GMs, ever accidentally escalated the stakes in a campaign too *much?*

I don't mean TPKs or the like. I mean revealing so much danger, complexity, or other complication that the PCs' reactions and strategies are *much* more severe (and potentially awkward to implement) than expected.

...Because I get the sense my D&D 3.5 DM did *not* expect the reveal of a Thirty Gambit Pileup when the PCs were already struggling with the circumstances at hand to have those kinds of effects.

One of my characters, who wound up party leader by default because the other PCs were either too scatterbrained or too passive to do it themselves, is finally starting to crack in the face of things turning out to not merely be a question of a single cult with many facets, but a big clash of multiple powerful interests like that. OOCly, we're already making plans involving having to recruit and coordinate double digits of adventurers just to deal with all the tentacles.

And she seems surprised.

GMs, ever accidentally escalated the stakes in a campaign too *much?*

I don't mean TPKs or the like. I mean revealing so much danger, complexity, or other complication that the PCs' reactions and strategies are *much* more severe (and potentially awkward to implement) than expected.

...Because I get the sense my D&D 3.5 DM did *not* expect the reveal of a Thirty Gambit Pileup when the PCs were already struggling with the circumstances at hand to have those kinds of effects.

@pteryx this is a constant worry of mine. Early in my re-booting of RPGing back in 2014 I did this.

My only solution was to deus ex machina, setting off a massive volcano to clear some of the complexity immediately.

Then I admitted to the group that the complexity was overwhelming me. They told me they felt the same. We reviewed what threats remained and moved on

Notably, there were *already* "save the world" stakes in play. Raising it to "save the world from multiple threats at once, and figure out who's trying to accomplish what and how exactly and who's allied with and opposed to whom" just... kinda comes across as too much work for just one adventuring party. Or even just one normal-sized party, two miniature parties, and a solo adventurer, as we currently have collaborating on the major project we're already in the middle of.

It's worth pointing out that while we're currently ICly working on a large-scale collaborative project, Savaa's assumption was that this was going to be a one-time thing, and the party would go back to normal (if high-level) adventuring efforts directed at one cult associated with one plane. The idea that instead, having to coordinate multiple parties's actions relative to multiple powerful conspiracies is going to be the new normal, when she's not used to other competent leadership existing...

...well, it smashes the idea that stress levels might be going *down* anytime soon.

It's going to take a lot to get past this ICly, I think, but there is some promise. The party's main casters are collecting means of fast travel. We have the opportunity to make some guild connections. We already know a few other adventuring parties. And... well, one intended early goal we've been forced by circumstance to backburner for most of the campaign could be *exploited* now...

GMs, ever accidentally escalated the stakes in a campaign too *much?*

I don't mean TPKs or the like. I mean revealing so much danger, complexity, or other complication that the PCs' reactions and strategies are *much* more severe (and potentially awkward to implement) than expected.

...Because I get the sense my D&D 3.5 DM did *not* expect the reveal of a Thirty Gambit Pileup when the PCs were already struggling with the circumstances at hand to have those kinds of effects.

@pteryx This is cynical and unfair on my part but, owing to a few early anecdotal experiences, I associate this (extreme escalation) with a GM feeling underprepped, because it's an easy short-term, pay-later way to keep sessions feeling impactful and revelatory.

Realistically, there can be several other causes! But it's where my mind goes first.

@SJohnRoss
Honestly, I'm pretty sure she had the three major groups involved (and possibly one more) in mind from the beginning. They just didn't seem to all be important at the same time until now. One was centrally having its layers peeled back all campaign, but another was getting established in ways that read more as "if you want to continue after the current campaign this will be the villain", and the third had seemed like more of a force of nature than an active antagonist (or ally?).

@SJohnRoss
Also, it's not as though we were short on things to do that she has ideas for, either. Notably, there's a potential quest trajectory that's been dangling from way, *way* back at the beginning of the campaign, I know she's got a pile of ideas for if we go to a particular plane that the campaign revolves around, and if push comes to shove after the current arc, "Oh no, people trying to replicate your work need your help!" would be a *very* easy card to play.

@SJohnRoss
On top of that, even the current arc obviously has a few OOC months of play left in it, even if no new elements were to come in. We're an IC week behind schedule on the seal on account of complications beyond those Savaa anticipated (and brought the other adventurers and mercs for). We've got leftover enemy groups to clean up, dungeon loot to find to pay for that extra week, and if she doesn't have Ritual Defense 2: Electric Boogaloo planned already, I'd be shocked.

@SJohnRoss
What she *thought* she was doing, and I'm inclined to trust her on this point, was setting up future lower-priority mysteries for us to pursue, not, y'know, raising the stakes from "save the world from a cult and the horrors associated with it" to "save the world from multiple powerful forces that seem to be working at cross-purposes, determining who to trust and help (or redirect) and who to just fight, and incidentally you need a lot more info ASAP to accomplish that".

@SJohnRoss
On one hand, it's all really cool stuff. I'd still easily count her as the best GM I've ever had. On the other... the complexity isn't in the red overload zone, but it's certainly well into the yellow danger zone by now (well, aside from maybe the one player struggling just to keep the short-term schedule Savaa has set straight... and that player's PC has a sidequest of her own to pursue too, incidentally, as far as the having-enough-plans issue).

@SJohnRoss
Overall, I'd call it a too-much-of-a-good-thing problem — which, after the trauma conga line of my gaming career prior to 2020, is a very welcome kind of problem to have. But I've still had to cry, "Enough! This is so many plot hooks that we need to delegate — not to mention that our PCs don't need more stuff to do, they need a *break*, and growing the pile just makes it seem like the break has to happen in a hyperbolic time chamber."