I have a small problem with my dm. He has gotten real comfortable with the stance that he is the dm and there is always right and word is absolute. He has made at least a few questionable calls and the just rubber stamps it with I'm the dm conversation over. I will provide a few examples.
Banned barbarians cause they aren't fun for him to kill.
Didn't alot us exp for an encounter we stratgicly avoided ie: bribed our way through instead of fighting.
Decided for his convince to add spell like abilities to a enemy who didn't have them ie: drow can levitate at will.
Picking on a character ie: If he doesn't like someones character goes out of his way to kill it, like making it the first and primary center of all attacks.
This guy is a friend my group has been together for almost 8 years we play 2-36 times a month for about 8-10 hours a session, so we have logged some game time. We don't want to run him out of the group cause we like him a lot and these problems haven't arisen til lately about 3-4 months ago. Basicly just seeing if anyone has had the same type of issue and how they addressed and handled it.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Tell him nobody wants him to GM anymore. He can stay but as a player. Otherwise get used to him enjoying your tears.
Pan wrote: Tell him nobody wants him to GM anymore. He can stay but as a player. Otherwise get used to him enjoying your tears. Have you had to do this before?
just gather up as a group and try to speak with him, it would be like giving some feedback on his gm style, players also have the right to get what they want if they are going to put time on the game
for me, the gm serves the community, he should do it properly then, part of being a gm is to know what your players want (this does not mean to make things easier or give away everything)
|
11 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Well, as the DM he is allowed to do pretty much that. It doesn't make him less of a jerk, but if he wants to say you don't get XP for talking your way through something rather than just tossing them into the woodchipper, or that he wants Drow to fly, that's his prerogative.
As for banning barbarians, a lot of DMs will ban classes in their games because of a perceived power imbalance. Just look at how many threads there are about Gunslingers and Summoners being banned around here.
Juicing up monsters by giving them new abilities is also something that a lot of DMs do. It adds variety to otherwise boring fights against the same thing over and over. So yea, give the Drow the ability to levitate so that they can do neat stuff with positioning in combat. Just make sure that he treats every movement while levitating as a move action and gives the Drow that cumulative penalty to attacks while they're doing it.
If you don't agree with how he's running things, tell him and explain your issues. And also point out that if he continues to play the game as "DM vs. Players" rather than "Everyone has fun" that you're not going to play anymore. That's about all you can do.
|
6 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Unruly wrote: Well, as the DM he is allowed to do pretty much that. It doesn't make him less of a jerk, but if he wants to say you don't get XP for talking your way through something rather than just tossing them into the woodchipper, or that he wants Drow to fly, that's his prerogative.
As for banning barbarians, a lot of DMs will ban classes in their games because of a perceived power imbalance. Just look at how many threads there are about Gunslingers and Summoners being banned around here.
Juicing up monsters by giving them new abilities is also something that a lot of DMs do. It adds variety to otherwise boring fights against the same thing over and over. So yea, give the Drow the ability to levitate so that they can do neat stuff with positioning in combat. Just make sure that he treats every movement while levitating as a move action and gives the Drow that cumulative penalty to attacks while they're doing it.
If you don't agree with how he's running things, tell him and explain your issues. And also point out that if he continues to play the game as "DM vs. Players" rather than "Everyone has fun" that you're not going to play anymore. That's about all you can do.
Listen to this guy. He is smart.
Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Maps Subscriber
I saw this sort of GM a lot in my Junior High gaming. Not quite as much in High School. But I have not seen it all since. Wait, no there was one GM in later years, and I refused to game with him again. He was a weanie as a player, too. Sad, because most people become better players over the years, and he got worse!
The GM is clearly being a "Weanie GM". That GM is forgetting that you are all there to have fun together. He can stop being such a weanie, or he can stop running (and ruining) the game.
It is much better to have in-game reasons and rationale for rulings. Sure, sometimes for the sake of the game a GM can make a ruling that can be looked into after the session is over. But that is different. Saying "no Barbarians" is fine, I guess. But targeting a character just because you don't like it is childish. I have fallen prey to this (refer to weanie GM above). In the most extreme case my character died during the intro to joining the group!
If a GM has a problem with a certain character, it really is best to say something BEFORE the player starts playing the character. Or better yet, before effort is made into creating that character. I get that the GM did not like my character, but he could have said something and I would have made a character that fit his secret view of the game.
If a GM has expectations for character parameters. these should be laid out and transparent from the beginning.
|
7 people marked this as a favorite.
|
If he is a friend, then you should be able to talk to him.
You say the jerk behavior is new?
Well, something has changed for him. Ask him what's wrong, and if you can help.
The only one of those that seems to me to be a problem is picking on a single character. Even that can be justified if that character is more powerful and threatening than the others.
Bottom line is all you can do it talk to him about your concerns. I would phrase it as 'I feel like my character is being picked on and that makes the game less fun for me' rather than 'you are doing it wrong.' That is much more likely to get a good reaction and actually open up a dialog.
If you talk to him, and you still aren't happy with the outcome, you basically have a few choices. You can decide that that fun is greater than the annoyances and just keep playing, you can decide not to play anymore, or you can (as a group) decide to have someone else run the games.
One thing though, don't have a conversation or dispute a rule in the middle of a game. Other than a quick 'did you add flanking?' or 'are you sure drow are immune to fire?' if the GM makes a call, that is the call and rules disputes, questions, concerns should be handled at a separate time. During such a situation, his 'I am the GM, conversation over' line is entirely appropriate.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
50ft. of rope, not just usefull for the adventurers, but their players as well.
Cap. Darling wrote: Unruly wrote: Well, as the DM he is allowed to do pretty much that. It doesn't make him less of a jerk, but if he wants to say you don't get XP for talking your way through something rather than just tossing them into the woodchipper, or that he wants Drow to fly, that's his prerogative.
As for banning barbarians, a lot of DMs will ban classes in their games because of a perceived power imbalance. Just look at how many threads there are about Gunslingers and Summoners being banned around here.
Juicing up monsters by giving them new abilities is also something that a lot of DMs do. It adds variety to otherwise boring fights against the same thing over and over. So yea, give the Drow the ability to levitate so that they can do neat stuff with positioning in combat. Just make sure that he treats every movement while levitating as a move action and gives the Drow that cumulative penalty to attacks while they're doing it.
If you don't agree with how he's running things, tell him and explain your issues. And also point out that if he continues to play the game as "DM vs. Players" rather than "Everyone has fun" that you're not going to play anymore. That's about all you can do.
Listen to this guy. He is smart. Agreed...also don't be afraid if he threatens to stop GMing in hopes of cowing the group, running a game is a fun and creative way to enjoy the game. If he threatens to quit, let him. He will come back eventually if you guys keep the game fun.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Title - Power tripping gm?
seto83 wrote: I have a small problem with my dm. Doesn't add up...
seto83 wrote: This guy is a friend my group has been together for almost 8 years Really doesn't add up. Take the guy out for a beer and discuss some of your concerns in a non-accusatory, non-"Everyone thinks so" way.
If someone came along every time you were using your computer, and unplugged it, would you consider him a "friend"? It sounds to me like this is a person I'd strongly reconsider my friendship with if that's the way he's going to operate. Also, contrary to popular belief, the GM doesn't have the last word. Each player always has the option of the last word; that word being 'quit', immediately preceded by 'I'. Kick him out of the group for a 2-3 sessions and then make him the offer to come back as a regular player first, then if he can show himself to be a decent human being, let him GM again. But right now, he doesn't know how to GM; and you shouldn't trust a task to a person who doesn't know how to do the job.
|
7 people marked this as a favorite.
|
"Hey I've noticed you don't seem to enjoy gaming as much lately. Something up? Or are you just getting burned out on the game? Want me to take a turn as GM for a while so you can get some PC time?"
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
seto83 wrote: I have a small problem with my dm. He has gotten real comfortable with the stance that he is the dm and there is always right and word is absolute. He has made at least a few questionable calls and the just rubber stamps it with I'm the dm conversation over. I will provide a few examples. DM's word is final is the prerogative of the DM. If players don't like the rulings, they are free to find another game or start one of their own.
Quote:
Banned barbarians cause they aren't fun for him to kill.
Banning a class is fine. DMs ban for all types of reasons including not liking a class conceptually or mechanically, a class being inappropriate for a setting. My concern is the "aren't fun for him to kill" qualifier. It sounds as if he views the game as GM vs. players or is a killer DM.
Quote:
Didn't alot us exp for an encounter we stratgicly avoided ie: bribed our way through instead of fighting.
Many DM's only give XP for killing things. Not my preference, but it is legitimate.
Quote:
Decided for his convince to add spell like abilities to a enemy who didn't have them ie: drow can levitate at will.
The DM is not required to have characters/creatures be a carbon copy out of a Bestiary. It can be an ability of the creature type in the DMs world, it can be a unique creature with a template or class.
Quote:
Picking on a character ie: If he doesn't like someones character goes out of his way to kill it, like making it the first and primary center of all attacks.
This is just being a jerk and abusing the position.
Quote:
This guy is a friend my group has been together for almost 8 years we play 2-36 times a month for about 8-10 hours a session, so we have logged some game time. We don't want to run him out of the group cause we like him a lot and these problems haven't arisen til lately about 3-4 months ago. Basicly just seeing if anyone has had the same type of issue and how they addressed and handled it.
Talk to him. If the problem just started up, something may have happened in his personal life. If talking doesn't work and the group is not happy, have somebody else run.
By the way, how do you play 36 times a month for 8-10 hours a session?
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Aelfborn wrote: By the way, how do you play 36 times a month for 8-10 hours a session? A lot of Red Bull, short naps, and decreased work performance.
Just sounds like he is a bit tired GM'ing, possibly he also feels underappreciated and dislikes the character choices people make.
If you play that much and expect a GM to take time to prepare many people will get fed up with the game eventually. Maybe time to switch GM seats for a while ?
Agreed with most of the above. Let someone else take the reigns for a while, and let him play. If he doesn't like that idea, let him know he's killing the fun for you, and ask him if he has any other suggestions.
Switch GM, might be just burned out.
As a grognard playing in the modern RPG world, I have seen some character concepts I DID NOT LIKE. But I didn't 'target' the offending PC. Better to tell a Player, "Hey Joe, that annoying Anime Rip-Off-clone character you were telling me about probably won't fly in this campaign. Can you re-think it, maybe tone it down?"
As for your specific issue, I strongly agree, get someone else behind the screen for a while, or maybe do some beer and pretzel games for a few nights :) Keep everyone the friends you want them to be and get a little refresh in there.
I also strongly agree that the GM is *required* to make judgement calls and say, "GM. Final." Otherwise, rules 'questions' turn into discussions turn into debates turn into arguments turn into hurt feelings. And if you are friends, let that crap go. However, after it should be ok to get some clarification, "Why did you say X is heavier than Y?"
GNOME
seto83 wrote: I have a small problem with my dm. He has gotten real comfortable with the stance that he is the dm and there is always right and word is absolute. He has made at least a few questionable calls and the just rubber stamps it with I'm the dm conversation over. I will provide a few examples.
Banned barbarians cause they aren't fun for him to kill.
Didn't alot us exp for an encounter we stratgicly avoided ie: bribed our way through instead of fighting.
Decided for his convince to add spell like abilities to a enemy who didn't have them ie: drow can levitate at will.
Picking on a character ie: If he doesn't like someones character goes out of his way to kill it, like making it the first and primary center of all attacks.
This guy is a friend my group has been together for almost 8 years we play 2-36 times a month for about 8-10 hours a session, so we have logged some game time. We don't want to run him out of the group cause we like him a lot and these problems haven't arisen til lately about 3-4 months ago. Basicly just seeing if anyone has had the same type of issue and how they addressed and handled it.
1. this is what you have to go by this is rule 0 the GM has final call in his game. That just it is his game, you are just players. you don't have to play. he can't have a game with out player and you can't have a game with out a GM. Talk to him about your concerns
2. This happens I don't like barbarian either, I don't band then, but when I first started DMing pathfinder I only allowed core class. it is perfectly reasonable for gm to limit class in his world. It make the game easier to GM because there is less rules to remember and go over ect. It can also be a power issues. I in my Game I limited Archetypes to single class characters, treating them as specialist forms of their class. If you want multi class you have to be base class. This for me fix a lot of power issue and less rules for me to know as I know just what this character and can’t do.
3. As long as GM is constant with the ruling on xp and avoiding encounters, the encounter could have also not challenging either way, this no xp reward either way.
4. GM who do this are good GMs, no monster should ever be the same, making the party constantly change tactics. It prevents Meta gaming, example is what you are doing right now. How do you know drow’s can’t levitate at will. Because you looked it up. Your PC don’t know what monsters can and can’t do. Monster books are for If you need something quick cookie cutter monster. Example of this if you look at the recent dragon’s unleashed book the the blue dragon in that book has completely different feats then the one in monster book. Monsters can do anything to add to the adventure.
5. GM’s job is to kill all characters, are you sure the player is just not putting himself in easy access to me the first logical target. I used to get accused of this a lot, but slowly the players started to realize they were using poor tactics over all. I still have 1 player that regular use really poor tactics and put himself in bad situation all the time. He accused of me of this still, but then all the players, start to laugh and tell him he keeps doing it to himself. A lot of players don’t like to think they are using bad tactics but it happens. Also how long has the adventure been going on. It logical that the bad guys would start to learn who they players are and there strength weakness and attack accordingly. Thus targeting spell caster first or sending rust monster have the tank with his full suit of armor. So many players expect all monster to have a int of 4-8 when the truth is monster of them have int of 12+ most of the time being smarter than most of the pcs. Because they use mental stats as dump stats.
You been playing a long time and sounds like you may have been spoiled until recently and your GM is just now coming into actually GMing correctly by making the game Harder. There could be something else there but I doubt it. You’re not going to get much support or advice on these boards short of , if you don’t like it then play with someone else or Talk to the gm.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
KainPen wrote: You been playing a long time and sounds like you may have been spoiled until recently and your GM is just now coming into actually GMing correctly by making the game Harder. Wow.
seto83 wrote: Decided for his convince to add spell like abilities to a enemy who didn't have them ie: drow can levitate at will. Best. Debuff. Ever.
Levitate from Core Rules wrote: A levitating creature that attacks with a melee or ranged weapon finds itself increasingly unstable; the first attack has a -1 penalty on attack rolls, the second -2, and so on, to a maximum penalty of -5. A full round spent stabilizing allows the creature to begin again at -1.
Unruly wrote: Aelfborn wrote: By the way, how do you play 36 times a month for 8-10 hours a session? A lot of Red Bull, short naps, and decreased work performance. Wow typeo should be 3-6 times a month lol
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
KaiPen ... no. NO NO NO NO NO. The GM's job is NOT NOT NOT to kill all characters. That's textbook bad GMing and totally missing the point of the game.
seto83 wrote:
Decided for his convince to add spell like abilities to a enemy who didn't have them ie: drow can levitate at will.
Drow can levitate at will, it's the Drow Noble though which is higher CR.
Also I've seen the Barbarian banned lots of the time just because it doesn't fit the style of game the GM is running. Same with Gun Slingers.
Just want to point out that in older versions of D&D drow could levitate and if you've ever pulled "hey that monster can't do that" with out spending time/skills researching the monster I'd start fishing back throwback or variant critters as well.
seto83 wrote: .
Picking on a character ie: If he doesn't like someones character goes out of his way to kill it, like making it the first and primary center of all attacks.
Missing some info here. WHY did he dislike characters ? Were they going around murdering everyone or being disruptive to other players ?
Jiggy wrote: KainPen wrote: You been playing a long time and sounds like you may have been spoiled until recently and your GM is just now coming into actually GMing correctly by making the game Harder. Wow. yes, face it most gm runs monsters and encounters as if creature have a int 8 and lower. Some of them of even written in ap to be dumber then they actual are. Like fighting dragons with 20+ int in and enclosed cavern where everyone can melee full attack it. People complain about these monsters being too easy. or why the BBEG in the AP get slaughter because they are setup as solo encounter but are supposed to be challenging. Most of the tactics used or prewritten do not match, the creatures actual mental abilities. The AP are always written to give player advantage.
Another gming flaw is number of encounters in a day letting the party rest too much, thus almost every encounter they have full health spell ect. Most intelligent creature or BBEG are not going to let that happen, the party should be at full strength when fighting other intelligent creatures.
Beating A Dead Horse wrote: @-@ Get back in your stall!
You came out once for my thread. That's enough for now.
KainPen wrote: 5. GM’s job is to kill all characters The is just so, so wrong. I mean, wow. It's one thing to be a DM that doesn't cut slack for poor planning and another thing entirely to go out and actively kill all the PCs, which is what that statement seems to be implying a DM is supposed to do.
KainPen wrote: are you sure the player is just not putting himself in easy access to me the first logical target. I used to get accused of this a lot, but slowly the players started to realize they were using poor tactics over all. I still have 1 player that regular use really poor tactics and put himself in bad situation all the time. He accused of me of this still, but then all the players, start to laugh and tell him he keeps doing it to himself. A lot of players don’t like to think they are using bad tactics but it happens. Also how long has the adventure been going on. It logical that the bad guys would start to learn who they players are and there strength weakness and attack accordingly. Thus targeting spell caster first or sending rust monster have the tank with his full suit of armor. So many players expect all monster to have a int of 4-8 when the truth is monster of them have int of 12+ most of the time being smarter than most of the pcs. Because they use mental stats as dump stats. This is more reasonable. However, it really does depend on what they're facing and how combats go. If you're facing a bunch of singular enemies or enemy groups that aren't coordinated, they shouldn't know your group's exact tactics and should instead follow a generic tactic of their own such as "kill the guys without armor first" or "kill the guy that's hitting the hardest." If you're fighting a bunch of scouts for the BBEG, then maybe they'll learn your tactics and spread them to later fights, but only if someone that saw you fighting manages to escape to warn the others. Otherwise, who's going to tell the next group what your tactics are? The corpses that you left lying on the road as you marched into the enemy camp? Or is the BBEG scrying on all of his soldiers 24/7? Because that would mean he had no time to do anything else.
I don't feel we have been running a cakewalk up until now. Cold and ruthless he ha always been death has always been on the table and we under stand and excpect that completely. There's I a diffrence between dying in an andventure and have the deck stacked to where it's almost isn't enjoyable to play.
Zhayne wrote: KaiPen ... no. NO NO NO NO NO. The GM's job is NOT NOT NOT to kill all characters. That's textbook bad GMing and totally missing the point of the game. I don't think it is bad gming, that is the monsters and villan job correct, If the gm does not try to do this, with every encounter, you fail as a gm because the game becomes to easy the game never become challangeing and the reward of victory are not as sweet. Go for the kill just don't be a jerk about it. That how is how players learn to be better players. The good guys don't always win. Killing a character is meaning less as it is so a GM should aim to do it. It make the game harder and more fun in the long run. the system already has a way to cheat death, via raise dead ect. If the it can't be raised roll up a new one.
Quite frankly, I absolutely hate it when people say, "The GM has the final say and never has to account for his actions or explain his reasoning, because the GM is an all-powerful god and the players are just peons; the players can find a new game if they don't like it." If the players can't hold the GM accountable for a rules call (In the case of the GM not knowing the rules or knowingly ignoring them) or provide input as to the wellbeing of their characters and their OOC fun, the GM might as well be writing a book if he doesn't want player input and for the players and characters to just shut up and do what they're told.
KainPen wrote: Zhayne wrote: KaiPen ... no. NO NO NO NO NO. The GM's job is NOT NOT NOT to kill all characters. That's textbook bad GMing and totally missing the point of the game. I don't think it is bad gming, that is the monsters and villan job correct, If the gm does not try to do this, with every encounter, you fail as a gm because the game becomes to easy the game never become challangeing and the reward of victory are not as sweet. Go for the kill just don't be a jerk about it. That how is how players learn to be better players. The good guys don't always win. Killing a character is meaning less as it is so a GM should aim to do it. It make the game harder and more fun in the long run. the system already has a way to cheat death, via raise dead ect. If the it can't be raised roll up a new one. Every encounter should not be a TPK waiting to happen. Heck, they shouldn't even be single character deaths waiting to happen. Low risk fights not only underscore the fact that your characters have gotten stronger, but they also make the high risk fights much more enjoyable because they're something different. If every fight is just a slog uphill that results in characters dying, then it isn't fun. It's tedious at best and mind-wrackingly frustrating at worst. I play games to have a good time and develop my character, not to roll one up, have him die, and then bring in one of his identical septuplets every session because the GM keeps throwing APL+4 CR encounters or fights where the enemies know every single counter to every one of our abilities at us one after the other.
Drow Nobles can levitate and I banned clerics and paladins in my current game because the gods are missing. I don't agree on the not giving out xp part but hey I played under a gm that gave extra xp for critical hits, me playing a wizard didn't see much extra xp.
Unruly wrote: The is just so, so wrong. I mean, wow. It's one thing to be a DM that doesn't cut slack for poor planning and another thing entirely to go out and actively kill all the PCs, which is what that statement seems to be implying a DM is supposed to do.
This is more reasonable. However, it really does depend on what they're facing and how combats go. If you're facing a bunch of singular enemies or enemy groups that aren't coordinated, they shouldn't know your group's exact tactics and should instead follow a generic tactic of their own such as "kill the guys without armor first" or "kill the guy that's hitting the hardest." If you're fighting a bunch of scouts for the BBEG, then maybe they'll learn your tactics and spread them to later fights, but only if someone that saw you fighting manages to escape to warn the others. Otherwise, who's going to tell the next group what your tactics are? The corpses that you left lying on the road as you...
The player them self’s often make themselves known and the tactics they use, when they go to tavern spread words of their glory of battles won, so that they make it with the local bar girl that night. Who to say well place survival check and heal checks by knowledge or diplomacy checks by BBEG men will not get the information when his scouting party does not come back to report to camp. So unless the party is walking around without permit pass without trace and taking all the body’s along with them as they go they leave plenty of evidence after every encounter. The BBEG does not have to scry to get this information. Same way murder case are solved in real life. There is also speak with dead spells. Raising one of the scouting party from the dead to get the information. This is where a monster being above int of 12+ comes in. if int of 18+ is genius level you could expect Sherlock Homes level of deductive reasoning. He may just have to look at the evidence of what happen and figure out what party tactics where there is no need for spells.
Same could be said of a dragon that is a few hundred years old, he learned through experience how to id the best archers in a group and spell casters as they ones that pose the biggest threat to him.
I play wandering monsters as you stated and I use the cookie cutter monster book monsters and they tend to target at random unless that wandering monster could have some connection to BBEG such as a group of drow soilder when the big bad evil guy is Drow himself.
The thing that bothered me the most was no exp for avoiding and encounter tactfully cause it eliminates any motivation beyond hack and slash, and the acting like because we are players and he is gm that our opinion and happiness with the game don't matter. I enjoy challenging fights and encounters just don't screw me of I come up with a clever way through it.
seto83 wrote: The thing that bothered me the most was no exp for avoiding and encounter tactfully cause it eliminates any motivation beyond hack and slash, and the acting like because we are players and he is gm that our opinion and happiness with the game don't matter. I enjoy challenging fights and encounters just don't screw me of I come up with a clever way through it. Really depends on what you talked past. If you talked past two low level guards then you'd get xp for them because you overcame them hut you would not be entitled to xp for the other 10 guards you never saw or the two traps your friendly guards disable for you. You may have talked your way out of having to overcome those other challenges but your reward was resources not spent not xp gained. You didn't learn anything by not interacting in with all the other stuff and you probably only.learned very little interacting in with the guys you did talk to, specifically if you just die rolled past them and didn't have a lengthy social encounter. General rule ofnthumb for me is that if it takes you less than 5 minutes to talk your way past something then you weren't challenged and didn't learn anything (gain experience).
seto83 wrote: The thing that bothered me the most was no exp for avoiding and encounter tactfully cause it eliminates any motivation beyond hack and slash, and the acting like because we are players and he is gm that our opinion and happiness with the game don't matter. I enjoy challenging fights and encounters just don't screw me of I come up with a clever way through it. I know the feeling, but a lot of gm just follow the kill to get exp script and APs encourage it. It is something that has been pushed down since frist edtion D&D. Every now and again in an ap will it give bonus xp for avoiding something but it is mostly for stuff saving a npc that is mad and attacking the party if you heal him ect. But it is few and far between. dispite my kill the party view, I reward the party 50% extra xp or information ect for avoding combat and maybe even more gold as a reward then what would have goten in the fight.
I ran an encounter with some hill giants blocking a road once demanding the pc giving them some food while taunting the pcs and threating them the whole time. When the pcs gave them some food and patched the giants wounds up, the Giants let them go and even gave them some information about pair of Land Sharks having been sighted up ahead, allow the players to avoid ambush during that encounter.
KainPen wrote: The player them self’s often make themselves known and the tactics they use, when they go to tavern spread words of their glory of battles won, so that they make it with the local bar girl that night. Who to say well place survival check and heal checks by knowledge or diplomacy checks by BBEG men will not get the information when his scouting party does not come back to report to camp. So unless the party is walking around without permit pass without trace and taking all the body’s along with them as they go they leave plenty of evidence after every encounter. The BBEG does not have to scry to get this information. Same way murder case are solved in real life. There is also speak with dead spells. Raising one of the scouting party from the dead to get the information. This is where a monster being above int of 12+ comes in. if int of 18+ is genius level you could expect Sherlock Homes level of deductive reasoning. He may just have to look at the evidence of what happen and figure out what party tactics where there is no need for spells.... Except that I don't usually play with groups that go to taverns and tell everyone the exact tactics that they used to kill something. They generalize, and that's if they even bother telling anyone anything beyond "That group of bandits won't be a problem anymore" and handing over a bag of scalps or ears or whatever to collect the bounty. So there goes that option.
And coming across a battlefield isn't going to tell you exactly where everyone was standing at all times. It will tell you "This guy died because of some kind of heavy slashing weapon. This guy got shot full of arrows. This guy got hit by something that burned a hole right through him, so probably magic. And these bodies that are bunched up here mean they were all probably fighting the same guy." It's not going to tell you that the guy who got shot full of arrows was being grappled by the monk, that the pile of bodies was actually caused by one of the enemies being dominated and used to kill his buddies, and that the guy who died from magic was killed by a magus instead of a wizard.
Speak with dead isn't foolproof either, because then you need a method of getting the message to the rest of the bad guys before the PCs get there.
Yes, enemies aren't always dumb. But they also aren't always all-powerful geniuses who will know every last thing the players can do either. It's all a matter of DM metagaming and, while DMs are expected to do it to a point, it has to be balanced. With the other things you've said, you really come off as being a DM that I wouldn't want to play with. You seem to have the old-fashioned "Me vs. Them" mentality where you have to win every fight with your PCs. Which is something that I've experienced before and I don't find fun in the slightest, and I'm glad that it has mostly faded away. But to each their own, I suppose.
Oh, and from the Paizo APs that I've seen, they give XP throughout the adventure for all sorts of things. Social encounters without combat, successful skill checks, avoiding things, and, of course, combat. They also implement an event-based level guide as well, telling you what level the PCs should be upon reaching a specific point, which is what I tend to use instead of XP rewards.
OP wrote: Picking on a character ie: If he doesn't like someones character goes out of his way to kill it, like making it the first and primary center of all attacks. This is the only one I see as an actual problem. I think its a pretty jerk thing to do and you should obviously talk to him about it.
The other issues don't actually seem so bad. Disallowing certain classes is certainly not a unique thing, though I have never seen it done for Barbarians. As has been mentions Drow nobles can levitate at will, also the GM is under no obligation to follow the stat blocks verbatim. And not handing out XP for bypassing an encounter without combat is certainly not unheard of, just not something I would do. I don't hand out XP at all :/
seto83 wrote: I have a small problem with my dm. He has gotten real comfortable with the stance that he is the dm and there is always right and word is absolute. He has made at least a few questionable calls and the just rubber stamps it with I'm the dm conversation over. I will provide a few examples.
Banned barbarians cause they aren't fun for him to kill.
Didn't alot us exp for an encounter we stratgicly avoided ie: bribed our way through instead of fighting.
Decided for his convince to add spell like abilities to a enemy who didn't have them ie: drow can levitate at will.
Picking on a character ie: If he doesn't like someones character goes out of his way to kill it, like making it the first and primary center of all attacks.
This guy is a friend my group has been together for almost 8 years we play 2-36 times a month for about 8-10 hours a session, so we have logged some game time. We don't want to run him out of the group cause we like him a lot and these problems haven't arisen til lately about 3-4 months ago. Basicly just seeing if anyone has had the same type of issue and how they addressed and handled it.
Sounds like he's wielding his power like a battle axe. Everything he's doing is within he perview to do. However, it sounds like he's doing it for the wrong reasons. The game is meant to be fun and challanging not a GM slaughter fest. I've been in games like this and while I think you shouldn't coddle players, it's not your job as GM to keep them under your boot either. The game isn't "players vs. GM" it's "PCs vs. Obsticles". The GM sets the tone interperits rules and lays out the world. He is not there to squish the PCs under his boot.
Banning barbarians because "they arn't fun to kill" is the wrong reason not to have them in your game.
Not awarding XP for bribery? I can go either way on. It's effective, but not exactly fulfilling to throw money at a problem.
Adding spell-like abilities for story? good idea. Adding them because you don't want to bother with book keeping? Lazy at best.
Picking on players, even if you don't like their characters is a BIG no no. If he has an in game reason for it... like the character pissed off the guys your fighting for some reason... that's alright, they hold a grudge and want to see you hurt. But because you don't like the character? NO, Bad GM!
Have the group voice their concerns. He may need to be removed for a bit before he sits in the GM seat again. Talk to him and the group, replace him as GM if need be. Be frank and honest in what the group is looking for and that there is no fun to be had in being targeted for death every game. If this is a new issue he may have something going on in his personal life and may need to work that out before returning to the GM position; because he may be acting out his frustrations on the PCs.
Then again some people can't handle the responsabilites of the GM seat and think if they constanly beat down the characters "they win". That's a hard mantallity to break someone of. I hope this is not the case.
seto83 wrote: I will provide a few examples.
Banned barbarians cause they aren't fun for him to kill.
Didn't alot us exp for an encounter we stratgicly avoided ie: bribed our way through instead of fighting.
Decided for his convince to add spell like abilities to a enemy who didn't have them ie: drow can levitate at will.
Picking on a character ie: If he doesn't like someones character goes out of his way to kill it, like making it the first and primary center of all attacks.
I will assume that you provided the most egregious examples, which in your case... just aren't that bad.
I don't want to gloss over your discomfort in the game, but:
Banning a class is perfectly reasonable for any number of reasons, and I would say "fun" is the most important one. If something isn't fun then why are you playing?
Awarding experience is almost 100% DM decision. Avoiding an encounter can be the equal of defeating it... or not. It's hard to say, and it's a DM's prerogative.
Boosting a NPC's or a monster's power is completely within a DM's rights. Not an issue at all.
The last is maybe your most significant argument, but there's very little information here. Are these intelligent creatures identifying the clearest and most obvious threat? Or unintelligent monsters displaying strange bias? It's hard to determine whether this is abuse just by your description.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
seto83 wrote: I have a small problem with my dm. He has gotten real comfortable with the stance that he is the dm and there is always right and word is absolute. He has made at least a few questionable calls and the just rubber stamps it with I'm the dm conversation over. I will provide a few examples.
You should speak to him as a group. Make sure all players are on board before you speak with him. Ask him what the purpose of the game is. When he admits the purpose is for everyone to have fun let him know which decisions he is making that are leading to less fun for the players.
You don't even have to BE drow nobility. You could just take the feat line drow nobility > improved drow nobility > greater drow nobility (yes they're called drow nobility but a regular drow can take them). This grants a lot of at will SLAs including levitate.
I'm with some of the others here. Discuss it with him as a group and tell him it's affecting the fun you guys are having. If he doesn't want to alter the style to be fun for everyone, someone else step up and GM. You might find yourself doing some similar things though. Sometimes players just want things to be easy.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I feel like the thing that is missing in my understanding of this is context of the decisions in how they were presented.
"Hey man I was thinking about running a barbarian."
"NO BARBS ARE BAD and are BANNED"
is way different than;
Well in this setting I am running there aren't any because of x, y, z
Same thing with the drow. Sure a gm should mix things up. A floating Drow? Woah! Never heard of that, wow we gotta re-think this vs. "Uh no you can't catch him because he..uh... jumps off the cliff and he.. uh ..LEVITATES! yeah!"
I guess what I am getting at is were these expected adjustments or were they things that came across in the heat of the moment? I have targeted specific players...because they were 7ft of walking plate mail but that is different than "oh hey, guess what everyone here can see invisibility, guess what Bilbo? You get stabbed for *picks up 80 d10s*
Rule 0 is for adjudication, not to drop the dice on people while being an a&@~!~#. There are both constructive and non-constructive ways to challenge PC notions of the rules and I think that plays a big role in setting off whether the player is being too sensitive to being caught off guard versus a GM being a jerk.
But I agree with others. If this is sudden and the group is well established and are friends then most likely something is going on with the individual beyond GMing.
NO QUESTIONS! QUESTIONS BANNED!
|
