| | | | | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
YRM_DM
Sergeant
901 Posts
    
 | | 12/04/2006 6:36 AM |
| I was reading through the Rules Lawyer post, and, it was pretty impressive to me that there were a lot of smart, rational responses.
Unfortunately, some DMs view "Rules Lawyers" as any time a player is actually correct about the rules, but it disrupts the DM's poorly planned story.
I can speak from experience that, as a newer DM, I made a lot of those mistakes when I started.
High School - When I DMed 2nd Edition, I ran a good campaign for the standards of most HS games, and the guys enjoyed it, but, I would regularly cut corners for my story, and exaggerate heavy handed punishments if a player did something stupid. (like, when the Wizard cast Flaming Sphere in the wilderness, I had a massive fire ignite, even though I hadn't described the dry conditions ahead of time)
Post College - New group. I was really challenged by some players who went out of their way to learn the rules, inside and out.
This forced me to learn what they learned, and also to learn what they missed.
The party rogue learned all the ways he could sneak attack, but failed to mention all of the things that could prevent sneak attack under certain conditions like concealment, uncanny dodge, fortification armors, and monster types.
We got more into using miniatures, and combats, eventually, went 100% by the book.
I'd still cut corners on story devices, such as having elves drop in front of the party from trees to emphasize the sneakiness of the new ally. Now, I'd handle it properly with all the proper spot and listen checks... and if my NPC elves snapped a branch, so be it.
My players learned that they could die in my campaigns, and I re-enforced that they wouldn't die through mis-rule or DM mistake.
Current 3.5 Campaign
Now, we do just about everything by the book.
I think I've had situations where ever skill on the list has been used, and the rolls are all made properly.
When I plan a battle, I'm better at mixing the threat in a way that makes sense. I'm also better at damaging the party without using monsterously strong foes that can kill a PC with a crit.
Goblins, for example, with a level or two, make great minions in a fight. With thrown weapons, a high dex, and perhaps equipped with tanglefoot bags or acid flasks, the little buggers are dangerous support to a few tougher NPCs. They can hit frequently without being overly deadly.
I handle wealth better now.
We use miniatures a lot, but, it's seemless, and the way it works out, the PCs really don't know when combat is coming, even if they're in a shop in town.
The PCs weave through a variety of major plot threads, and if they manage to kill a major villian easily, I allow the anti-climactic moment and vow to plan better next time.
(if a villian is fighting near a cliff, make sure he/she has feather fall or fly... if the PCs use a lot of save or die spells, make sure the villian's henchmen have warned him and he prepares at least somewhat...)
The PCs themselves are hit with a large variety of saves, and I don't meta-game vs player type unless the NPC causing the save is so experienced and intelligent that he could recognize a PC's role by looking at the gear.
If you make enough PCs make enough of each type of save, eventually, something gets through (usually non-lethal, like sleep, charm person, certain poisons, disease, stunning, area spells, traps, etc.)
This current campaign, according to my players, is the most difficult, but best of my campaigns. Yet, none of them has died, and they are L10. They've come close to death, and I'm sure someone will buy it eventually, but, they are playing better now.
When I play as a player, or the other DM(s) in the group play in my campaign, we do try to help each other out with the rules, even if the rules are BAD for our PC.
The other DM plays a wizard type in my campaign, and, he's meticulous about paying proper amounts for his spellbook, inks, and the time it takes to decipher and scribe new spells from scrolls.
The players all have little charts and tools to speed their actions in combat, and all the combats play out more like a quality strategy game than hack-n-slash.
I'm thankful to have such a good group, and to have players that push to build creative campaigns within the existing rules.
We've all come to accept that, as DMs, if we plan to steal an item from the party, or set an ambush, or capture a PC... that sometimes the PCs can foil the plan.
I did a PC audit recently to see how close I was to the recommended wealth levels. One PC, the barbarian, was about 10k richer than anyone else (the players don't stress too much about equal spoils regarding items).
I made an attempt to steal the barbarian's Ring of Protection +2... which would have balanced things out, and, the way it happened made sense.
The party rogue prevented the theft through some surprising rolls and quick thinking.
Instead of punishing the group for success, or finding another way to even the wealth, I just let them have their success. They felt good having thwarted my plans, and I didn't feel the need to heavy-hand the issue, even though it didn't follow the exact path I figured it would.
I guess I think that the more you DM, the more you learn the rules, and the easier it gets to plan general adventures within the rules to such a point where you don't have to force anything.
Like I said before, I was really glad to see some of the responses in the Rules Lawyering thread. Most of the examples were of "rules lawyers" actually getting the rules wrong, rather than hoping for a legitimately correct ruling.
If you got through this whole story, let me know if it's ringing any bells. How have you improved your play over the years? How about your group? Have they pushed you and vice versa to make a game that would resemble one run (as much as possible) by a WoTC employee at Gen Con?
| |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Chris Orlando
Warrior
187 Posts
| | 12/04/2006 9:09 AM |
| | I liked your write up and its very interesting to see development of players and DM's over the years. I have learned a hand full of no, no's as a DM for example having a ultra high lvl NPC in the party (more than 5 levels ahead of the party) working with the PC's and how boring it can be as well as making the PC's feel inferior. I know i have developed a lot as a DM and player over the years. I have also seen little development over other players' and DM's. I think that whole rules lawering is a intresting situation becuase even though you wana play by the book there are always cases in which the rules might not apply. I think the key is to find some sort of middle ground of running strickly by the rules and running things how you see fit. This is how i precieve the beauty of D&D. | |
Zardnaar, One dork to rule them all. | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 12/04/2006 10:01 AM |
| | Tha's a very good point. I know I went through a bit where I became a little too inflexible and only after thinkng about it did I realize that in some cases you have to bend or even break them. I think the biggest lessons I learned were similar to the ones you did as well, YRM, that as a DM the players aren't there to see my greatness. This means limit cut scenes (or box text), allow them their moments of greatness even if it goes against what I planned, and never screw over the PCs just to reestablish balance (like you showed in your wealth example, that was an excellent example of good DMing). | |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 12/04/2006 11:31 AM |
| | It is interesting to me that your progression as a DM has largely been one of getting closer and closer to the core rules.
I certainly don't run a house rule-heavy game, but I would say a lot of my improvement has come from knowing what rules to ignore. The iconic example I would give for this is the appraise skill. It just isn't worth my time and effort to keep track of how much the party thinks things are worth vs. how much they are actually worth, deal with haggling over trying to sell it, etc. It just slows the game down without adding any real value. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
901 Posts
| | 12/04/2006 11:49 AM |
| I agree with the comment about not using NPCs with the party that are more than X Levels higher than the party... although, when my group was helping Randal Morn and his mercenary army to re-take Dagger Falls www.jpoppa.com/daggerfalls.htm there were some high level NPCs on both sides.
The party has been put in some tough spots, where, sometimes, they are in over their head and better not fight.
In the case of re-taking the town, for the most part, it worked out that the more powerful leader-NPCs on both sides eventually sought each other out and fought, and the PCs had to do as much as they could without getting caught in the crossfire.
Now, the PCs actually own a stronghold on the outskirts of town. They have considerable power as stewards, yet, they are also beholden to Daggerdale and they've met forces far greater than themselves. I did actually capture the entire group once, after leading them into a trap (but I made sure to give them every chance and roll to avoid the trap... it was difficult, but not impossible to avoid, and their best shot was a Detect Evil by the Favored Soul granting a Will save vs the enemy's Misdirection spell).
But yeah, you have to avoid the Deus Ex Machina to the point where the party thinks that a powerful NPC is going to come in at the last second and bail them out.
Even when they are helped by NPCs, it's always worked out that the party sees the value of the NPC help, but yet, the party has to pull their own weight to make the plan work. They've tried to build good relationships with the town leadership (to the point where there is a helpful relationship), so I have tried to reward that by periodically granting them small favors or partial bail-outs (they use "Sending" to ask for help, and, perhaps, a similar level scout type from town later shows up with a few supplies and a helping hand... )
I haven't really found the rules to be too restrictive any more, although, occassionally, I'll convert a rule or combine rules to allow for some cool bit of improvisation.
If a PC wanted to, say, run down a hill, jump over a log, slide along some ice and perform a charging attack...
Well, if the PC has invested all those ranks in Tumble, Jump, Balance, and has the needed movement... I think it's moments like that where, if they make their checks, it really makes for a memorable moment.
It's said that Large Water Elementals can easily flip boats... so, a pit trap on a solid wall type fortification, filled with water (and a Large Elemental) flipped the trap door when a PC walked over it and failed to detect the trap. From there, I decided to use a "falling block trap" combined with a balance check to see if the PC remained standing after being flipped to the ground with the "floor" collapsing on them.
So yeah, we ad-lib some stuff.
Diplomacy is done with dice, BUT, I grant from +5 to -5 circumstance bonus based on actual RP, so, it's not enough just to pad your score (although it helps a lot too). Some Diplomacy, we just use opposed checks.
Condition cards, initiative cards, secret notes, hidden rolls for skills the PC wouldn't know, etc. No fight resembles a bunch of PCs surrounding a monster and swinging at it. (unless it's some meaningless random encounter intending to let the PCs perform a 1 round beatdown... just to mix it up on a rare occassion)
I know we're not the only group who has gone from barely controlled chaos to what seems like a fairly well oiled machine. It couldn't happen unless all the players wanted it to happen and worked for it... but this would have been impossible to run smoothly just a few years ago.
| |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Oryan77
Sergeant
950 Posts
| | 12/05/2006 11:19 AM |
| I did exactly what you did...stuck to using core rules and very little
house rules. I was never a big rules guy, but I got some players that
were total rules lawyers so I was forced to improve my rules knowledge.
Then I got new players and they are also big on rules. I wouldn't call
these new players rules lawyers because they actually help with rules
without nitpicking every detail, and they have NEVER argued with me.
It's amazing to me that they don't argue with me. You don't realize how
much arguing slows down a game until you've played games where no one
argues!
I had 2 great rules moments in our session last week that totally
surprised me and impressed the players. The first was when my evil NPC
turned invisible underwater (we're playing in the Elemental Plane of
Water at the moment). I asked everyone, "Isn't there a chance to spot
an invisible guy underwater? I think the rule is in the DMG and it
talks about how the body displaces the water". So a player looked it up
while I continued on with the game and sure enough his jaw drops and he
says, "Wow, that's such a random rule. It's right here and does....".
He laughed at me for knowing about some completely off the wall rule.
Awhile after that, a PC gets into a grapple with an octopus. Grappling
rules are my bane! I've read those rules dozens of times and I still
can't remember all the details when it comes to performing actions
during a grapple. The PC wanted to attack with a natural claw attack. I
wanted him to check if he gets penalties for it because I remembered
something about a -4 penalty to certain attacks. He couldn't find the
text on it and I said, "Look at the paragraph at the top right of the
page, let me know if natural weapons are included in the penalty".
Another player laughed that I knew what paragraphs to check 
Knowing the rules also helps keep the game going smoothly. I think my
players believe that I know my stuff, so they trust me when I make a
ruling on the fly. Trusting your DM is a big deal. Players that don't
trust the DM cause problems and hurt the game. Even when it's the DM's
fault for being untrustworthy, it will cause players to hurt the game.
I've also learned not to make the mistake of thinking I need to punish a character for a player being an idiot. When I was DM'ing 2e, we were sticklers for alignments and you had to play the PC exactly to that alignment at all times. Alignments are so broad that it's hard for anyone to say a PC can & can't do certain things because of his alignment. The groups ranger player was a moron most of the time. He kept doing things that we thought a ranger shouldn't be doing. So I setup an elaborate scenario to turn his elven ranger into a deformed (but cool looking) humanoid fighter with special properties. If he stole a magic cloak from some NPC's that I planted in a "random" encounter in the woods, then he'd get transformed. If he didn't steal it, he'd be fine. But, as I figured, he stole it as if he was the party rogue. After his PC transformed and I explained the "cool & interesting" look & abilities he has and that it can be a goal of his to get turned back to normal, he lost interest in my campaign. He always played the hulking fighter and he wanted to be a ranger. I took that from him. I learned to be lenient on alignments when it's not an extreme action that obviously breaks the alignment code. Even if it does break it, I understand that players views on their PC's change as they play them more, and alignment changes can happen normally without needing to punish a PC.
| |
Miniatures for sale *more added 04/10/08*: Click here
I will buy your unwanted D&D WotC minis collection (DDM only). Email me your asking price! | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
901 Posts
| | 12/05/2006 12:26 PM |
| Nice.
I agree about trusting the DM. The rules help in that regard. You know that if you die, it happened because you failed your proper spot and listen checks, got ambushed, and were bull-rushed off a cliff where you took the appropriate amount of falling damage. You know that the DM uses a mix of balanced encounters, and you didn't die for the sake of the story or to something 5+ CR higher than you that you didn't pick a fight with.
And we do the same thing you do.
During combat, a guy who just went has plenty of time to look up an effect, rule, or spell that doesn't need to be resolved that exact second.
Can't remember which effects Panacea removes, and it's between that and a Cure Spell? Unless the target of those spells is next, or about to die next, you can move on with another part of combat while the player looks it up.
I can't tell you how many times I've asked a player to look up a non-lethal condition so that things can keep moving. I know most of them, but, it's hard to remember all the side effects of Deafness or Sickened if they haven't happened in a while.
And yeah, if you have to make a ruling on the fly, especially a non-lethal one, if your players know that you work hard to stay on top of things, they're more likely to think, "Well, I'm not sure the DC he picked was 100% right, but, it's probably close. (for example scaling a surface not described on the chart)"
I kind of look at the rules as oddly liberating. If you were to invent a board game, the dice don't limit creativity, but they define probability of events, so you can predict the average length. Trivial Pursuit must have known, with just a little math, how long it might take to land on, and finish, the last piece of pie.
Within a certain structure, you're free to now direct all your creative energy towards story, logic, strategy, NPC depth, flavor, etc.
Over time, you don't end up having to burn excess game time and thought debating or dictating what you think happens if a character tries to walk across magma or tries to pinpoint an invisible foe.
Once you know the rule for spotting an invisible foe (above water, this is a near epic level spot check), you can ad-lib circumstance modifiers for a dusty room (footprints, swirls, -5 to the DC to spot) or a room of mirrors (even if you make a spot check... does it help? perhaps a 1 in X type chance of pinpointing the square)
Good stuff... and if the players stop worrying about being railroaded or killed by DM mis-ruling, they can put more care and energy into playing their PC. (the player attitudes are huge though, even when the DM is trying hard and working to establish trust)
| |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 12/05/2006 3:14 PM |
| Interesting thread. Some things discussed here, i (think i) learned also.
Over time, i came to the following conclusion: i'll try to play my opponents fairly, but i always secretely root for the PCs. "Fairly" is the keyword here. Thus, my opponents will do what they can to kill or otherwise thwart the PCs' plans, to the best of their abilities, but without "divine intervention". All their knowledge of the PCs has to be obtained realistically. What they do, a PC of equivalent power should also be able to do. And then, i don't take pleasure in defeating them, it is not a goal i have. Thus, durint combat, i try to adjudicate as fairly as i can, and i won't allow my BBEG to accomplish impossible things because i want him to live. If he dies because he got unlucky on a Hold Person save, so be it.
Also, i don't have an ally NPC with a level above the PCs' level anymore. Preferably, i'll have an ally with 1-2 levels less at least, that way i can play him the best i can, and he still won't outshine the PCs.
As for rules, well personally i think rules are only there to support the game, they musn't *be* the game. The game is having fun around a table while role-playing through an adventure. Rules are interesting, but they have to take the back seat. I agree with others' comments about knowing the rules, but then again it's not so important as to have a smoothly run session, so when no one knows for sure, i'll decide on the fly and we'll stick with it and search later. It doesn't really matter in the end, apart for life-and-death situations.
Sky | |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 12/05/2006 4:13 PM |
| I've done the same thing before, especially if there is a time crunch like in a Living Greyhawk session where we only have 4 hours to finish a module. I personally like following rules as closely as possible since house rules have a way of needing to be changed or revised multiple times and I dislike that. I found that if I have to do a quick ruling I have to make sure it applies to me as well as the PCs. Once I did this with the tactical witdrawl mode and even though it worked against a monster, I had to follow the rules as I established them, even if I was wrong.
As for rules I always look up, grapple, bull rush, and the web spells are continual offenders. | |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
Oryan77
Sergeant
950 Posts
| | 12/05/2006 4:35 PM |
| Posted By Skyscraper on 12/05/2006 3:14 PM
As for rules, well personally i think rules are only there to support the game, they musn't *be* the game. The game is having fun around a table while role-playing through an adventure. Rules are interesting, but they have to take the back seat. That's exactly how I feel. I hate having to spend my time learning rules when I could be preparing adventures instead. But it's very hard to put the rules in the back seat when the players are people that have extensive knowledge of the rules (and that's most of the players I find to join my game). They'll call you out on a rule if you're wrong and they'll insist that you do it right (most of the time). They'll also take advantage of your lack of knowledge and they'll perform tactics that you did not consider (sunder, bull rush, trip, grapple, grab, ect). That will do 2 things, thwart your attempts at running a challenging encounter, and slow down the encounter because the DM will be fumbling around either looking up the rules or figuring out how to wing it on his end.
Either way, players that know their rules usually won't enjoy playing with a DM that doesn't.
That's one of my biggest gripes about 3rd edition. It's awesome how easy it is to learn & use rules for the game, but it sucks how easy it is for players to learn & use rules for the game. It's harder for the DM to get away with winging something without the players thinking twice about it.
| |
Miniatures for sale *more added 04/10/08*: Click here
I will buy your unwanted D&D WotC minis collection (DDM only). Email me your asking price! | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
901 Posts
| | 12/06/2006 7:59 AM |
| I agree, it is harder for a less experienced DM to get away with "winging it".
In our group, initially, under 3.0 rules, I was the only DM, and I made a lot of mistakes. I still had control of the table and, if I had to rule on the fly and make fixes later, I could put my foot down... but I preferred to be on solid footing if possible.
Now, the core people in our group haven't changed in 5 years, and several of us rotate into the DM slot as we manage two campaigns.
Just like for all of you, my group's dynamic guides our play style.
POSITIVES:
- Most of us are in our 30's, so, we have a bit more stability over years than a college or HS group.
- Since we all have careers, spending money on miniatures, books, and materials is somewhat easier.
- Having worked in various areas of development, we can apply those skills to managing a campaign.
- We do have one college kid and one guy's son (13) in the group, so, we do have a mix.
- We all enjoy tactics, strategy, story and push a high level of accuracy.
- I enjoy building terrain, and have won a few Hirst Art Design Derby contests, we have a very large mix of master maze, buildings, castles, outdoor matts, ruins, wasteland and we keep adding new environments.
NEGATIVES:
- Most of us have full time jobs and kids. We can't play all that often. We play once every three weeks.
- We rotate campaigns, so, each DM only has to be ready once every six weeks, (or longer). This can create a bit of a memory gap and we have to rehash at the beginning of each session.
- Because it's hard to get everyone together, our sessions tend to be 6-10 hours long. This is probably both good and bad.
Right now, we have two "main" DMs. I'm one. The other one was a top player in my first campaign. He probably worked harder than anyone else to learn the rules, and he also tries to run a challenging, but fair, campaign.
A third DM runs a sort of tertiary campaign about 2-3 times a year as a change of pace.
We also try to have our NPCs only act on knowledge that they should actually have. But, I will say that a smart NPC leader doesn't sit in a room in a dungeon, waiting to be killed. In every campaign, the NPCs go about their business, and only act on intel that they are aware of.
In fact, the PCs delved too far into my last dungeon, after finding out that the "main bad guys" (a Zhentarim Cleric and Wizard) weren't even home. The PCs stumbled through a disguised one-way portal, and were now pursuing the Cleric and Wizard across the 7th layer of Hell, hoping to recover the Wizard's amulet, which could open the portal from the other side (they found this out after perusing a journal they stole but didn't read prior to entering the portal).
The PCs finally caught up to the Wizard and Cleric, who were delivering a hostage to a Pit Fiend as part of a deal. The PCs heard the Pit Fiend ranting, and snuck into an outcropping to watch and wait until they could ambush the Wizard and Cleric after the big devil left. Even with their good hiding and distance, the Pit Fiend might have spotted them, but failed due to big negative modifiers for being distracted.
The Wizard and Cleric's prisoner/hostage had escaped, thanks to a subtle plot by competing archdevils. I've let enough bits and pieces slip to the PCs that they are aware that they are part of a web of deception and intrigue, but not so much that they see the big picture yet.
The Pit Fiend was less than happy, and, he responded to a sarcastic retort by the Wizard with a Meteor Swarm, Quickened Fireball, and several more fireballs into the smoking crater. THEN, he left. Needless to say, the unattended objects, even taking less damage from fire, were mostly destroyed (one or two objects from the clerics actually did survive and were recovered).
In any case, the PCs were rather shocked at the twist, since they fully expected to ambush the NPCs and steal their stuff when the Pit Fiend left.
Smart & dangerous NPCs regularly scry, gain intelligence, use illusions, use arcane eyes, and listen to reports from surviving minions. They'll cast prep-spells if they hear fighting coming their way.
A dragon, realizing vulnerability to DEX draining rays for example, might have cast multiple defensive spells against key tactics (espcially cheese) before entering a fight... and something like a dragon is sure to snatch PCs, drop them away from the group, and other nasty divisive tactics... but if a main foe rolls a 1 on a key save and dies... so be it.
---
But even though the 13 year old and the college kid, for now, are just players, I think they'd be better suited to run a future campaign than if they were thrown into a mix of peers (especially the younger kid, if he played with all other novices, it'd take him a lot longer to grasp interesting combat and just nudging the PCs along enough without railroading them)
To put it another way, this 13 year old plays better now than any of us did when we first started my 3.0 campaign, and he's far better at understanding the game than I was even when I ran a campaign in high school.
Eventually, some group will count themselves lucky to have him as their DM. | |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 12/06/2006 8:09 AM |
| I hear you Oryan.
I think the DM has to know the rules for the most part, you can't really get around that. In my case, there is a single player that knows the rules as much as i do (out of a total of 8 players in 3 campaigns). And sometimes, he does call me on a rule that i didn't get right. It's OK with me, i'll accept his correction and i'll change my ruling right away if he's positive about it and i'm not. Also, he knows some specific rules related to his PC better than i do. For example, he just made a new PC with the Overrun feat. When he used it the first time, i asked him to remind me how it worked, which he did, and we played it out right away. I think there is some need for some degree of humility as a DM, as i can't always be right and i can't know everything, and i have to accept corrections, suggestions and game knowledge by players.
As far as players using stuff you're not really familiar with (you state sunder, bull rush, trip, etc...), i like it. It allows me to discover how something works in-game. What i do ask is that players that have a special ability be aware how it works. If you're to cast a spell, know it's duration, area of effect, range, ... If you're going to use trip, know the mechanics of it. And so on.
As for grapple, well... no one ever remembers that one 
I guess my point is: you can get some pleasure in being thwarted, if you root for the PCs. You'll have fun seeing them manage to trip your opponent when you thought you had the upper hand, or bull rush him through the window (with saving throw due to window frame) when you thought you were going to lay the smack on them. Look at their eyes light up when they successfully accomplish some feat (in the broad sense of the word), and realize how more important it is for their PCs to survive and shine in battle, than it is for your short-lived NPC. That's my take on the game, at least as far as battles.
I guess for me, playing D&D is playing *with* the players, not against them.
Sky | |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
901 Posts
| | 12/06/2006 8:35 AM |
| I think the DM has to know the rules for the most part, you can't really get around that. In my case, there is a single player that knows the rules as much as i do (out of a total of 8 players in 3 campaigns). And sometimes, he does call me on a rule that i didn't get right. It's OK with me, i'll accept his correction and i'll change my ruling right away if he's positive about it and i'm not. Also, he knows some specific rules related to his PC better than i do. For example, he just made a new PC with the Overrun feat. When he used it the first time, i asked him to remind me how it worked, which he did, and we played it out right away. I think there is some need for some degree of humility as a DM, as i can't always be right and i can't know everything, and i have to accept corrections, suggestions and game knowledge by players.
This is a perfect situation.
I do that as a PC, and the other DM does it for me. Your guys may do this too, but, I think the overriding factor that makes this correction work for the DM is that the PC doing it (me, him, or someone else) doesn't only mention this stuff when it HELPS the PCs.
I've corrected the DM to my detriment before, and I've had that happen the other way.
One example is when the DM, knowing my AC, missed a pretty nasty attack, but, some condition or other actually meant that the bad guy hit, and I mentioned the effect/rule and took the damage.
Another time, when I was DMing, a player told me, after looking something up, "I couldn't have done what I just did, here's why... so, X action didn't actually occur." (of course, if there are too many ramifications, I might rule that it occurred anyway and we move forward)
It's really a great situation. I know I can count on my players. They know that the campaign is tough, and when they are doing well, it speaks volumes to their successful group tactics, which it seems like they are quite proud of (as they should be). | |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Oryan77
Sergeant
950 Posts
| | 12/06/2006 12:04 PM |
|
Posted By Skyscraper on 12/06/2006 8:09 AM
Look
at their eyes light up when they successfully accomplish some feat (in
the broad sense of the word), and realize how more important it is for
their PCs to survive and shine in battle, than it is for your
short-lived NPC. That's my take on the game, at least as far as battles.
I guess for me, playing D&D is playing *with* the players, not against them.
I should join your group then, we seem to think alike
I had a group last year that was the hardest group I've ever had to
play with. They really made me hate DM'ing them. I finally realized the
reason was because they had a player vs DM mentality. I had never
experienced that before. That was mostly why I went the extra mile to
become a rules machine, so I could keep up with them so they wouldn't
think they are "beating me".
I love it as much as you do when my players use tactics like bull rush
or trip. It really makes the combat seem more amazing. But I hated when
the bad players I used to have would use tactics. Everytime they'd
thwart an NPC, they made comments like, "Heh, you'd think those thugs
would have flanked Bills character"...since I didn't know about
flanking bonuses. Or, "It's funny how the goblins didn't target our
spellcaster first"...when the goblins wouldn't be smart enough to think
about that. More than once I've heard, "HAH! You'd think a spellcaster
would
target the PC with the lowest Ref save rather than our groups Rogue!"
One that really bugged me was when I heard the sarcastic comment, "It's
always nice when the NPC shouts out their next move"...when I'm trying
to spice up combat by roleplaying the Hobgoblin shouting orders to his
goons to attack a certain PC on their next turn. So players give each
other advice during combat all of the time, "Bill, you should move here
and then you can get the flank bonus", but it's lame if an NPC does it
and I just happen to roleplay it outloud? After the player made that
comment, I was so waiting for him to give another player advice during
combat in the next session. I was going to roleplay an NPC laughing at
him and saying, "I love when stupid dwarves shout out their plans for
us to hear! Grok, watch your back, you've got one coming up from the
rear!" That player left the group before I had the chance
Those players weren't saying those comments to poke fun at the NPC.
They said those comments to point out that they are better tacticians
than I am and they want to let me know I suck. I finally told them once
that I'm roleplaying NPC's. If a stupid NPC does something dumb during
combat, it's cause he's not a trained warrior skilled in the art of
strategic combat. I'm not there to play off of everyones weak points
either. I said that I'm the DM and I could easily kill anyone at any
time if I wanted, I'm not there to play against the players. I actually
told one of them that if I wanted to play against the players, I'd be
playing chess instead of D&D. I kept having to remind them that my
NPC's are trying to kill them, not me. That group fell apart just a few
sessions after those speeches.
Posted By YRM_DM on 12/06/2006 8:35 AM
I've corrected the DM to my detriment before, and I've had that happen the other way.
The players I have now do this. It's great. I really appreciate it when a player speaks up about a rule when he knows it's not in his favor. I always tell players that I remind them of rules all the time to help them out, so I ask that they do the same for me even if it benefits my NPC's.
Last session, our sorceress cast lightning bolt at a creature. As she was about to roll damage, the rogue player said, "OH CRAP! I'm standing right in the line of fire way behind the creature!" No one even noticed that and the sorceress player got upset and said, "Oh man, I'm sorry". I told her she has to roll that damage. Then I told the rogue player to roll his save. Everyone watched as he made his save, then he shouted out, "AND I HAVE EVASION SO I TAKE NO DAMAGE!" Everyone laughed with a sigh of relief and it turned into an unexpected shining moment for the rogue player.
That's proof that players & DM's need to just be casual players and not nit-pick every single thing about the game. If you just play fairly & not be a prick, you can have more fun in the game than if you argue rules or try to cheat just to benefit your PC. And if the DM shows trust, there won't be any reason for the players to cause problems. But no matter what you do, if a gamer is a problem player/DM, there's nothing you can do about it besides not play with them.
| |
Miniatures for sale *more added 04/10/08*: Click here
I will buy your unwanted D&D WotC minis collection (DDM only). Email me your asking price! | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 12/06/2006 12:46 PM |
| Aleluia!
Having fun as i'm having right now with my group, i simply could not play with a group such as your previous group that you described. I'd be out of there in 2 sessions max, methinks.
Sky | |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
901 Posts
| | 12/06/2006 1:13 PM |
| Evasion! Whee.
I think I'm a bit of a tactical nightmare at times to the other DM. All of us are generally good at strategy games, but, at least on a local level, I do very well at any kind of turn based strategy, just from playing it a lot.
I don't think I go out of my way to find cheese, but, I do try to build the most effective PC that I can, within reasonable role-playing limits. I play a pure monk in his campaign, and, with the right items, feats, and skill distribution, Monks have very few weaknesses and probably get in 4+ attacks all at their highest BaB, which is like a fighter's 2nd swing, so, still pretty accurate.
I don't outshine the other players, but, we talk about our tactics and enjoy Rary's Telepathic Bond (which we've ruled you can use to make short, immediate suggestions to another player during combat).
The group functions like a SWAT team, and, the same players in other campaigns, different PC groups, don't manage the same kind of fast lethality and effectiveness. (which is good, every group is different)
The DM has had trouble challenging us though. Away from the table, perhaps foolishly, I told him several ways I'd threaten my nigh-invulnerable monk if I was him, and, he's used a few of them to hurt me, but within the logic of the story.
When I DM, I hope my players go all out, making the most effective PCs possible, and play at the top of their game at all times. Sometimes, this means they mop the floor with me... but other times, and they don't know when it's coming, there are encounters that really require them to be at the top of their game to come out with everyone alive (and so far, they have).
At the same time, you're right. Goblins and Ogres probably shouldn't be using expert tactics, and mine don't unless they have class levels and/or a smart commander. They sure as heck shouldn't know, by looking, which PCs have a good Reflex save (although they might guess a Dwarf in Full Plate has a lower Ref Save than a wirey guy in leather armor).
I've talked to the other DMs from time to time, and we've compared notes about what we think makes for a challenging and effective encounter.
1 - Almost never use just one enemy, unless it's something like a flying, spell-prepped dragon hunting the PCs outside. If you do use one enemy, something tough like a giant or purple worm (based on party level), there will be a lot of varience in the fight. The enemy should die quickly, but may or may not kill one PC, depending on initiative, positioning, and key saves in the first round.
2 - Rarely use tons of the same type of enemy. It's too hard for a DM to manage well, and the level of individual tactics drops off.
I have actually run massive battles, but, they require more pre-planning and take a lot of time to resolve. These should be rare, and even then, there are multiple enemy types mixed up.
3 - The best encounters are generally such that there are a variety of enemies, from leader types to minions, with a variety of functions, and the enemy tries to use terrain or some other factor for an advantage.
A great encounter last session happened after the PCs easily repulsed a Bearded Devil patrol (w lemures) into their camping cave.
When the Devil didn't report back (wasn't summoned, the PCs are actually in hell), his Erinyes commander investigated and came back with a more dangerous attack.
She hired a Mezzoloth and brought along two Hellcats. Then proceeded to order the cave filled with Cloud Kill, forcing the PCs to come out.
She fired arrows from a distance while the Hellcats lay in ambush to kill any PC approaching her or the Mezzoloth. An Erinyes is smart enough to use this kind of semi-advanced ambush to thwart a PC's typical camping strategy (yes, their alarm stone went off, but by then, the Cloudkill was already starting, and pouring down into the cave).
The PCs won the fight, but it was a faced paced, exciting, five round combat, full of twists and turns.
For me, if I craft an encounter correctly, it can be balanced so that the PCs have enough of an advantage that I can actually play to the best of my ability with an inferior force.
Other times, if I'm using an equal or superior force, I usually tip the alertness level in favor of the PCs (like, two commanders in the superior force are arguing, giving the PCs more chance of surprise). This gives the PCs a preperation advantage to counter a tougher CR.
We have 5 PCs, and each campaign allows one PC to take Leadership.
So if the party's effective level is 11, the best way to provide a moderate challenge is to craft a multi-complimenting-creature encounter at about CR 12-13.
The most challenging fights, I balance carefully at about the party level +3 or 4. This is a fine line, because the wrong kind of single foe at that CR can be an impossible fight.
After the fights, we (DMs) all use a +/- % system to adjust EXP. If the party was ambushed, such as in the Erinyes fight, they might get +10 or +20% EXP. I try not to penalize if the party gains an ambush through good strategy, but I will penalize a bit if they somehow stumble onto an advantage. (which is fine, it's not a penalty for wrongdoing, but rather an attempt to adjust EXP) Everything is tallied after the session and then given to the players.
Oryan, if you are ever looking for some really nasty/fun synergies that make interesting but not-impossible encounters, we've had lots.
Consider this ecological nightmare.
A group of intelligent Nyth (glowing wisps that multiply when hit with lightning) hunts around a small family of Shocker Lizards living near a pool of Yellow Ochre.
The Nyth use the Shocker Lizards as a defensive and procreative mechanism. The Ochre is immune to electricity and eats the leavings of the Shocker Lizards, but it can't get to them up in their trees.
The Nyth wait for adventurers or NPCs to pass by, and they try to line up into the sun, where they are virtually impossible to spot. Then, they fire magic missiles at the PCs. Of course, the PC sorcerer was tempted to kill all of "whatever they were" with a lightning bolt... which doubled them.
When the PCs got an edge and killed some Nyth, the Nyth fell back to the Shocker Lizard grove, the lizards activated when the PCs entered the grove (they even spotted the lizards but didn't know what they were).
Finally, after a long and surprising fight, the PCs went to check the corpse that was sitting, decaying, in the murky looking "pool" (which of course, set off the Ochre Jelly).
The fight was not lethal, but it was mentally challenging enough to keep them on the edge of their seats, and what's more, the monsterous ecosystem made sense. I explained it to the ranger, via note, after the fact, when he was trying to make sense of the situation with his survival skill.
With a fight like that, you only need a few fights per session (and of course, some are easy).
But I like the fact that my players kind of demand that what is happening in the world make some kind of sense. Now, they've come to trust that I always (at least try to) think that stuff through when preparing.
| |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Oryan77
Sergeant
950 Posts
| | 12/06/2006 3:44 PM |
| Posted By YRM_DM on 12/06/2006 1:13 PM
Oryan, if you are ever looking for some really nasty/fun synergies that make interesting but not-impossible encounters, we've had lots.
Consider this ecological nightmare.
A group of intelligent Nyth (glowing wisps that multiply when hit with lightning) hunts around a small family of Shocker Lizards living near a pool of Yellow Ochre.
See, that's great. I'm starting to think just like that but I haven't had the chance to implement anything yet.
I don't use terrain that well, but I realize I don't so I've been trying to come up with terrain ideas. And while I was thinking about that, I also realized I could spice up encounters more by throwing different monsters at PC's at the same time. Sounds like you managed to get something good going, I'll think about this again and see what I can come up with. I was only thinking of 2 monsters at once, but you went and did 3 I like that.
I was thinking of a random encounter where some travelling NPC's were fighting off a Chimera when the PC's ran up on them. During the encounter, a cage on the NPC's wagon would burst open, releasing the 2 Owlbears caged inside it. The the PC's & NPC's would have to deal with a Chimera & 2 Owlbears. I never got to run it since the PC's spent more time with a previous encounter and I wanted to keep the game moving towards the main goal.
| |
Miniatures for sale *more added 04/10/08*: Click here
I will buy your unwanted D&D WotC minis collection (DDM only). Email me your asking price! | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
901 Posts
| | 12/06/2006 5:50 PM |
| The idea with the Chimera and Owlbears makes for an interesting idea. Since you seem open to the idea, I'll break down what I read into an encounter like that. First of all, the encounter seems, for the most part, to be a brute force battle, and, to combat that, you need to keep the Chimera in the air.
The PCs are journeying from point A to point B, probably on a semi-secluded road, and they hear sounds of a battle up ahead.
Rushing forward, they see a group of three humans, in different gear, crouching behind a very large covered wagon (about 20x10) they are peering at the sky. A horse with a broken neck lies still in front of the wagon, though there appears to have been room for two horses. (A spot or listen check, base DC 10+ distance, notices growls and movement under the stretched cover of the tipped wagon) Suddenly, one human in leather armor points in the sky, and shoots an arrow at a large, three headed flying creature that bursts into view over the treeline.
(pre-roll to see if the arrow hits, or, if you prefer, just decide)
(I believe a Chimera is a magical beast, which I believe falls under Knowledge Nature, but I'd have to look those up to make sure)
The flying creature's central head, that of a black dragon, breathes a line of acid at the humans. The acid also burns away some of the canvas, and a large claw slashes up through the damaged canvas.
At this point, or before, you add the PCs into initiative. Make sure the map is big enough that you start the PCs far enough away that they can't simply charge and attack on round 1 (though spells and arrows can work).
Here's the question, which may not come up now, that makes this encounter interesting.
- Why did these NPCs capture OwlBears?
1 - For some kind of show?
2 - For an evil wizard?
3 - For a good druid, seeking to undo twisted animals?
I actually suggest changing the Owlbears. The Chimera plays, essentially, the dragon role. The owlbears are brute force, so, there are no finesse foes in this encounter.
I suggest making the creatures in the cages something less twisted than an Owlbear.
Weaken the cages due to the line of acid hitting them, and allow the animals a chance to break the cages. You can pre-roll or just have this happen. I find it more fun to pre-roll, as it makes me more familiar with break DCs and other rules, and, with the hyperlinked SRD, it's easy to look up.
Insert two off the following list based on party level ( which I assume to be somewhere around 6-8 ).
A - Dire Bear (I'd only use one of these and one of something else weaker, like the badger)
B - Dire Boar (nasty one-hit wonder with death strike)
C - Dire Badger
D - Dire Ape
E - Dire Wolf
The Chimera will continue to do most of it's attacking during flight... I don't think they have great maneuverability, and the easiest way to adjudicate that is to have it take several rounds for the Chimera to circle back (like running around a track). I'd stick mostly with it's dragon's breath until it's either driven off or angered by wounds to the point of landing and attacking.
The Dire Animals will smash the cages and begin to attack. It's ok if, for example, the Dire Bear ends up grabbing, grappling, and killing an NPC (I'd stick with the dice in that case, so you are surprised when it happens).
When the furious dire animals are killed, and the Chimera is driven off, the thankful human NPCs will show much appreciation to their new comrades (but don't offer a physical reward).
Your party may not think to ask, but you KNOW... these NPCs managed to subdue two DIRE animals.
If they were motivated by goodness, perhaps a Druid was calming/charming the animals to relocate them.
But the NPCs MIGHT be rogues. They might have been using a stronger version of Drow Poison to put the animals to sleep, and, if so, they might still have some of that poison.
What does this mean? These theives were going to sell the animals to a sideshow, and they certainly don't want to travel with the PCs to the next town, where Janra the Druid might hear about what they were doing. Perhaps the Chimera was actually provoked, and if the NPCs could capture it, they'd kill the Dire Badger, skin it, dump it, and take the bigger prize Chimera instead.
Perhaps the next time the party and these NPCs camp together, the NPCs will ambush the PC on watch with sleeping poison, and, if successful, try to steal a key item or two (and some gold) and try to get away into the night. Mix the classes of the enemy thieves. Rogue, Wizard, Fighter (or cleric of Malar). Don't over equip them, but keep their NPC wealth less than PC wealth of similar level.
Now, for every ONE time you betray the PCs, you need to reward the PCs for not killing an NPC something like five or six times.
If the PCs interrogate a prisoner, give up some useful information (assuming intimidate or bluff checks are made).
If the PCs save a beautiful woman, have her actually be skilled and helpful, rather than a succubus in disguise.
If the PCs do good work for a town, have the Mayor reward them with some land, or some other kind of reward that doesn't screw up their recommended wealth per level.
---
When you mix creatures in an encounter though, consider the roles of the creatures.
Instead of mixing a Troll, Ogre, and Hill Giant... perhaps mix a Gauth, Troll, and four L2 Goblins armed with Tanglefoot bags and Acid Flasks. Perhaps the Gauth works for the Troll or vice versa.
The Troll + Ogre + Hill Giant combo is likely to kill a PC or two if you play it right (unless the PCs are equipped with Will save effects).
The Troll + Gauth + Goblins combo is likely to cause a variety of grief to the PCs but probably won't be lethal.
In combo two, you're forcing reflex, will, fortitude saves, and you have a strong physical threat. The goblins deny mobility to the PCs, and can't be totally ignored.
The PCs may actually feel the second encounter is more challenging and interesting, even though it's less lethal.
I suggest 2-5 encounters per session, where 1-3 of the encounters are a nicely challenging mix, and you've thought about the reasons why everything is doing what it's doing.
Sorry if I'm sharing tips that you already practice or know.
Take care.
| |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 12/07/2006 9:30 AM |
| YRM_DM, the insight on how you play your game is great! I love this kind of info exchange.
Further suggestion: the creatures in the cage could be a pair of displacer beasts, male and female. The displacement and reach of the beasts will make for an interesting battle. Plus, you can make the cage see-through, with wood bars, instead of a canvas. The beasts, crouching on the ground because they've seen the chimera kill the horse, could be mistaken for panthers from afar, unless the PCs take particular interest in them and make a successful spot check (i agree with something like DC 10 + distance mod.) in which case they notice the tentacles. Knowledge (nature) would reveal the beasts' identity if you're so inclined. They'd not be deploying their tentacles because of the space restriction in the cage.
As for the the NPCs, building on YRM_DM's ideas, you could increase the interest level by having two of them being mercenaries of a generally good nature that are, say, hunting the displacer beasts for a wizard who wants to make a cloak of displacement (the NPCs heard about the beasts preying on cattle and even on a human in a nearby village, and were hunting for three months without success before that), and a third also being a mercenary but having an ulterior motive, such as:
- slaying the other two NPCs before they get near the wizard's abode to get the entire reward for himself;
- stealing the beasts before they get to the wizard's home, to sell them to an evil NPC who wants to use the beasts for some darker purpose, such as charming them, freeing them from their cage (i.e. they'll see him as a friend) and sending them to kill and/or wreak havoc somewhere, while he uses the diversion to accomplish some evil deed that could be linked to the PCs' mission somehow... (I like the second option better myself.)
Sky | |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
901 Posts
| | 12/07/2006 10:49 AM |
| Good ideas, Sky.
There was actually an adventure somewhere that I read where the PCs were moving through a maze of iron fencing (like a gate for a mansion), and the maze was full of displacer beasts that would perform hit and run attacks through the bars. I know that's a different idea, but, similar concept.
Displacer Beasts are still sort of a brute force foe, but, reach and displacement make them more tuned to challenging high-damage output barbarian types. They also give spellcasters more to do, since there are various spell counters.
A super powerful barbarian with a great axe isn't as good vs a Displacer Beast as a Sword & Board fighter with the blind fight feat.
I like the idea that one of the NPCs might be planning a betrayal.
Another great way to throw your party off is to bring them vastly useful information through an ally who happens to be, say, Lawful Evil. The party cleric, likely paranoid if you're an evil DM like me, will probably cast "Detect Evil". Yet, just because an NPC is evil doesn't mean he'll betray the party.
An evil NPC is more likely to betray the party if cooperating provides less personal gain or more risk than betrayal or simple abandonment.
At the same time, an evil NPC who enjoys the pursuit of knowledge, and enjoys the thrill of adventure, might find it amusing to befriend a group of PCs for a while and actually help them out.
A mid-level shade wizard with an imp familiar once helped my PCs track down a villian who had vastly wronged the PCs, but had also made an enemy of the shade. The party and shade made several trades, and the shade provided several buffs as needed.
I follow the advice that NPCs aren't built to out-perform or outshine the party, but, in a case like this, you CAN use an evil NPC 2-3 levels higher, but reserve 30% of his power towards defensive and escape spells/abilities should the party decide to betray him. People capable of an evil are usually more cautious and less trusting, because people want to think that they aren't alone in their failings.
Sure, the evil NPC might be able to cast X level spells, but, those spells are reserved for contingency or teleport or swift expeditious retreat or swift invisibility.
The guy still doesn't outshine the PCs, but, if they decide to kill him and take his stuff, he has a shot of escaping and bringing back a world of hurt later.
A DM who fails to plan for such an event will be caught with his or her pants down if the PCs do turn on the NPC, who will fall quickly and provide, probably, an imbalancing amount of loot. | |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Oryan77
Sergeant
950 Posts
| | 12/07/2006 12:06 PM |
| Posted By YRM_DM on 12/07/2006 10:49 AM
swift expeditious retreat or swift invisibility.
Are there rules for adding the swift action to those spells?
| |
Miniatures for sale *more added 04/10/08*: Click here
I will buy your unwanted D&D WotC minis collection (DDM only). Email me your asking price! | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 12/07/2006 12:10 PM |
| Since we're talking about our respective styles...
In my campaign, the spell "know alignment" does not exist, and detect evil/good/law/chaos only works against pure forms of the respective alignments, i.e. outsiders, non-sentient or some sentient items, etc... Mortals, including most monsters, are not "extreme" enough in their alignment to be detected by a "detect alignment" spell.
I've used that house rule since I hate the fact that anyone can judge someone else immediately based on a single spell. I want evil wizards to be able to lull others into thinking they're good, and PCs to make mistakes concerning good NPCs who they think are evil.
I still attribute an alignment to all NPCs (and ask the players to attribute an alignment to their PCs) according to how i see the NPC's (or PC's) personality. The alignment is mainly for mechanical reasons, although it's a quick reminder in my case of how a NPC is likely to act in some situation, especially if i haven't looked at a NPC for some time.
Up to now, this has worked fine, and it's fun because the players have to trust their own intuition to determine where a NPC stands. There is no quick response to that question, you need to judge the person through his actions and what he says. Like we do in our world. I do not try to use this to screw the PCs all the time with fake allies. (In fact, the single NPC who was intended to become a fake ally up to now, they never actually joined up with.)
Anyway, just my two cents on how i work with alignment in my campaign.
Sky | |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
901 Posts
| | 12/07/2006 12:25 PM |
| Oryan, there are several metamagic feats and items that let you make a spell swift. In this case, I was referring to having the NPC prepare Expeditious Retreat with the Quicken Spell feat, which makes it four spell slots higher.
It's a way to lower the power level of the NPC (at least for the time he's in the campaign) but give him more survivability.
Skyscraper, as I mentioned, my PCs are on semi-friendly terms with several evil characters. The Detect spells do indicate levels of evil or good, but, I've tried to make it so that an "evil" NPC might simply be selfish and greedy, but an important part of the health of the town due to their skills or services.
I agree that it's bad if the PCs can Detect Evil, then kill anything that registers evil. (unless it's overwhelming evil, like a disguised devil)
From what I've seen of your posts Skyscraper, it sounds like you're looking for a sort of realism over game mechanics.
- Low magic campaign.
- No clear alignment distinctions.
I've had some of those same instincts in the past, but I ended up coming back to the core mechanics. The instincts to keep magic low and stay away from black and white NPCs are instincts every DM should have.
I guess I'd only suggest being careful in the unintended game balance effects your style might have.
Even though the books aren't perfectly written, there is a lot to be said for the way that wealth, spells, stats and enemy CRs are balanced.
A creature that might be easy to defeat in a normal D&D campaign could be too strong in yours.
An enemy illusionist or rogue might be more easily able to fool the PCs with misdirection or lies. I don't mind it if the cleric in my group uses Detect Evil to get a first impression of a situation, as long as he's willing to look deeper.
I think, in principle, our goals are similar, but we're using different approaches.
There isn't only one right way to DM, but, the guidelines in the books are more conducive to balanced party power and encounters. If you have a great knack for keeping that balance adjusted, it won't be a problem, but it might be more work for you.
If you haven't gone through a campaign using the rules as is, I'd recommend it, just so that when you change the style later, you'll be more prepared for the changes in balance.
| |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 12/07/2006 1:13 PM |
| Posted By YRM_DM on 12/07/2006 12:25 PM
[snip]
Skyscraper, as I mentioned, my PCs are on semi-friendly terms with several evil characters. The Detect spells do indicate levels of evil or good, but, I've tried to make it so that an "evil" NPC might simply be selfish and greedy, but an important part of the health of the town due to their skills or services.
I agree that it's bad if the PCs can Detect Evil, then kill anything that registers evil. (unless it's overwhelming evil, like a disguised devil)
[snip]
I guess I'd only suggest being careful in the unintended game balance effects your style might have.
Even though the books aren't perfectly written, there is a lot to be said for the way that wealth, spells, stats and enemy CRs are balanced.
A creature that might be easy to defeat in a normal D&D campaign could be too strong in yours.
I think, in principle, our goals are similar, but we're using different approaches.
There isn't only one right way to DM, but, the guidelines in the books are more conducive to balanced party power and encounters. If you have a great knack for keeping that balance adjusted, it won't be a problem, but it might be more work for you.
If you haven't gone through a campaign using the rules as is, I'd recommend it, just so that when you change the style later, you'll be more prepared for the changes in balance.
Thanks for your comments.
Concerning the evil detection, i wasn't even contemplating the possibility of players attacking evil NPCs on sight - god forbid! No, personally i just have trouble with the entire clearly good vs clearly evil thing, i feel it leaves a lot of the ambiguous "humanity" out of the game. Having a spell tell you that this person is evil, just doesn't work for me even if the rules provide for relatively clear guidelines as to how alignment works.
As for changes possibly impacting on the balance of the game, your suggestions are well taken. Whenever i change anything, i try to evaluate how the shock wave will change the game. I cannot say if i have a knack for it or not, lacking comparative values. Who knows, maybe my methods really are not that good and i'm not realizing it - that is a clear possibility.
Still, for the time being, i feel that my campaign is in somewhat of a comfort zone, among other things based on some rule changes i made. The alignment question is one, the low-magic (and low-wealth level generally) is another. The main idea behind my DMing approach is to try to create some intense role-playing moments coupled with some intense combat situations, playing with the intensity level by allowing it to rise into interesting crescendos that may or may not be anticipated at the outset. The rules set is secondary to that general principle, although a campaign is made of a lot of little things that add up, and the rules are part of that.
Sky
| |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 12/07/2006 1:34 PM |
| As a side note, having a single discussion over a few threads complicates things a bit. There should be a thread merger option
Sky | |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
Oryan77
Sergeant
950 Posts
| | 12/07/2006 3:06 PM |
| How about some advice on railroading? This is a topic I always enjoy hearing opinions on.
When does a player feel a DM is railroading him and when does he feel he's not being railroaded?
If players want to complete a mission but they steer off course, do you say it's railroading when a DM steers them back on track? Maybe give some examples of what is railroading and what isn't
| |
Miniatures for sale *more added 04/10/08*: Click here
I will buy your unwanted D&D WotC minis collection (DDM only). Email me your asking price! | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
901 Posts
| | 12/07/2006 3:50 PM |
| Railroading...
I think I have a pretty high standard for not-railroading my players.
When I wrote my current campaign, I planned 3 major evil groups at work, seperately, on different goals. Since I'm working in the Forgotten Realms, I did take some goals right out of time current novels and actual timelines, but in such a way that the PCs aren't redoing what happened in another book.
I'm pretty good at hooking my PCs so that they don't want to deviate from their current path, but, every few sessions, they come to a cross roads for what major goal to next pursue. I generally allow time at the end of the session for them to make this decision, or we finish talking about it via email.
When the next session starts, its as if they JUST made that decision, but I've had weeks to flesh out the direction.
Initially, I made the story starting assumption that each PC had joined Randal Morn's mercenary army built to re-take Daggerfalls (which had fallen again). The PCs were formed into a strike unit, due to their diverse skills, so they got to take part sort of with, but along side of, a large battle (after doing a spy mission).
Once the PCs were established in town, they had lots of jobs to pick from at the newly joined adventurer's guild (which is like a dating service, matching capable parties with challenging, but doable jobs).
Surprisingly, the party picked a job that ran them up against the Cult of the Dragon... although they didn't know it at the time. (we'd fought the Cult in a different campaign, so, I was surprised they chose the route they did, with the hints provided)
The party was actually captured by the Cult, but, the way I tricked them into a capture worthy fight was through disguise checks, misdirection, bluffs, etc.
The enemy was skilled and capable, and had set a nice trap, but one good roll, or the right spell, from a PC, and I had several fall-back plans that may not have involved the PC's being captured.
Currently, the PCs are in hell... but they are not in hell because I forced them to go to hell.
They are in hell because they chose to invade a level of the Tethyamar Mines, known for it's many portals.
They delved too far into the level. The scout, who would have heard the flapping wings of an invisible imp, was deaf because he failed a save vs a goblin thrown thunderstone. The imp reported back to his Beholder Masters, and the cut off the PC's avenue of escape while a Golem was slowly raised to the PCs level by a dwarf crafted elevator.
Unfortunately, the back of the level contained a portal to hell, overlaid by a permanent image which made it look like a simple opening. (maybe I should have been using Hallucinitory Terrain there, but, the categories of illusions are slightly confusing as far as what you can cover over or not... )
The portal was disguised because the evil Zhentarim liked to trick goblin slaves through the portal (looked like an exit), as part of their deal with a Pit Fiend named Fahl to provide the services of devils to the Zhents.
Anyway, I came up with a list of the top 10 ways that the PCs could accidentally or intentionally escape without going through the portal.
Had the PCs managed NOT to go to hell, the campaign would be proceeding differently now.
There are events on the calendar, that, unless affected by the PCs, will happen at certain dates in the future...
All the evil NPC groups are active, not passive. In fact, the two bad guys weren't even home when the PCs stormed their level of Tethyamar.
Because I have taken the time to prepare a foundation, when the PCs do something that I didn't expect, they're not wandering into a void. I have a lot of material that sort of roughs out what is going on in different areas at different times, and I can just fill it in.
Even if they throw me a curve ball, in session, I've usually thought about, in general, what I do if they manage to turn 180 degrees and go the other way.
However, after the PCs were captured by the Cult of the Dragon, (back at the start of yet another rambling post by me), I was guaranteed that the PCs would pursue a vendetta against the evil leader of the Cult, even if they escaped.
Why?
During capture, the PCs were mis-treated, and the leader of the Cult completely burned off the Dwarf's beard. (Dwarf being run by the groups best role-player too)
I didn't have to force the PCs to hate the Cult, or wonder why they cared.
Don't kidnap children or terrorize caravans if you want the PCs to care.
Just steal something.
If you steal a low cost ring, most PC groups will track the thief to the ends of the earth.
Make it an NPC they've met, didn't like, and he steals something valuable? OMG. You'll NEVER have to tell the PCs which direction to go next.
PCs are just hungering for an answer to the question. Why are we doing this? Why should our PCs care?
Give them a common cause. Be a prick... but do it within the rules.
If the PCs spot a theft attempt and stop it, they feel like they had success, and that it was WORTH putting all those ranks into SPOT.
You're the DM, you've got another fall back plan.
Heck, those short "Fantastic Locations" packets (with map and adventure) make for a great side quest if the PCs ever toss you a curve ball you can't hit.
Ultimately, there needs to be a strong story, so the PCs don't feel like they wander aimlessly, but they should be able to jump from thread to thread, not forced along a st |
|
|
|
|
|