agree, but then as a player I view being spellbound/brainwashed/etc the same as being wounded/unconscious/etc - ie, as long as it's dealt with mechanically within the system then social/mental restrictions are no different to combat/physical ones in that I have a responsibility to honestly role-play what's happening to my character. Lots of gamers are not like that though and have problems with the former but not the latter as they feel it's usurping player agency in a different way to suffering wounds or other physical penalties. Perhaps Woodclaw's player(s) fall into this category of gamer, at least partially.

[Morgoth]

I have to say that I didn't told them that they were under a spell until I snapped and that I actually rolled their corruption test myself behind the screen.

As a LM, I understand the reasons for doing this.

As a player, I wouldn't like this. If you had given them the chance to roll the corruption test themselves (even if they didn't know what it was for), some of them might have spent hope to help. At the very least, that way they feel as if falling under the spell is the result of their own actions and aren't going to be mad at you for it. Otherwise, it just seems like the hand of the LM is against them.

If you roll an Eye of Sauron you expect something bad to happen. You're not going to be mad at the LM about it. If something happens out of the blue, and you feel like the LM is picking on you (even if he's not) you're going to get into an argument. That's my advice anyway. Hope it's useful!

[Glorelendil]

I've been thinking more about this and I agree with things said by both Rich and Morgoth.

1) In some ways the players' reaction is a little alien to me. If LM and players trust each other and are playing the game for the communal storytelling, none of this should be an issue. As a player, if my LM says, "You're possessed by a spirit that is making you do 'X'" then I'm going to get into the spirit of doing X. Even better if the LM passes me a note; then I can have fun seeing how long I can keep the other players in the dark as to what is going on.

I don't think the mumbling automaton is necessary to make this work. Isn't the most interesting sort of crazy the kind that you can't be sure if the person is crazy or not? (Think Hamlet.)

2) And Morgoth's point about letting them make their own rolls also rings true, but again you have to trust them to be in the spirit of the game and have fun with the result if they fail the roll.

3) All that said, if everybody fails the roll and things are looking bad for the party, then allowing some Wisdom checks to notice that something is fishy works for me. And if that also fails I'm not averse to some deus ex machina.

[Evening]

Out of four players three -- elf, dwarf and beorning -- failed the Wisdom roll (but with no "eye") against the spell and so they were driven toward the well. I tried to make each lure personalized to the shadow weakness of each character. The elf player argued that since they were driven by so disparate temptations toward the well should have tipped them off.
Now, all the players spoke out loud about what they were experiencing, but they were also under a dreadful spell, so I don't know what to think. Was it metagame or not?

I always have my players roll for everything like this. TOR is no different than every other rpg I've gm'd. I have them occasionally roll for mundane things, enough so that they aren't on their guard all the time when they (think) they've made a failing roll. Sometimes they roll for beneficial things (you found a clear spring, the water is icy cold) and sometimes for 'bad' things which aren't readily evident. They may not know what they are rolling for at the time, but later I point out everyone's rolls as to who succeeded and who failed. When they roll for everything concerning their character it prevents any whiff of impropriety.

That said, if this is the way you and your players have been gaming all this time, I don't see what the problem is here. They obviously know you roll secretly for their characters and they are ok with it, because they trust you.

I like the well creature, it's a plot device from alot of movies and books. Yes, the three of them speaking outloud about what they are experiencing, and ultimately they don't care what the other two are saying.

[Woodclaw]

Out of four players three -- elf, dwarf and beorning -- failed the Wisdom roll (but with no "eye") against the spell and so they were driven toward the well. I tried to make each lure personalized to the shadow weakness of each character. The elf player argued that since they were driven by so disparate temptations toward the well should have tipped them off.
Now, all the players spoke out loud about what they were experiencing, but they were also under a dreadful spell, so I don't know what to think. Was it metagame or not?

I always have my players roll for everything like this. TOR is no different than every other rpg I've gm'd. I have them occasionally roll for mundane things, enough so that they aren't on their guard all the time when they (think) they've made a failing roll. Sometimes they roll for beneficial things (you found a clear spring, the water is icy cold) and sometimes for 'bad' things which aren't readily evident. They may not know what they are rolling for at the time, but later I point out everyone's rolls as to who succeeded and who failed. When they roll for everything concerning their character it prevents any whiff of impropriety.

That said, if this is the way you and your players have been gaming all this time, I don't see what the problem is here. They obviously know you roll secretly for their characters and they are ok with it, because they trust you.

All very true Evening, maybe the problem is also from the fact that the guy is a new player at my table. He has gamed and GMed for quite some time, but we only played together a few times.

I like the well creature, it's a plot device from alot of movies and books. Yes, the three of them speaking outloud about what they are experiencing, and ultimately they don't care what the other two are saying.

Thanks for putting in plain words what I was trying to figure.

[Jakob]

I'd say that it was metagaming and add that metagaming can be a pretty cool thing - after all, it is also metagaming when the players look at how the story unfolds and try to enhance it by the actions of the players characters. So I wouldn't discourage players from anything by arguing that they are metagaming. Players making decisions not strictly in character, but also in terms of where you want the story to go (and maybe finding a reason for why the character is acting this way afterward, thereby building his or her backstory and making him or her a more complex person) can be a great enrichment of the game.

In this specific case, I don't really see the problem. As a GM, you can weave in the notion that the characters a whispering to themselves about what they see; if one of them says: "Wait, why are we all seeing different things?", this only gives a voice to the sense of dark foreboding the players will have any way, and if you as a GM pick up on it, they feel that they can shape events and really take part in the story. If they roleplay it really cool, making the scene that much more eerie, I would definitely grant them mechanical advantages for it (maybe one of them hesitates and doesn't fall in the well after all). That's what rpg's are about, after all - you don't just follow the rules mechanically or follow the story as you have laid it out, you allow players to modifiy the situation (often to their advantage) by smart roleplaying.

I would only see a problem if the players insist that every effect of the spell they are under should simply disappear as soon as they have realized that something is fishy. As another poster said, you can make clear to them that they might realize that something can't be right here, but they still feel drawn to the well and that their feet move on their own accord. Give them maybe another corruption test to break free. Or encourage them to narrate themselves how they throw all caution to the wind because they desperatey want to be with whatever it is they see (in my experience, roleplayers will do exactly that very often anyway, because they like the spotlight on the emotions of their character, and they also wan't to go where the action is and see what happens).
In short, if players come up with a smart, maybe even meta-gamey idea that modifies an encounter see if you can interweave it in the narrative to enhance it. Don't just say "no" - if you do that, most players will feel the need to press their point even more, or they will resignate because they feel that they can't influence events anyway. Say "yes, but ..." Make the idea part of the narrative, but introduce a new complication, make it work, but not to the extent the players want it to work or not in the way they want it to work.

Sorry for the rant, but I think this is a pretty important rule of thumb if you wan't to make a gaming session fun for everyone.