|
They bought into the God Wizard mystique and believed that since Wizards are "the best" according to all the "experts" a 4 wizard party would be great. But it sucked.And if I get four guys who are half-blind and can't shoot worth a damned and give them Glock-9s, and four combat marines beat them with a combination of old one-shot Colts, riverboat gamblers' derringers, and a Glock -- does that "disprove" the "myth" of the superiority of modern firearms?
A party of 4 wizards, run by moderately competent players, will do a lot better than a party of all fighters, and will do as well or better than a mixed party. A party of 4 anything -- wizards, fighters, mixed anything -- won't do as well against the same challenges when it's being run by bumbling novices.
Depends on how it is run and at what level. Wizards have weaknesses, just like everyone else.
Wizards have weaknesses, just like everyone else. Depends on how it is run and at what level.
Yes, they do -- but fewer of them, and they generally have better tools to bolster them. The imbalance certainly increases with skill level and with character level, though -- no question about that.
Heh, I'll take four well-played wizards against the challenge MM set up any day.
I'd take four of just about any class into that setup. That was not a hard setup, the only reason it GOT hard was due to player over-confidence and tomfoolery.
I'd even take four rogues.
Now, that doesn't mean that four wizards are an uberparty. I have said in the past and maybe even in this thread that a four wizard party is going to have to be smart and careful for the first four levels, but by level 5 it's going to be hard for the GM to challenge them without metagaming horribly.
Even in a low magic world four fifth level wizards are going to be a serious threat against any CR based encounter. Let those wizards have PF standard WBL options and load up with metamagic rods and pearls of power....
Well... they might not be gods, but they're gonna be awful hard to stop.
|
|
Heh, I'll take four well-played wizards against the challenge MM set up any day.
I'd take four of just about any class into that setup. That was not a hard setup, the only reason it GOT hard was due to player over-confidence and tomfoolery.
I'd even take four rogues.
Now, that doesn't mean that four wizards are an uberparty. I have said in the past and maybe even in this thread that a four wizard party is going to have to be smart and careful for the first four levels, but by level 5 it's going to be hard for the GM to challenge them without metagaming horribly.
Even in a low magic world four fifth level wizards are going to be a serious threat against any CR based encounter. Let those wizards have PF standard WBL options and load up with metamagic rods and pearls of power....
Well... they might not be gods, but they're gonna be awful hard to stop.
Lets do it.
We tried this before and it kind of petered out, but it was a fun exercise while it lasted.
4 people pick an AP (preferably something everyone has played like ROTRL) and they go encounter by encounter discussing what each person brings to the party in each encounter.
I firmly believe that Schrodinger's Wizard is exposed if you play through an AP as written, until you get to very high levels, where most people never play.
Heh, I'd love to ciretose, but your first comment on that link was if you haven't played RotRL to "stay out". And I haven't played RotRL, so I stayed out.
Now, it is highly unlikely that I ever WILL play RotRL with my group, I and the other main GM are home-brew GMs, and the other part-time GM is just now starting up a Carrion Crown campaign that will likely take us over a year to complete at our nominal game play rate.
But otherwise I'd love to tackle RotRL with a four wizard party. Sounds like fun.
|
|
Heh, I'd love to ciretose, but your first comment on that link was if you haven't played RotRL to "stay out". And I haven't played RotRL, so I stayed out.
Now, it is highly unlikely that I ever WILL play RotRL with my group, I and the other main GM are home-brew GMs, and the other part-time GM is just now starting up a Carrion Crown campaign that will likely take us over a year to complete at our nominal game play rate.
But otherwise I'd love to tackle RotRL with a four wizard party. Sounds like fun.
It is only because by the nature of the thing, there are spoilers. As a player, it is actually better for you not to have played it, so you can't cheese the perfect spell each round.
Everyone had a lot of fun (as you can see if you over to the discussion) but we lost a few people to real life and it faded.
This has gone on far too long. MM insists on being right, has a harsh attitude, and and is ready to punish the players characters at the drop of a snooze. The players want a campaign that makes them ubermenshen. No one seems able to really listen to one another or to compromise. Maybe they deserve each other?
I'm not punishing them, and not all the players want to be whatever that fake word is you just used.
I have admitted that I was wrong with the Grease spell, but I did nothing wrong as far as the rulings are concerned with the rest situation. I let them roll a d8 just to see if they rolled an 8 and I wouldn't make them have to rest more... it was a courtesy, not a punishment.
Half my players have agreed with my rulings now, so it is no longer an issue anyway. The main discussion has shifted to a general discussion about where to draw the line between being a pushover DM that lets the players have everything and making a player deal with their choices.
Again, I'm not punishing them, their own mistakes are causing them to be overwhelmed by the world, where someone with more patience and wants to blow sh*t up less would not have that problem. My player was trigger happy, and that's the gist of it.
I welcome AD and anyone else who wants to play my campaign with 4 wizards, I was actually excited to see if my players could actually succeed with 4 wizards. I had high hopes for them, and I had high expectations because 4 wizards should have been capable of handling it.
If someone wants me to do a PbP I am willing, never ran one before so there may be some kinks. (Hint: keep track of how much sleep your wizard needs, and when I ask you if you are sure about something, don't out of spite tell me off and do whatever you want anyway thinking nothing bad will happen.)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main discussion has shifted to a general discussion about where to draw the line between being a pushover DM that lets the players have everything and making a player deal with their choices.
There's your problem right there I think. Because the difference between "being a pushover GM" and "making a player deal with their choices" is not a "line".
It's a vast and intriguing chunk of real estate that allows for nearly infinite choices and opportunities for the GM and the party to have as much fun as they like.
The real issue is that you think it's a line where one side is "pushover GM" (by which I believe you mean "entitled players") and the other side is "players dealing with choices."
It's not a line dude. It's really not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The main discussion has shifted to a general discussion about where to draw the line between being a pushover DM that lets the players have everything and making a player deal with their choices.There's your problem right there I think. Because the difference between "being a pushover GM" and "making a player deal with their choices" is not a "line".
It's a vast and intriguing chunk of real estate that allows for nearly infinite choices and opportunities for the GM and the party to have as much fun as they like.
The real issue is that you think it's a line where one side is "pushover GM" (by which I believe you mean "entitled players") and the other side is "players dealing with choices."
It's not a line dude. It's really not.
I do see it differently, as my players have a metagame where they see what all they can get away with, with my group specifically it is a very real thing.
Again, this view is brought on by my very specific group, and I am not saying players in general always do this, though there is always a balance between letting players have what they want, and making them earn it. Players being 'entitled' is where they think that I as the GM owe them something, and the line I am talking about is where the player is trying to get something they know they don't deserve, or shouldn't get.
That said, this is all a game, and no friendly relationships are being ruined in this, we are capable of keeping in game and metagame conflicts aside from our friendship, although they do sometimes overlap. If your players never try to get away with things and have genuine respect for the rules as they exist, there is something else I envy your group for.
So just scale the challenges so they are just hard *enough* for their abilities, yet not overwhelming, and let them grow into tougher things. The players DO have a say in things..the difference between a good GM and a great GM is taking what you have already envisioned, and changing it if they don't do what you planned, be that going off the map, or creating characters that you didn't expect.
There is a lot you could explore that had minimal combat that matched their abilities. Even if you nerf the kobolds some..so what? If people are having fun, and advancing the storyline..thats OK.
Also keep in mind that unless you played every class perfectly the first time you created one, them making MISTAKES is ok as well. Spell casters have a learning curve, as does running a game. And if a player is just a bad tactician..they would still suck, no matter WHAT they played. In that case, they learn as they die..or they don't and eventually quit.
Its a lot like writing..don't be so in love with your own writing and world not to be able to change it as is needed. It would beat fighting your players for control.
One comment after all this hullabaloo? Expecting players of a certain age to RTFM is hardly onerous nor unreasonable.I'm pretty sure that none of us could ace a serious test on the Pathfinder rules system. Even at a lower level, I can't recall a single college class that's actually made it through a textbook the size of the core rulebook in one semester. That's a heck of a commitment you're demanding from people to play the most popular RPG on the market, and I suspect if people were held to it, it would no longer by the most popular RPG on the market.And this is one of the big reasons I really don't like Pathfinder or 3.X. I don't want to have to get a college degree to be able to play a roleplaying game.
It wouldn't be so bad, but every new thing they add, adds new rules, new exceptions, new changes to old rules. It's like playing Star Fleet Battles.
You can make a lot simpler games, you have the power. There is fudge, AD&D, all flesh, lace and steel, all games that you can use as a base, and go from there.
This has gone on far too long. MM insists on being right, has a harsh attitude, and and is ready to punish the players characters at the drop of a snooze. The players want a campaign that makes them ubermenshen. No one seems able to really listen to one another or to compromise. Maybe they deserve each other?I'm not punishing them, and not all the players want to be whatever that fake word is you just used.
I have admitted that I was wrong with the Grease spell, but I did nothing wrong as far as the rulings are concerned with the rest situation. I let them roll a d8 just to see if they rolled an 8 and I wouldn't make them have to rest more... it was a courtesy, not a punishment.
Half my players have agreed with my rulings now, so it is no longer an issue anyway. The main discussion has shifted to a general discussion about where to draw the line between being a pushover DM that lets the players have everything and making a player deal with their choices.
Again, I'm not punishing them, their own mistakes are causing them to be overwhelmed by the world, where someone with more patience and wants to blow sh*t up less would not have that problem. My player was trigger happy, and that's the gist of it.
I welcome AD and anyone else who wants to play my campaign with 4 wizards, I was actually excited to see if my players could actually succeed with 4 wizards. I had high hopes for them, and I had high expectations because 4 wizards should have been capable of handling it.
If someone wants me to do a PbP I am willing, never ran one before so there may be some kinks. (Hint: keep track of how much sleep your wizard needs, and when I ask you if you are sure about something, don't out of spite tell me off and do whatever you want anyway thinking nothing bad will happen.)
Fake word? It's er... German.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cbermensch
Niet is a good read. I recommend you try Thus spake Zara. Übermensch has crept a lot into nerd culture and the vernacular, likely coming in from uni students, that one ep in Buffy.
As far as a few specifics:
The sleep thing has, as been said, been beat to death. My only comments: With a party of all wizards, I would go VERY lite on random encounters. I would not count guard duty against rest..if I wanted to be really mean, perhaps a -2 or something to Perception checks as the wizard reads a spell book, or such. I don't expect them to pace around the camp like a fighter. Also, throwing out a "so do you take extra rest..?" does not damage the game.
The kobolds..You up powered them expecting a specific set of characters..then left them as such when the players didn't make them. You should have at least turned them back to normal stats, if not made them a tad weaker in hp because of the all wizard party. If its fair to adjust them up because of the characters people play..its equally fair to adjust them down.
The flip side of the coin..they called them all out at once..that is a stupid player trick. Their job to deal with.
The guy that wanted the elf wizard with 18 str and the free longsword..fine, let him have it. Despite the fact he can fight better than a typical wizard..he still lacks the armor and hp and feats of a fighter. It gives them a slight edge..and shows the player was thinking out of the box.
Sometimes it sucks to adjust the whole storyline because the players made choices you didn't expect..but a party of wizards gives you a chance to look at and explore other parts of the world you created.
While its true wizards can become intensely powerful..they are nowhere near that level yet, and both you and the players must keep that in mind.
|
Never suggested you couldn't formulate a logical response; nor intimated that MM was without fault or flaw. Just pointing out hypocritical nature of accusing him of having a confrontational manner.Yeah and? I'm a jack ass. Funny thing however...I still manage to convey my issues quite well and can formulate a logical response. MM is STILL playing footsie with how he handles the rest issue. He even admits that he did it because he was getting even with them and he doesn't see an issue with this? Seriously, the players fraked up royal...but the DM ain't exactly clean on this one either....Speaking of confrontational manner...
Not really hypocritical to call somebody a jackass unless you are have denial that you so are one yourself. If you admit your a jackass, it's not hypocritical to call others one too. It takes one to know one kind of deal. I have never hid the fact that I'm quite confrontational...well ever. I have repeatedly said as much in many threads.
|
|
I have admitted that I was wrong with the Grease spell, but I did nothing wrong as far as the rulings are concerned with the rest situation. I let them roll a d8 just to see if they rolled an 8 and I wouldn't make them have to rest more... it was a courtesy, not a punishment.
Umm so you STILL holding the line that you didn't mess up the ruling here? Seriously? The rule isn't you roll a d8...the rule is you take 1 extra hour per interruption (am I even willing to give you guard duty as interruption as a DM call). So yes there is 1-2 interruption...they sleep one or two hours more. They don't have to tell you that anymore then they tell you they eat breakfast or go use the restroom unless you as a DM makes that extra hour or two an issue with more random encounters or some other happenstance. Seriously you fraked up with this. So yeah, your ruling was indeed a HUGE punishment.
And you flat out told you players you didn't rest enough, you don't get spells back. And when they didn't ask to rest more you punished them with no spells. That's like telling players as they enter a room, you see nothing. Then have a bunch of people surprise them because the players didn't ask for a perception check. Part of your job as a DM is to advise players of when the heck things are happening. you FAILED at that job in this ONE instance. Try not to do that again in the future is not a bad advice...I have no idea why you just absolutely have to hold on to you made no mistake in this. Seriously, you so much more reasonable in other threads I have seen you in.
Umm so you STILL holding the line that you didn't mess up the ruling here? Seriously? The rule isn't you roll a d8...the rule is you take 1 extra hour per interruption (am I even willing to give you guard duty as interruption as a DM call). So yes there is 1-2 interruption...they sleep one or two hours more. They don't have to tell you that anymore then they tell you they eat breakfast or go use the restroom unless you as a DM makes that extra hour or two an issue with more random encounters or some other happenstance. Seriously you fraked up with this. So yeah, your ruling was indeed a HUGE punishment.And you flat out told you players you didn't rest enough, you don't get spells back. And when they didn't ask to rest more you punished them with no spells. That's like telling players as they enter a room, you see nothing. Then have a bunch of people surprise them because the players didn't ask for a perception check. Part of your job as a DM is to advise players of when the heck things are happening. you FAILED at that job in this ONE instance. Try not to do that again in the future is not a bad advice...I have no idea why you just absolutely have to hold on to you made no mistake in this. Seriously, you so much more reasonable in other threads I have seen you in.
CN, if you told your players you haven't rested long enough to regain spells none of them would say "how much longer until we can?" Really? These guys didn't. They just went forward. M_M may not be the perfect GM (I've played for 39 years now and I'm not one and I have yet to meet one) but the players should be able to open their mouths and make basic decisions. Not enough rest... do we go on without spells or get more rest and recover spells? Pretty damn basic. This was not a skill based situation (like Perception) this was basic player decision making.
I have admitted that I was wrong with the Grease spell, but I did nothing wrong as far as the rulings are concerned with the rest situation. I let them roll a d8 just to see if they rolled an 8 and I wouldn't make them have to rest more... it was a courtesy, not a punishment.Umm so you STILL holding the line that you didn't mess up the ruling here? Seriously? The rule isn't you roll a d8...the rule is you take 1 extra hour per interruption (am I even willing to give you guard duty as interruption as a DM call). So yes there is 1-2 interruption...they sleep one or two hours more. They don't have to tell you that anymore then they tell you they eat breakfast or go use the restroom unless you as a DM makes that extra hour or two an issue with more random encounters or some other happenstance. Seriously you fraked up with this. So yeah, your ruling was indeed a HUGE punishment.
And you flat out told you players you didn't rest enough, you don't get spells back. And when they didn't ask to rest more you punished them with no spells. That's like telling players as they enter a room, you see nothing. Then have a bunch of people surprise them because the players didn't ask for a perception check. Part of your job as a DM is to advise players of when the heck things are happening. you FAILED at that job in this ONE instance. Try not to do that again in the future is not a bad advice...I have no idea why you just absolutely have to hold on to you made no mistake in this. Seriously, you so much more reasonable in other threads I have seen you in.
Solid advice, I totally misinterpreted your tone
Apologies sir
CN, if you told your players you haven't rested long enough to regain spells none of them would say "how much longer until we can?" Really? These guys didn't. They just went forward. M_M may not be the perfect GM (I've played for 39 years now and I'm not one and I have yet to meet one) but the players should be able to open their mouths and make basic decisions. Not enough rest... do we go on without spells or get more rest and recover spells? Pretty damn basic. This was not a skill based situation (like Perception) this was basic player decision making.
Umm so you STILL holding the line that you didn't mess up the ruling here? Seriously? The rule isn't you roll a d8...the rule is you take 1 extra hour per interruption (am I even willing to give you guard duty as interruption as a DM call). So yes there is 1-2 interruption...they sleep one or two hours more. They don't have to tell you that anymore then they tell you they eat breakfast or go use the restroom unless you as a DM makes that extra hour or two an issue with more random encounters or some other happenstance. Seriously you fraked up with this. So yeah, your ruling was indeed a HUGE punishment.And you flat out told you players you didn't rest enough, you don't get spells back. And when they didn't ask to rest more you punished them with no spells. That's like telling players as they enter a room, you see nothing. Then have a bunch of people surprise them because the players didn't ask for a perception check. Part of your job as a DM is to advise players of when the heck things are happening. you FAILED at that job in this ONE instance. Try not to do that again in the future is not a bad advice...I have no idea why you just absolutely have to hold on to you made no mistake in this. Seriously, you so much more reasonable in other threads I have seen you in.
From what I gleaned the players were told they could not regain spells and then "whined" about it, and the OP refused to allow any alternative to his (incorrect) reading of the rules. Neither the players or GM apparently knew about the extra hour of rest rule.
From what I gleaned the players were told they could not regain spells and then "whined" about it, and the OP refused to allow any alternative to his (incorrect) reading of the rules. Neither the players or GM apparently knew about the extra hour of rest rule.
Hmmm. I didn't interpret what was relayed to us that way but it could be. That would certainly be more problematic for the PCs. Short of the OP popping back in and clearing it up (or me looking back again and finding out I was mistaken) it shall remain an open question. Especially since I'm up after midnight grading piles of tests, essays and miscellaneous work :) Back to the paper mines I go...
The thread is about my revelation about how annoying and petulant players can be, when anything goes wrong they act like it is always the responsibility of the DM to make sure nothing ever goes wrong for them. In the past I was a player like that, and now I know fully what the other side is like when you have players who insist on playing classes they do not have mastery of, and blame you, or the campaign, or game design. When my players get enjoyment from frustrating me because they know that people will defend them on the internet and other such forums of discussion, simply because they are the player and I'm the big bad DM who punished them. I am no longer on the side of the player when it comes to constantly asking for favors, for explanations, and for special treatment.
I'm of the firm belief that new DM's should first be tutored by experienced DM's if at all possible, and that by the time they decide to DM, they should be very good at running a Wizard because of the sheer complexity of the choices involved.
It is hard to have the mirror held before your face, tis true.
Personally, I have no trouble with this. I view it as a learning experience, an opportunity to grow and get better at what I do. If I make a mistake, I want to know about it so that I can DO something about it. But first, I have to agree that there was a better way to do something, and it has to be arrived at without prior knowledge. In other words, I can't be faulted for something I didn't know, but I can be faulted for not thinking before I do something.
"Knowing is half the battle." GI Joe tv series
Hmmm. I didn't interpret what was relayed to us that way but it could be. That would certainly be more problematic for the PCs. Short of the OP popping back in and clearing it up (or me looking back again and finding out I was mistaken) it shall remain an open question. Especially since I'm up after midnight grading piles of tests, essays and miscellaneous work :) Back to the paper mines I go...
From what I gleaned the players were told they could not regain spells and then "whined" about it, and the OP refused to allow any alternative to his (incorrect) reading of the rules. Neither the players or GM apparently knew about the extra hour of rest rule.
I did not tell them they could not have spells for the day, I told them they did not get enough rest and felt it difficult to prepare spells and that the amount of rest they had was not enough.
It is possible that they didn't know about being able to rest more, but they still should have made a decision other than "oh well, we move forward." I would gladly look up and clarify a ruling mid-session. It's not a big deal, and I don't pretend to have every rule memorized.
I told them they had to keep the spells they had prepared from the previous day, and I think they had only used like 1-2 spells anyway, so again, it's not like I completely screwed him.
...but they still should have made a decision other than "oh well, we move forward."...
"After foolishly pressing onward you encounter waves of Kobolds that eventually kill you because you did not rest long enough last night. Time to make new characters and stop the whining or I will make a post at the Paizo boards."
Yeah, I see, that totally was the only way you could have handled this situation.
15 minute workday ftw.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issues as I see them:
1. How much should a GM "help" his players? Matter of taste and experience. I've GMed for groups of newbies who badly needed me to explain everything to them carefully and give advice. I've also GMed for veterans who neither needed nor would have appreciated my interference in this way. From the totality of the arguments presented so far, I would say MM was a bit scanting in his help and perhaps overestimated the system mastery of his players, and perhaps should have given more advice. That said, 4 wizard players and none of them know to just rest a little more to get their spells back? Seriously?
2. How much should the GM reshape adventures to match the capabilities of his players? Most GMs do it all the time. I know I do, particularly with storebought adventures, because my groups of seven players, 4 of whom are experienced and skilled veterans, will absolutely trash published adventures as written and be snoozing within an hour from lack of challenge. That said, the players did ignore GM advice on party composition and apparently went in brimming with ill-deserved confidence, so I certainly understand the temptation not to nerf the adventure and let the chips fall where they may. However, in the end the game is about fun, and the GM's responsibility is to do his best to make it fun. If that means nerfing to make up for incompetent players, so be it. Helps if the players recognize their responsibiities to make it funs as well, includign for the GM.
3. Is an all-wizard party viable and/or "the bestest"? It's certainly viable, but definitely challenging at lower levels. I think as this group's experiences showed, those that want to go this route had better know their stuff and work cooperatively in their builds, their spell selections and their tactics to make it work. Another poster said that any "moderately competent players" could do it, and I strongly disagree with that - this is not for any beginner or for the average player who has not memorized the CRB and/or doesn't have the time to research and test optimized builds. As to being "the bestest", I'd still take a balanced party over it any day, when you consider all levels, but I think the argument can be made that a well-constructed all-wizard party might indeed reign supreme after a certain level, which I would place around 7th-9th. That is possible due to the extreme wizard-friendliness of the 3.X/PF rules system, and would not have been possible in AD&D or 2nd edition.
4. What to do about whiny players? My first impulse whenever a player gets whiny (and it occasionally happens even in our excellent group) is to offer to change places with them and see if they can do better. It strikes me as no coincidence at all that the most sympathetic player in MM's described scenario is the other one that GMs. He's been there, done that, and understands how much more diffuclt it is to GM than to play (by orders of magnitude), and is probably both more supportive and more willing to cut the GM some slack even when he makes a wrong call or interpretation (and all GMs do occasionally). Seriously folks, if players aren't willing to man up and walk the walk, well you know what they can do with their talk. We have three who GM in our group and we all support each other (even when mistakes are made)and make sure whining doesn't get out of hand.
5. Should players suffer the consequencs of their own decisions? Yup. However, I would caveat that by saying you can/should ease up a bit on newbies in this regard, and that I am more forgiving of mistakes made in character creation (like making a party of 4 wizards, not all of whom are well-built or coordinated with the others) than of tactical mistakes made during play (like purposely taking on a horde of baddies all at once rather than attempting to find a way to keep the numbers manageable). Not so hard for a GM to adjust an adventure beforehand to make it less challenging for a non-optimal party build. However, hard to nerf things during the game without endangering suspension of disbelief. If players are stupid (or just unlucky sometimes) their characters can and should suffer the consequences and possibly die. Take away that possibility and well, the game just isn't very exciting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have admitted that I was wrong with the Grease spell, but I did nothing wrong as far as the rulings are concerned with the rest situation. I let them roll a d8 just to see if they rolled an 8 and I wouldn't make them have to rest more... it was a courtesy, not a punishment.Umm so you STILL holding the line that you didn't mess up the ruling here? Seriously? The rule isn't you roll a d8...the rule is you take 1 extra hour per interruption (am I even willing to give you guard duty as interruption as a DM call). So yes there is 1-2 interruption...they sleep one or two hours more. They don't have to tell you that anymore then they tell you they eat breakfast or go use the restroom unless you as a DM makes that extra hour or two an issue with more random encounters or some other happenstance. Seriously you fraked up with this. So yeah, your ruling was indeed a HUGE punishment.
And you flat out told you players you didn't rest enough, you don't get spells back. And when they didn't ask to rest more you punished them with no spells. That's like telling players as they enter a room, you see nothing. Then have a bunch of people surprise them because the players didn't ask for a perception check. Part of your job as a DM is to advise players of when the heck things are happening. you FAILED at that job in this ONE instance. Try not to do that again in the future is not a bad advice...I have no idea why you just absolutely have to hold on to you made no mistake in this. Seriously, you so much more reasonable in other threads I have seen you in.
It seems like you are going in somewhat the wrong direction here. The d8 role was a boon. If they had rolled an 8, they would not have to waste an extra hour sleeping. When they did not roll an eight, all they had to do was say "we sleep for another hour". Or ask "is there any way to regain our spells without taking another 8-hour rest". Or say "wait, you mean we do not get our spells back, Why??". Or say "This sounds fishy, and I am not sure about all of these sleeping rules, can we take a break to look them up?".
Instead they thought that it was mean and unfair they didn't luck their way into full rest even though they were interupted.
If you told him specifically that he couldn't prepare spells, without also saying that if the group wanted to wait an hour he'd be able to, I can understand the group being mad.
Also, if you go into the next session with the intention of killing them, with malice or not, they're likely to get fairly angry. I certainly would.
I'm not going to kill them with malice, and after speaking to my players, at least one of them, they are okay with whatever consequences fall onto them.
I've also ruled that if they die and other characters come back to the same place, I an willing to let them loot their old characters bodies assuming something worth finding was left behind.
Of course, if it were me, I would have the bad guys attempt to loot the bodies as well, and give the players a chance to either get the gear back or prevent it from happening. Remember, PC's loot NPC's bodies ALL THE FREAKIN' TIME!
Second, if you seriously want a much more detailed gameworld, check out 3.5's Forgotten Realms. It will blow you away, I do not exaggerate. If you want a list of the ones I have, message me.
OP, personally I think that the Wizard is the single hardest class to play effectively. So, I don't think it was a good idea for a bunch of newbs to go for a nearly all Wizard party, to say the least.
It seems like you are going in somewhat the wrong direction here. The d8 role was a boon. If they had rolled an 8, they would not have to waste an extra hour sleeping. When they did not roll an eight, all they had to do was say "we sleep for another hour". Or ask "is there any way to regain our spells without taking another 8-hour rest". Or say "wait, you mean we do not get our spells...
I have admitted that I was wrong with the Grease spell, but I did nothing wrong as far as the rulings are concerned with the rest situation. I let them roll a d8 just to see if they rolled an 8 and I wouldn't make them have to rest more... it was a courtesy, not a punishment.Umm so you STILL holding the line that you didn't mess up the ruling here? Seriously? The rule isn't you roll a d8...the rule is you take 1 extra hour per interruption (am I even willing to give you guard duty as interruption as a DM call). So yes there is 1-2 interruption...they sleep one or two hours more. They don't have to tell you that anymore then they tell you they eat breakfast or go use the restroom unless you as a DM makes that extra hour or two an issue with more random encounters or some other happenstance. Seriously you fraked up with this. So yeah, your ruling was indeed a HUGE punishment.
And you flat out told you players you didn't rest enough, you don't get spells back. And when they didn't ask to rest more you punished them with no spells. That's like telling players as they enter a room, you see nothing. Then have a bunch of people surprise them because the players didn't ask for a perception check. Part of your job as a DM is to advise players of when the heck things are happening. you FAILED at that job in this ONE instance. Try not to do that again in the future is not a bad advice...I have no idea why you just absolutely have to hold on to you made no mistake in this. Seriously, you so much more reasonable in other threads I have seen you in.
This exactly
|
Even at a lower level, I can't recall a single college class that's actually made it through a textbook the size of the core rulebook in one semester.
I can. Twice.
Both were very demanding classes. I still use the knowledge I gained from one of them.
Pathfinder, on the other hand, is a hobby. People are generally far more willing to invest time in a hobby than on homework.
On the topic of rules knowledge: I was once challenged to a Battletech match having no functional knowledge of the current rules version. I spent 16+ hours that night reading through all current rules books + optional magazine articles as part of my prep.
If you told him specifically that he couldn't prepare spells, without also saying that if the group wanted to wait an hour he'd be able to, I can understand the group being mad.
Also, if you go into the next session with the intention of killing them, with malice or not, they're likely to get fairly angry. I certainly would.
I'm not going to kill them with malice, and after speaking to my players, at least one of them, they are okay with whatever consequences fall onto them.
I've also ruled that if they die and other characters come back to the same place, I an willing to let them loot their old characters bodies assuming something worth finding was left behind.
Of course, if it were me, I would have the bad guys attempt to loot the bodies as well, and give the players a chance to either get the gear back or prevent it from happening. Remember, PC's loot NPC's bodies ALL THE FREAKIN' TIME!
Second, if you seriously want a much more detailed gameworld, check out 3.5's Forgotten Realms. It will blow you away, I do not exaggerate. If you want a list of the ones I have, message me.
OP, personally I think that the Wizard is the single hardest class to play effectively. So, I don't think it was a good idea for a bunch of newbs to go for a nearly all Wizard party, to say the least.
I advised them not to, but I won't tell them that they can't. My players have accepted that I warned them fairly that I would not pull punches, and they are okay with whatever happens.
It is always possible that they could win. If it makes anyone feel better, I have nerfed the boss of the dungeon to compensate for their weakness. My optimizer still has one color spray left, and the can sorcerer still has spells and bloodline power uses left. If he decides to not waste space like he is known to do, they may in fact have a decent shot
Is it possible that they could retreat and rest? The boss could use the time to gather a few more minions to keep things interesting.
Is it possible that they could retreat and rest? The boss could use the time to gather a few more minions to keep things interesting.
That would be 100% ok and possible, I did already say that.
It is always possible that they could win. If it makes anyone feel better, I have nerfed the boss of the dungeon to compensate for their weakness.
No, it makes me feel worse. DO NOT nerf your NPC! Assume they will be full strength when they encounter it, and ensure it is effectively 2 CR higher than the party level, to give them a somewhat difficult challenge. Anything less is a disservice to DM's everywhere, and makes for a bloody easy game to win at. You are supposed to CHALLENGE them, but not wipe them out.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're not "supposed" to do anything beyond enjoy yourselves. Different groups like different things.
I don't feel bad for anybody spending their time whining, whether GM, player, or a former player-turned-GM who delivers novellas railing against his whiny players responding whiningly to their whiny GM.
Is it possible that they could retreat and rest? The boss could use the time to gather a few more minions to keep things interesting.That would be 100% ok and possible, I did already say that.
"100% ok and possible" meaning "if they don't do that, I kill them".
As I already said, it's obvious that your players do NOT want and are NOT able to play a tournament style game where wrong decisions usually end in death. Like so many other players they simply want to be heroes!
Especially because they seem still a little wet behind the ears you should go easy on them. Gaining levels does not only cover the character it also covers the player experience. If they start to grasp their characters a little more it is usually ok to gradually remove the stops and cushions.
So you should adjust your expectations accordingly or at least inform the players that this is how you will play the game or your campaign could be quite short lived.
The thread is about my revelation about how annoying and petulant players can be, when anything goes wrong they act like it is always the responsibility of the DM to make sure nothing ever goes wrong for them. In the past I was a player like that, and now I know fully what the other side is like when you have players who insist on playing classes they do not have mastery of, and blame you, or the campaign, or game design. When my players get enjoyment from frustrating me because they know that people will defend them on the internet and other such forums of discussion, simply because they are the player and I'm the big bad DM who punished them. I am no longer on the side of the player when it comes to constantly asking for favors, for explanations, and for special treatment.
I don't want to be offensive but basically the thread is about how much your friends are annoying. This players are even your friends? Why you play with them? Why they play with you? I think there's something very wrong at the base.
I would never, never write what you wrote about my friends. And i would not waste time playing PF with someone that is not. Real RPG is not like videogames. I have to like the people with i spend so much time, that i invite in my house, for whom i create settings and adventure.What you describes sounds more like a work situation that a game situation.
Is it possible that they could retreat and rest? The boss could use the time to gather a few more minions to keep things interesting.That would be 100% ok and possible, I did already say that."100% ok and possible" meaning "if they don't do that, I kill them".
As I already said, it's obvious that your players do NOT want and are NOT able to play a tournament style game where wrong decisions usually end in death. Like so many other players they simply want to be heroes!
Especially because they seem still a little wet behind the ears you should go easy on them. Gaining levels does not only cover the character it also covers the player experience. If they start to grasp their characters a little more it is usually ok to gradually remove the stops and cushions.
So you should adjust your expectations accordingly or at least inform the players that this is how you will play the game or your campaign could be quite short lived.
It's always possible that they could win too, the sorcerer still has spells and bloodline powers left.
Or are you just gonna bash everything I say?|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"100% ok and possible" meaning "if they don't do that, I kill them".As I already said, it's obvious that your players do NOT want and are NOT able to play a tournament style game where wrong decisions usually end in death. Like so many other players they simply want to be heroes!
Everyone wants to be a hero. We could, in theory, walk around and hand everyone stickers that say "hero" and everyone would be a hero. Wouldn't that be swell?
Except being a hero isn't creating a character sheet. It is doing something heroic. And for something to be heroic, it has to have a chance of failure. Otherwise, stickers.
If the party fails due to poor planning, there lack of heroism isn't the fault of the GM in the same way if the party succeeds and is, in fact heroic, it isn't the fault of the GM.
They earned it. So it actually means something. Unlike the sticker.
The thread is about my revelation about how annoying and petulant players can be, when anything goes wrong they act like it is always the responsibility of the DM to make sure nothing ever goes wrong for them. In the past I was a player like that, and now I know fully what the other side is like when you have players who insist on playing classes they do not have mastery of, and blame you, or the campaign, or game design. When my players get enjoyment from frustrating me because they know that people will defend them on the internet and other such forums of discussion, simply because they are the player and I'm the big bad DM who punished them. I am no longer on the side of the player when it comes to constantly asking for favors, for explanations, and for special treatment.I don't want to be offensive but basically the thread is about how much your friends are annoying. This players are even your friends? Why you play with them? Why they play with you? I think there's something very wrong at the base.
I would never, never write what you wrote about my friends. And i would not waste time playing PF with someone that is not. Real RPG is not like videogames. I have to like the people with i spend so much time, that i invite in my house, for whom i create settings and adventure.
What you describes sounds more like a work situation that a game situation.
So you didn't read the thread either? Especially the part where I said there were no hard feelings over anything that happens in the game, and that we were all still friends....
I made this thread to talk to other DMs who have been there and know how crappy it is to have players who think the DM is responsible for making sure everyone lives and nothing bad ever happens to them and they can have everything that they want, and their choices never have repercussions. I fully expected all the players who posted the "you should be helping us always, because it's not fun when we don't win, even if we don't deserve to win, so we should just win anyway." The lesson I learned from my experience is that being a "nice" DM leads to player entitlement so much more than being a hardass DM.
And as for telling them they should leave, no. Just no, I am not going to make any decisions for them. If they ask about leaving, sure, but I will not be making the PC's decisions for them. That's what the PC's have players for. If they cannot figure out that they can just go backwards and leave, it's their problem, not mine. I'm not being a mean DM there, and I'm not being nice either. They get to make a choice, but they have to make it, I cannot, and will not make their choices for them.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone wants to be a hero.I don't.
That's fine. We apparently don't need any more.
The thread is about my revelation about how annoying and petulant players can be, when anything goes wrong they act like it is always the responsibility of the DM to make sure nothing ever goes wrong for them. In the past I was a player like that, and now I know fully what the other side is like when you have players who insist on playing classes they do not have mastery of, and blame you, or the campaign, or game design. When my players get enjoyment from frustrating me because they know that people will defend them on the internet and other such forums of discussion, simply because they are the player and I'm the big bad DM who punished them. I am no longer on the side of the player when it comes to constantly asking for favors, for explanations, and for special treatment.I don't want to be offensive but basically the thread is about how much your friends are annoying. This players are even your friends? Why you play with them? Why they play with you? I think there's something very wrong at the base.
I would never, never write what you wrote about my friends. And i would not waste time playing PF with someone that is not. Real RPG is not like videogames. I have to like the people with i spend so much time, that i invite in my house, for whom i create settings and adventure.
What you describes sounds more like a work situation that a game situation.So you didn't read the thread either? Especially the part where I said there were no hard feelings over anything that happens in the game, and that we were all still friends....
I made this thread to talk to other DMs who have been there and know how crappy it is to have players who think the DM is responsible for making sure everyone lives and nothing bad ever happens to them and they can have everything that they want, and their choices never have repercussions. I fully expected all the players who posted the "you should be helping us always, because it's not fun when we don't win,...
I don't get why you talk me about PC decision and stuffs. I never mentioned that. It's your game, do what you want. Conseguences are all yours,too. If it is good for you and your friends, just go on.
What i was talking about is another thing. You opened a thread to blame your players in front of this community, so i'm sorry but i don't think you have not hard feelings on this situation. Maybe this has not still ruined your friendship with them, but you described your players as immature pretending that you, as DM, work for their fun and never make them lose. So, you are here for what? To tell that they are your friends but... stupid? And you expect that we discuss about that? As a DM you can't do wrong as all group (you included) enjoy the game. I'm not saying it's your fault, but if you really believe that your players are playing in a wrong manner or that they have absurd pretensions to you, you should speak with THEM and not with US. A group need that all person that compose it share the same goal. If not, the group will be bad. For what i can see here you are a bit hurted by the situation, and i also think that you need to speak about that with your friends before this became a real problem for your group and your game. Sure you will not solve this complaining about the situation on the forum.I'm not native eng speaker and i hope you don't think from what i wrote that i want to offend or troll you, i'm just stating a fact. You have a problem with your players but you are talking about that with strangers, and this will not help at all. Maybe it's your fault, maybe your players' fault, maybe both or none fault, but this is not important, because is not important to have reason over someone that is your friend but is important to solve a problem that can ruin your game of friendship.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone wants to be a hero.I don't.That's fine. We apparently don't need any more.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Apparently, you are wrong.Everyone wants to be a hero.I don't.That's fine. We apparently don't need any more.
You are my hero for responding with that EXACT clip.
...The thread is about my revelation about how annoying and petulant players can be, when anything goes wrong they act like it is always the responsibility of the DM to make sure nothing ever goes wrong for them. In the past I was a player like that, and now I know fully what the other side is like when you have players who insist on playing classes they do not have mastery of, and blame you, or the campaign, or game design. When my players get enjoyment from frustrating me because they know that people will defend them on the internet and other such forums of discussion, simply because they are the player and I'm the big bad DM who punished them. I am no longer on the side of the player when it comes to constantly asking for favors, for explanations, and for special treatment.I don't want to be offensive but basically the thread is about how much your friends are annoying. This players are even your friends? Why you play with them? Why they play with you? I think there's something very wrong at the base.
I would never, never write what you wrote about my friends. And i would not waste time playing PF with someone that is not. Real RPG is not like videogames. I have to like the people with i spend so much time, that i invite in my house, for whom i create settings and adventure.
What you describes sounds more like a work situation that a game situation.So you didn't read the thread either? Especially the part where I said there were no hard feelings over anything that happens in the game, and that we were all still friends....
I made this thread to talk to other DMs who have been there and know how crappy it is to have players who think the DM is responsible for making sure everyone lives and nothing bad ever happens to them and they can have everything that they want, and their choices never have repercussions. I fully expected all the players who posted the "you should be helping us always,
My problem isn't with my players as people, but with their decisions in game.
Again, I've already talked to my players and they have admitted that what they did was dumb and they are willing to accept whatever happens.It is no longer a problem, with the exception of one player who has been having issues. If he doesn't enjoy a game that the other 4 people at the table are, I can try and find compromise for him, but I won't take away what we are all enjoying to accommodate one player.