So i had the idea of having players encounter a clearing. I'd describe it as "you come across an empty. The ground is smoothed and seemingly unoccupied", or something along those lines - i'm no writer.

Here's where the main idea comes in. If they want to investigate the clearing I just straight up say "No you don't. Lunch sounds good though.", or something else that denotes a lack of choice in the matter. i.e, "There's clearly nothing here, just move on"

The player can choose to fight this impulse by rolling a wisdom check/save/whatever. If they succeed, then go ahead and try to convince the party or just go ahead alone. Fail, and you walk away to do whatever else you want as long as you leave the area, maybe grab some lunch.

I'd like some ideas on how to play this out with players, so shoot some thoughts.

The trick to this sort of thing it that, to avoid taking away player agency, you should avoid giving it to them in the first place. 

I would have this be taken against a passive skill, in this case passive perception. They can attempt to investigate, and you roll a stealth roll for this "innocent clearing" and compare it to their passive perception. If it beats them all, their investigation turns up nothing. If one or more of them beat it, then they see or suspect the illusion - perhaps they see a fly that is endlessly looping, flying from one flower to the next, then disappearing and reappearing back in the first flower, indicating a looping illusion. Then they can be active in trying to see through it, and might well think your roll is just a random encounter table. Perhaps act as if you're disappointed that it's "just an empty clearing" after your roll, to improve this illusion.

If you tell the players "you don't want to investigate", you get into the meta-knowledge conundrum of the players knowing that something's up, and the characters not realising, which in turn leads to the players performing actions which they hope will reveal the illusion - where they might have walked past before, they might stop and see if they can dig up any treasure "just because". The more you tell the players they can't do something, the more they will try to do it.

Alternatively, have the roll they make actually be the wisdom check and not investigation - as the investigation would only turn up nothing until the wisdom roll is done. They think they're rolling to look around, but they're actually rolling to see what they see. You can also roll for them, if you want to roll for things without the player knowing that their character is making a roll.

If one player sees something and the others don't, then it's quite good to private message or pass them a note, to give them the info without the rest of the players hearing/reading it and knowing the exact description of what they saw. To add more authentic things for a flicker in the illusion, pass them the note and then take it back before they start describing what they saw, so they have to try and remember what the note said!

If you haven’t seen the antipathy/sympathy spell, you may want to check that out for ideas as well.

Here's where the main idea comes in. If they want to investigate the clearing I just straight up say "No you don't. Lunch sounds good though.", or something else that denotes a lack of choice in the matter. i.e, "There's clearly nothing here, just move on"

I would approach this differently. Instead of saying, as a GM, "no you don't," pass the first player who says "I want to investigate the clearing" a note (or private message online), saying, "Ragnog suddenly feels very strongly that he would rather do almost anything else other than investigate this place." Most players will then go along with this - you are enlisting them to RP about a "secret" so they will think it is cool. This feels much less like being "forced" into RP by the DM. Let Ragnog's player choose what other thing is more desirable than investigating the clearing. Then when the next player says, "OK, well *I* will investigate it now," send them a similar PM or note. "Joline feels like there is just no reason to investigate this place. Maybe she'd rather join Ragnog?" etc. The idea is to get the players to join in on this RP, rather than having it forced on them.

Remember, RPGs are cooperative games, so it's best to get the players to cooperate on this rather than imposing something by fiat, if you can.

Quote from kootranova1 >>

So i had the idea of having players encounter a clearing. I'd describe it as "you come across an empty. The ground is smoothed and seemingly unoccupied", or something along those lines - i'm no writer.

Here's where the main idea comes in. If they want to investigate the clearing I just straight up say "No you don't. Lunch sounds good though.", or something else that denotes a lack of choice in the matter. i.e, "There's clearly nothing here, just move on"

The player can choose to fight this impulse by rolling a wisdom check/save/whatever. If they succeed, then go ahead and try to convince the party or just go ahead alone. Fail, and you walk away to do whatever else you want as long as you leave the area, maybe grab some lunch.

 

I'd like some ideas on how to play this out with players, so shoot some thoughts.

First of all, I recommend letting them save up front.  This immediately meta-informs them (the players know, not the characters) that their agency has been removed with good reason, due to an effect.  The save DC can be infinite, if you really want, but the simple act of telling them to roll the save will make everything go more smoothly.  As usual, don't tell them what the results of their success or failure are, just take down their roll results and nod sagely.  If any of your players have abilities that inform them when they fail a save, naturally you'll have to divulge that.

Now, as to how I'd play it - I'd emphasize to the players how the spell makes them feel.  Here are some examples.

GM:  Roll a Wisdom Save.

PC:  Ok, I got a 18.  I'm gonna roll my bardic inspiration... 19.

GM:  Ok.

PC:  My inspiration came from an Eloquence bard, so I need to know if I failed so I know if I still have my inspiration die.

GM:  You failed.

PC:  Noted.

GM:  You come across an incredibly boring-looking clearing surrounded by incredibly interesting-looking trees.

PC:  Sus.  I investigate the clearing.

GM:  It occurs to you that clearings are the least interesting of all natural phenomena, but you know what's neat?  Trees.  You just can't help yourself - you investigate a nearby tree instead.  Roll investigate.

PC:  I roll a 24!

GM:  You find a squirrel's acorn trove.  It is well stocked.

PC:  I cast detect magic and look at the clearing.

GM:  Thing of it is, clearings are obviously the least magical of all natural phenomena.  But you know what's magical af?  You find yourself looking up at a double rainbow, and never in your life have you seen anything this magical before.

And so on and so forth.  Let the pc attempt things, then react with telling them what actually happens and why.

Huh, basically exactly what i was thinking. Thanks.

I guess i forgot about the meta possibilities. Kinda hoped the players would just play along.

Fair points. Thanks.

Quote from BioWizard >>

Here's where the main idea comes in. If they want to investigate the clearing I just straight up say "No you don't. Lunch sounds good though.", or something else that denotes a lack of choice in the matter. i.e, "There's clearly nothing here, just move on"

I would approach this differently. Instead of saying, as a GM, "no you don't," pass the first player who says "I want to investigate the clearing" a note (or private message online), saying, "Ragnog suddenly feels very strongly that he would rather do almost anything else other than investigate this place." Most players will then go along with this - you are enlisting them to RP about a "secret" so they will think it is cool. This feels much less like being "forced" into RP by the DM. Let Ragnog's player choose what other thing is more desirable than investigating the clearing. Then when the next player says, "OK, well *I* will investigate it now," send them a similar PM or note. "Joline feels like there is just no reason to investigate this place. Maybe she'd rather join Ragnog?" etc. The idea is to get the players to join in on this RP, rather than having it forced on them.

Remember, RPGs are cooperative games, so it's best to get the players to cooperate on this rather than imposing something by fiat, if you can.

 Yea, i wouldn't want to be rail-roaded either. Thanks for the tips.

Quote from quindraco >>

Quote from kootranova1 >>

So i had the idea of having players encounter a clearing. I'd describe it as "you come across an empty. The ground is smoothed and seemingly unoccupied", or something along those lines - i'm no writer.

Here's where the main idea comes in. If they want to investigate the clearing I just straight up say "No you don't. Lunch sounds good though.", or something else that denotes a lack of choice in the matter. i.e, "There's clearly nothing here, just move on"

The player can choose to fight this impulse by rolling a wisdom check/save/whatever. If they succeed, then go ahead and try to convince the party or just go ahead alone. Fail, and you walk away to do whatever else you want as long as you leave the area, maybe grab some lunch.

 

I'd like some ideas on how to play this out with players, so shoot some thoughts.

 

First of all, I recommend letting them save up front.  This immediately meta-informs them (the players know, not the characters) that their agency has been removed with good reason, due to an effect.  The save DC can be infinite, if you really want, but the simple act of telling them to roll the save will make everything go more smoothly.  As usual, don't tell them what the results of their success or failure are, just take down their roll results and nod sagely.  If any of your players have abilities that inform them when they fail a save, naturally you'll have to divulge that.

Now, as to how I'd play it - I'd emphasize to the players how the spell makes them feel.  Here are some examples.

GM:  Roll a Wisdom Save.

PC:  Ok, I got a 18.  I'm gonna roll my bardic inspiration... 19.

GM:  Ok.

PC:  My inspiration came from an Eloquence bard, so I need to know if I failed so I know if I still have my inspiration die.

GM:  You failed.

PC:  Noted.

GM:  You come across an incredibly boring-looking clearing surrounded by incredibly interesting-looking trees.

PC:  Sus.  I investigate the clearing.

GM:  It occurs to you that clearings are the least interesting of all natural phenomena, but you know what's neat?  Trees.  You just can't help yourself - you investigate a nearby tree instead.  Roll investigate.

PC:  I roll a 24!

GM:  You find a squirrel's acorn trove.  It is well stocked.

PC:  I cast detect magic and look at the clearing.

GM:  Thing of it is, clearings are obviously the least magical of all natural phenomena.  But you know what's magical af?  You find yourself looking up at a double rainbow, and never in your life have you seen anything this magical before.

And so on and so forth.  Let the pc attempt things, then react with telling them what actually happens and why.

 Great stuff, but i don't know how i feel about deciding player actions - investigating the tree for example.

Thanks for the advice.