I've looked over the other adventures and at a glance it doesn't seem I would have to much trouble with such a character in the other adventures.
Short Circuit! (Imprisoning a Psionicist)
It is highly problematic for DMs to keep a psionicist in jail, especially a psychoporter. The Short Circuit rule states that psionics cannot work when there is an enclosed loop of metal or obsidian around the head. This includes helmets, crowns, and circlets. This is actually putting the already-printed 'no helmets' rule to good use. The DM may limit the Armored Psionicist option for S&P character classes to maintain game consistency.
A labotomy works wonders as well, but has many of the same drawbacks as the above.
So SandChicken probably has the best idea.
I also recall there being some sort of 'anti-psionic' magic item from 2e as well, pretty much made just for that reason, but I can't remember what it is. Teleportation aside, *any* psion makes for a dangerous slave, so there's got to be some way that Athasians deal with it (...barring "just kill 'em and be done with it" as a solution, of course).
This way you can present that player with an obstacle that he can still overcome and not just cancel out his abilities. Maybe the other party members cover for him so he does not work very hard during the day to recover some PSP. Of course the overseers may take notice of this and punish them.
Collective punishment can also work. If the templars know he is a psychporter they tell him if he tries to escape they will punish/ kill the other characters.
Actually it can be easy. In 2nd, the character has to have a lot of PSP to teleport. Just make sure that before you capture the character he is involved in a fight or series of encounters that uses up most or all of his PSP. The life in slavery presented in the adventure is very grueling. The characters are overworked, underfed and malnourished. Under such circumstances he will not be able to recover much, if any PSP. If he does figure out a way to recover the PSP, then good for him, let him escape. Of course now he would be on the run in Tyr and it may take him some time to get enough rest to return for the other characters.
This way you can present that player with an obstacle that he can still overcome and not just cancel out his abilities. Maybe the other party members cover for him so he does not work very hard during the day to recover some PSP. Of course the overseers may take notice of this and punish them.
Collective punishment can also work. If the templars know he is a psychporter they tell him if he tries to escape they will punish/ kill the other characters.
sweet... I wish I thought of this when I ran Freedom in 2nd edtion. I just didnt let the PC have it until later in the characters life.Actually it can be easy. In 2nd, the character has to have a lot of PSP to teleport. Just make sure that before you capture the character he is involved in a fight or series of encounters that uses up most or all of his PSP. The life in slavery presented in the adventure is very grueling. The characters are overworked, underfed and malnourished. Under such circumstances he will not be able to recover much, if any PSP. If he does figure out a way to recover the PSP, then good for him, let him escape. Of course now he would be on the run in Tyr and it may take him some time to get enough rest to return for the other characters.
This way you can present that player with an obstacle that he can still overcome and not just cancel out his abilities. Maybe the other party members cover for him so he does not work very hard during the day to recover some PSP. Of course the overseers may take notice of this and punish them.
Collective punishment can also work. If the templars know he is a psychporter they tell him if he tries to escape they will punish/ kill the other characters.
I like the idea, the only serious issue I have with it is two of the players in my group are likely to let the others rot if they can escape, and one of those two is very likly to play a psychoporter. However I will certainly keep all of this in mind for whatever kind of psionic characters end up in the party.
Amulet of Psionic Interference
This item scrambles the wearer’s psionic abilities, rendering him incapable of making any psionic power checks. The device creates a magical field around the wearer’s mind that does not eliminate his psionic strength points, but interferes with them in such a way that they cannot be called upon for power checks. The amulet does not interfere with the wearer’s ability to recover psionic strength points. Only the person who places the amulet around someone’s neck can remove it; if someone puts it on himself, they can easily remove it, but if it was placed on by another, the wearer cannot remove it without a remove curse or wish spell.
Of course, I do have some questions as to the ... spirit ... of the item. I don't know if it really fits the mindset of 3e (which isn't about what you *can't* do, it's about what it'll cost you to do it ...), since it's basically an item that lets the DM tell a player: "You're basically nothing more than a Commoner until I take this thing off." Basically, it smacks of a DM taking the easy route to avoid player abilities, rather than learning how to handle those abilities. It's only gonna get worse, after all.
Of course, my gaming style is much more simulationist, and I've never been a huge fan of pre-built modules because they tend to railroad you -- and players with unanticipated abilities (teleporting, flying, etc) can easily break a module.
Of course, I do have some questions as to the ... spirit ... of the item. I don't know if it really fits the mindset of 3e (which isn't about what you *can't* do, it's about what it'll cost you to do it ...).
That's why he's playing 2ed.
Basically, it smacks of a DM taking the easy route to avoid player abilities, rather than learning how to handle those abilities. It's only gonna get worse, after all.
Hear hear, Flip! That is the truth, right there. Restricting players from using character powers they are legally able to have and utilize, out of fear of the consequences over control of the game, is wrong-headed and eventually game-wrecking.
So I'm right there on the same page with you on this one. Things that make the GM say "But...that power/choice/action ruins the plot of my adventure!" are only problems if your games require the characters to move through play semi-linerally, from start to finish, with a beginning, middle, and ending(s) all plotted out in advance. That method works great for fiction and passive entertainment, but RPGs function according to different interactive paradigms.
Instead, one can learn techniques that allow utilization of these "game-breaking" events and play features to create fun and engrossing play very easily.
Of course, my gaming style is much more simulationist, and I've never been a huge fan of pre-built modules because they tend to railroad you -- and players with unanticipated abilities (teleporting, flying, etc) can easily break a module.
They tend to be problematic with every functional style of gaming: Narrativist, Gamist, or Simulationist.
They really only work if your goal for play is to experience someone else's story, like an interactive story-game (basically, what most computer RPGs are) -- that is, with a plot lain-out in advance for you which (functionally) cannot be deviated from and in which you are only participating as an actor, where your apparent freedoms are only illusory (I use the word actor very specifically. You are an actor: for you are adding color but no substance).
(I've absolutely never liked that type of gaming. It can work, if everyone is on-board with it ahead of time: where everyone knows there is a plot they will be guided through and is alright on going along with it.)
As mentioned, there are methods of pre-building adventures that don't presume such linear progression through the module, or, in fact, any sort of progression in any particular direction at all -- they are written without any scripted end point(s) or even scripted in-play events, must-see locations, or etc.
Instead, everything that occurs arises organically from the module setup, the desires of the NPCs, and the characters' actions in play (ie: the players' desires). (Surprisingly) it is easier to prep for than more traditionally-run games!
Well of Souls is a HeroQuest module available for free on-line that provides a good overview of how one can do this for a pre-scripted adventure.
The award-winning RPG Dogs in the Vineyard is also an excellent example in an of itself of how to create that sort of play from the get-go.
For those interested in understanding how to write these sorts of adventures, Chris Chinn (one of the co-writers of said module) gives great overviews of the "how to" in his blog. Direct links to some relevant entries for those interested are Flag Framing and The Conflict Web.
There's also a really good recent thread on the Forge about using such methods, though (again) it relates to HeroQuest/Hero Wars, the ideas are easily utilized independent of mechanics: Writing Adventures for Heroquest.
[INDENT]---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
[/INDENT]
So, how would one deal with Freedom this way?
Unfortunately, Freedom is so linear that most of the module "goes to waste" if the players don't make a specific series of choices, are brow-beaten into them, or are quietly tricked into them.
The trick, of course, is to invest the players through their characters in the events of play and in a specific goal for play that they can drive towards and make decisions about in play -- and in letting them come up with that goal before play. Have them talk about what they (or their characters) all want to achieve.
This may mean throwing away a good chunk of the module, at least as "play through" material. Instead, it becomes background, set-up, event(s) that kick off the part of the adventure the group is interested in exploring.
Everything before and after that is scrapped and the focus is on: "Here's the situation, what are you going to do about it" and any and all results are left on the table as valid outcomes, even if it means you never use the module parts where Kalak goes down or where they are imprisioned at all.
For example, the group might decide the "wandering the desert" and "getting captured by slavers" events are the set-up for the rest of play (or YOU might decide that...that's ok, too). So, either the group decides, or you tell the group you'd like to start them off captured in the slave pits of Tyr and they agree that's an awesome kick-off point. Captured, enslaved, Tyrian slave-pits.
The module stuff before this serves as background filler. Give them NPC names, conflicts, events and all that stuff from the module to use to build the background. "You were wandering in the deserts, half-starved, and ended up captured by a group of nasty slave-traders. Their leader took a particularly viscious dislike to you, but before you could escape or revenge yourself against him, you were sold to the Tyrian slave pits." etc and whatever.
That's the "go" point for the game. Now goals are set and choices made: you want to escape, buy your freedom, be the best slave ever, overthrow the corrupt government, find your enslaved sister, whatever. And you'll note that there is no one solution or correct reaction to the presented problem. The event that kicks things off should not be a linear, black-or-white (or even just black) choice-point. There should be multiple, valid choices and solutions to it.
However, with this, in your specific case you'll have a player who says, "But my character would never be caught because of this power of his."
Great! Then you say this, "That's true. Can you think of any way we could set it up that so that he is caught and can't use his powers to escape? Or wouldn't want to escape?" The ball is in the player's court.
You get either, "Yeah, how about there's this slave-master psion that goes everywhere with him to keep him from using his own powers," (or something like that) or you hear, "But I don't want him to be caught. It doesn't make sense."
In the latter case, don't dispute it, instead ask, "Ok. What can he do, then? Maybe he tracks the caravan and is waiting for an opportunity to bust the others out? Does that sound like fun?"
And so on.
Maybe you'll need to develop some reason he wants to bust the others out. Maybe he decides one of them is a relative he cares for, maybe one of them has something he wants or knows something he wants to know, so he feels he has to help them (or at least get to them) somehow.
You'll note that if you want to play a party-based game, a lot of this hinges on the players having characters who are tied to one another, the characters need reasons to hang out together, help one another, and be involved with and concerned for one another, more than "We all met in a bar and some guy hired us to yoink the head templar's jewels."
However, there's also the possibility he'll decide there's absolutely nothing he wants with any of the other characters. In that case, you run with it, and find out what the player wants from this character. And perhaps you can find some way to interweave his desires with the other players over the course of the game, or even set him in opposition to them! However it plays out.
If you're not comfortable with that, you say, "I really don't feel comfortable running a game about that right now, I don't think I want to handle a split-party. Can we put this character aside for another game and come up with one that you would like to play in this scenario? What kind of character do you think would work well here?"
Or maybe he'll decide on his own this character won't work and come up with a concept that fits better into the scenario.
And you go from there, forgetting about the rest of the module's set pieces, except for: NPCs tied to the immediate events, their goals that hinge on the characters. And you push that stuff, let the characters react to it, and let things develop organically even if the rest of the module never happens.
At the end, you'll realize you won't have lost or "wasted" a thing.
There's likely a high-powered psion making sure that psychoportation into and out of the pits is not occurring. That would keep some do-gooder from rescuing slaves as well as keeping the wild talents from getting out. Also, it is difficult to regain PSPs in the pits. It seems unrealistic that a msgical/psionic item or metal/obsidian helm would be used on a slave. It would be more cost effective to kill the slave or just let him go.
That's what I thought was logical, but looking over all the powers in all the books I could find powers in, I couldn't find anything that would allow a high-powered Psion to prevent, control, or even track a Psychoporter. The only methods that would work are mental domination, or blasting away all the characters PSP, both methods aren't very fun for the player.
They tend to be problematic with every functional style of gaming: Narrativist, Gamist, or Simulationist.
They really only work if your goal for play is to experience someone else's story, like an interactive story-game (basically, what most computer RPGs are) -- that is, with a plot lain-out in advance for you which (functionally) cannot be deviated from and in which you are only participating as an actor, where your apparent freedoms are only illusory (I use the word actor very specifically. You are an actor: for you are adding color but no substance).
(I've absolutely never liked that type of gaming. It can work, if everyone is on-board with it ahead of time: where everyone knows there is a plot they will be guided through and is alright on going along with it.)
As mentioned, there are methods of pre-building adventures that don't presume such linear progression through the module, or, in fact, any sort of progression in any particular direction at all -- they are written without any scripted end point(s) or even scripted in-play events, must-see locations, or etc.
Instead, everything that occurs arises organically from the module setup, the desires of the NPCs, and the characters' actions in play (ie: the players' desires). (Surprisingly) it is easier to prep for than more traditionally-run games!
Well of Souls is a HeroQuest module available for free on-line that provides a good overview of how one can do this for a pre-scripted adventure.
The award-winning RPG Dogs in the Vineyard is also an excellent example in an of itself of how to create that sort of play from the get-go.
For those interested in understanding how to write these sorts of adventures, Chris Chinn (one of the co-writers of said module) gives great overviews of the "how to" in his blog. Direct links to some relevant entries for those interested are Flag Framing and The Conflict Web.
There's also a really good recent thread on the Forge about using such methods, though (again) it relates to HeroQuest/Hero Wars, the ideas are easily utilized independent of mechanics: Writing Adventures for Heroquest.
You see my group likes to have a certain degree of railroading in thier D&D, none of them are exceptional RPers and can't really handle the ability to do whatever they like, my group resently lost the only person that could.
What I like about the Freedom adventure is that the encouncters focus more on an individual player for each of them. What's really scary if the encounters seem almost custom tailored for my players, so I could probably spend a lot of time RPing with each of them. The other advantage to me of the encounters being more focused on the individual is that my group is easily distracted, so I could RP with a couple players at a time while letting the rest of the group do whatever they were distracted by. Also I intend to let the players do as they please in the pits, no way telling them they can't TRY something and will just throw the encounters in to shake things up a bit and establish a plot. Another thing about the adventure is that it in no way forces the party to work together as a party, so I'll avoid the whole awkward party of getting the group together part of most D&D, by letting them come together on there own by working the same job in the pits. The group may not even develop into a party until a later adventure because the adventures later in the series use contacts that each character gained from previous adventures to draw the characters together again.
All this combined provides for a fairly good illusion of freedom in the adventure while placing enough control for the group to enjoy it. Teleportation is really the only thing that breaks the control enough that the illusion could start to fall apart, it's kinda like Neo in the Matrix.
That's what I thought was logical, but looking over all the powers in all the books I could find powers in, I couldn't find anything that would allow a high-powered Psion to prevent, control, or even track a Psychoporter. The only methods that would work are mental domination, or blasting away all the characters PSP, both methods aren't very fun for the player.
QUOTE]
In case you do want to use such powers:
There is a power called Teleport Trace in the City State of Tyr that allows one to trace where another has teleported to.
In the WILL and the Way there is Teleport Lock that blocks a person from teleporting.
And there are spells that suppress all psionics, not just teleporting.
If I were you, I would mod the adventure a bit to maybe allow a character with teleoport to use it - let them use their abilities. There is noting I hate more then when you get a really cool item, like a ring of fire resistance or a brooch of missiles, and then the DM does not use those effects against you any more because he knows is it pointless - but the enemy should not know.
Sure, haveing a few secure locations that have some kind of teleport lock in place is reasonable, but your should in no way have it as a common fixture.
Just my two bits! :D
If I were you, I would mod the adventure a bit to maybe allow a character with teleoport to use it - let them use their abilities. There is noting I hate more then when you get a really cool item, like a ring of fire resistance or a brooch of missiles, and then the DM does not use those effects against you any more because he knows is it pointless - but the enemy should not know.
Sure, haveing a few secure locations that have some kind of teleport lock in place is reasonable, but your should in no way have it as a common fixture.
Just my two bits! :D
I know what you're saying, I did consider adding something like a continueous spell or power to the slave pits that prevents teleportation in an out of the area, using the logic that considering the project that is being work on Kalak may have invested in such a spell or power to prevent slaves from escaping. I even considered modifying it so that it rerouted the teleport to a special holding cell so that the Templars would know who can use such abilities and put those trying to teleport in to good use as a slave.
But the more I thought about the idea, the more I didn't like it no matter how well it deals with my problems, it just felt like it didn't fit. Of course I'm far from a DS expert, maybe it's perfect for the setting.
You see my group likes to have a certain degree of railroading in thier D&D, none of them are exceptional RPers and can't really handle the ability to do whatever they like...
...
Teleportation is really the only thing that breaks the control enough that the illusion could start to fall apart, it's kinda like Neo in the Matrix.
Never mind "doing whatever they like", but Harkle, do you see how the last statement in your post contradicts the first? "Oh, they aren't really able to make choices..." followed by "Oh, if they make choices, it would destroy the illusion..."
Either they can't make choices, and you're in the clear, or they can, and you're in trouble.
Ok, I understand you are afraid they might choose to have the teleport power, and then choose to use it, because you won't have a workable contingency prepared for such an escape that lets you put them back into/keep them in the adventure as written.
As such, the simple, straightforward solution is: if you need to have this much control over the group for their own good, you tell them the power is off-limits because it causes problems with the adventure/plot and will make play unfun.
Simply remove the choice of even having the power because it is problematic. Restrict their choices as you state you are already doing (by choosing to railroad).
After all, you have already said you are making the important choices for them and just giving them only the most harmless freedoms in play. Removing the teleport power is just you making another such a choice without being underhanded about it.
Otherwise, you're trying to pretend for your players that you aren't controlling things when you really are, and justifying that choice as "necessary" while complaining about the problems it is causing. You're saying they can't make choices, but are afraid of the choices they might make; you mean you don't want them to make certain choices, but you won't explicitly restrict them from making those choices.
In such cases, there is no viable solution we could provide that would maintain the desired status quo -- quiet and invisible GM control over the game's direction while the players remain ignorant and happy in the dark thinking they really can do whatever they want -- for as Flip points out: it is only going to get worse as they rise in level and more "game-breaking" powers become available to them.
(This is also why I consider the "negating the use of powers" solution to be a poor long-term or widespread solution.)
So ultimately this is not a problem with your players. They can't "break the illusion" by teleporting. They can only choose to teleport and you break the illusion by not dealing effectively with their choice to do so: whether that is removing the power from the game so it isn't a problem, or learning more effective GMing techniques to deal with its continued inclusion.
It is about taking responsibility for one's style of play up front. Not that you aren't, but you may be overcomplicating the situation with conflicting desires.
-----
-----
Tangentially, I have wonder if I were to ask your group about this, what would they say?
Have you as a group sat down and discussed how they aren't capable of really RPing so you need to control certain choices they might make, and that you must deny them access to certain powers or choices in order to effectively maintain the illusion in play? Or are you doing this in the dark and have decided on your own without their input that "GM knows best"?
Have they said flat-out they want/desire/need railroading because they can't deal with the freedom? Or if you haven't asked them, would they say to you "screw that, I want to be able to do what I want"?
If they have or would say the latter, by making such a statement they are showing they can or want to "do whatever they want", and in that case while you may really want them to be constrained, they don't "need" or "want" you to do so -- and the "it's for their own good" defense becomes pretty shaky.
The real solution in that case is to learn more effective GMing techniques that let you handle their choices without destroying the illusion for them, instead of trying to subtly removing their choices from them.
Anyways, I hope some of this has been helpful.
Tangentially, I have wonder if I were to ask your group about this, what would they say?
Have you as a group sat down and discussed how they aren't capable of really RPing so you need to control certain choices they might make, and that you must deny them access to certain powers or choices in order to effectively maintain the illusion in play? Or are you doing this in the dark and have decided on your own without their input that "GM knows best"?
Have they said flat-out they want/desire/need railroading because they can't deal with the freedom? Or if you haven't asked them, would they say to you "screw that, I want to be able to do what I want"?
If they have or would say the latter, by making such a statement they are showing they can or want to "do whatever they want", and in that case while you may really want them to be constrained, they don't "need" or "want" you to do so -- and the "it's for their own good" defense becomes pretty shaky.
The real solution in that case is to learn more effective GMing techniques that let you handle their choices without destroying the illusion for them, instead of trying to subtly removing their choices from them.
Anyways, I hope some of this has been helpful.
I haven't DMed for my group is 3 years, so I've played as one of the PC's and watched three other DMs try to work with the group, they've all tried giving the group the abilitity to do as they please and very little has happened, the players have actually called meeting after such times to complain about the DM not doing his job, not providing them with choices, when in fact the problem was to many choices, I know I had fun running off and trying to find the plot although I couldn't do that with all the differant choices I tried to make. What I want to do is,
1 get practice in DMing,
2. Learn DS better, and
3. actually run the 5 adventures in the series Freedom starts,
and 4.Slowly ween them off of have a DM hold thier hand by giving them lots of little choices and sideplots they can create by thier action, a forcing plot to find them once thins start to slow down. As they get better at making choices on thier own I'll provide them with few gudes and more freedom. Once I'm done with those 5 adventures I actually want to be able to say to my players, "what do you want to do now?" and actually get a responce.
So yes I'm an inefective DM for not being able to integrate Teleport into the adventure I want to run where several people have already said they could not handle very well themselves. But I did note when I first made this thread that I had looked over the other adventures I plan to run and can handle any ability I can think of in any of the situations that exist in those adventures. However I want to change things so what I can handle this kind of situation.
You know what this is turning into rambling, so I'll end this rant here.
they've all tried giving the group the abilitity to do as they please and very little has happened, the players have actually called meeting after such times to complain about the DM not doing his job, not providing them with choices, when in fact the problem was to many choices, I know I had fun running off and trying to find the plot although I couldn't do that with all the differant choices I tried to make.
My sympathies. I have been there before, exactly. Trying to give the group total freedom and then having the group stumble around trying to "find the plot", never accomplishing anything or gaining any forward momentum was very frustrating for everyone involved.
I was trying to achieve the same thing as a GM with one of my recent 3E groups: getting them to make their own choices and create their own plots. Unfortunately, I did not handle the situation very well because I failed to apply some of the tools I'd learned about (like "Bangs") that would have made the whole "what choice do we make" problem disappear.
Remember, a lot of gamers are used to the plot being handed to them, for there to be a set plot, encounters, etc. for them to discover, so they don't take any action until they're certain it is in line with the plot (and they often do so because they don't want to be hosed by the GM for failing to go in the right direction, or bored stiff because the GM has nothing exciting prepared to cope with their decision).
Heck, many don't even realize that's how they are playing! I know it came as a revelation to my group when we sat down and discussed it, and they realized they had been sitting around waiting for plot to fall into their laps as usual and it had not.
I wish I had set up some Relationship Maps and Bangs (especially Bangs) and things might have gone much differently. As it was, the game ended and desptie offering them freedom, I hadn't gotten them to take ahold of it because I'd failed to fill the void with anything worth grabbing.
Actually, I wish I had played a game of Dogs in the Vineyard with them, and really opened it up that way (I'm still thinking of how I might write up a Dark Sun variant of the game: Templars in the Royal Garden or something like that).
"Do something and I'll react to that," just didn't inspire them to try anything (because of too many choices? because they weren't sure what to do, or rather what they could do?); there was nothing there I was providing for them to grab onto and run with.
I realized later if I'd known what interested them, as indicated by their character sheets/background, and had developed some Bangs to test those desires and throw the desires into conflict, the game would worked out much better for everyone.
(As you might realize, and as I mentioned earlier, it isn't about "doing whatever you want", but more freedom and personalization than provided by linear plot structures and set-piece scenarios.)
As they get better at making choices on thier own I'll provide them with few gudes and more freedom. Once I'm done with those 5 adventures I actually want to be able to say to my players, "what do you want to do now?" and actually get a responce.
I hope your experiment in doing so turns out better than mine did!
You know what this is turning into rambling, so I'll end this rant here.
Didn't seem too rantish to me, but ok! And again, good luck! I've been there and I know how tough it is to make work.
The encounter I had used to start off the adventure was the one dealing with the two elves beeting up on the half-elf. As I had suspected, the players were quick to intervene. This, of course, meant they were also quick to obtain the notice of the city guard, and, because the psionicist had used a power on one of the elves, I had them "snitch" to the templars about his abilities.
Of course, I could have just as easily ruled that the templars would just kill the psionicist, and save the trouble, but I chose to go another route instead. I had found a fan-created creature, called a mind beetle, that I decided to use. It was basically just a beetle that buried itself under the skin of its victim, eventually causing massive pain in the event the "infected" individual tried to use a power.
This seemed like such a good idea at first. However, it became pretty apparent that, although the other players didn't seem to mind - hee hee, the guy playin' the psionicist was NOT having fun. So, it seemed I had only made matters worse, but a solution presented itself.
I had wanted to run the players through the encounters involving the NPC Faldar. In those encounters the opportunity for escape is presented. This solved both problems, and yet provided yet another. Being free from the pits, the psionicist was able to procur the means of which to rid himself of the parasitic beetle, AND I now no longer needed to worry about his powers disrupting the course of the adventure. Ahh, and note that it was only the psionicist that was able to escape...just the way the story worked out, it wasn't forced.
The problem now was, that the adventure doesn't provide info on what to do outside of the pits. So, now the story was up to me, and in that lies the primary problem that we both share(d).
Remember, that - now pay attention - THE STORY IS UP TO YOU.
This means, that the adventure module is simply a guide. If a player deviates from the storyline of the adventure, that's ok.
I was, in the end, able to get the player involved in the events pertaining to the arena, but only by keeping true to the nature of the players, their characters, and the story i wanted to tell, was this possible.
Remember, that - now pay attention - THE STORY IS UP TO YOU.
This is an important thing to remember. Beyond whatever your gaming group agrees on regarding what Athas / DS is, none of the players know what any specific place on Athas is like. Whatever you make up, the players will likely consider realistic.
One of the techniques I've seen for developing an RPG setting is to come up with a handful of rules that describe how things act in the setting. Then apply them whenever you need to come up with someone. For example, I've been thinking about how to do this for DS, and I've come up with the following:
1) Survival is difficult, or at least everything thinks survival is difficult. As a result, people act in a desperate manner almost all the time. This rule produces a world where it's difficult to trust people b/c they're always looking for a chance to take resources from you so that they can survive. Anyone with power will tend to abuse it because that's the best way to help yourself survive. If you don't rule with an iron fist, someone will overthrow you b/c they're desperate.
2) Nothing is free. This is similar to rule 1. This is why magic needs to be powered by something. This rule means that you can get the black lense, but you'll destroy the functioning situation the giants have set up around it. You can kill Beorys, but that will let Rajaat out. You can save Athas by filling it with water, but that will kill the existing ecosystem. Etc.
3) People who accomplish things, any things, will get noticed. In 2nd ed., this meant that you couldn't reach high levels without attracting followers. This mechanic doesn't exist in 3.5, but the rule means that once/if the PCs escape in Freedom, if they don't leave town people will start talking about them. Maybe it will result in publicized harsher treatment of slaves in the city (from rule 2 [the PCs have to pay for their freedom somehow] and rule 1 [rule with an iron fist]). Maybe it will inspire an uprising in part of the slave population that the PCs feel responsible for.
Those are my three rules for Athas/DS. Yours could certainly be different. Once you have those rules, you can predict how any situation of interest will turn out (my rules don't preclude me from letting the PCs rent a room and sleep peacefully for the night. If something interesting does happen, though, I have some idea what it will be.) Even if the players never know what your rules are, the setting development you do that is guided by them will feel consistent to them, even if they don't know why.
Telekintic Flight is fairly simple to handle should he try to get abusive with it, I'll just had an on duty Psionicist or Templar Blast him out of the air, I'll rule the fall almost kills him an leaves him unconcious, I'll give the other PC's enough time to ensure he doesn't bleed to death then have The guards throw him in a pit without food or water for a couple days. Dimension Door shouldn't prove to be much of a problem since the rang caps at 200 yards, 200 yards to the west places him on Kalak's Ziggurat, but I'll rule that Kalak protected his Ziggurat so they you can't use powers like that to get on it, and he arrives at the base of the Ziggurat. If he goes south west he ends up in the Stadium, any where to the east he ends up outside the city walls, and I'll say that area is heavily patrolled beacuse of how close it is to the slave pits, same with north and south, heavily patrolled. And Phase seems to be short ranged enough that he isn't going to get to far with it.
In any case should he get caught using such powers I'll have him assigned to Jobs where the templars require him to use hi powers to speed the process, and he'll be watched over by a high level Psionicist to make sure he doesn't get out of line.
Next Friday the group can add finishing touches to thier characters, and the no show we had yesterday can make a character (I'm hoping he'll want to be a HUman Preserver, currently don't have any humans or Mages in the group)