Was wondering; I know we all have an idea of a Monte Haul dungeon and munchkin players, but can the true be said of gms that they are munchkins? i have played in a few games over the years where the gm is really impressed by power races and power items so everyone plays power characters with uber uber relics and gear so that at very low levels (like 5-10) you fight epic type creatures some up to like 60th level and such; that kind of game takes some real adjustment, and was kinda fun being able to do wild and amazing stuff, and we all had a good time; but the scope of the game was squewed way way out there; so would this be a munchkin game? any thoughts on what this type gm might be called.
|
Was wondering; I know we all have an idea of a Monte Haul dungeon and munchkin players, but can the true be said of gms that they are munchkins? i have played in a few games over the years where the gm is really impressed by power races and power items so everyone plays power characters with uber uber relics and gear so that at very low levels (like 5-10) you fight epic type creatures some up to like 60th level and such; that kind of game takes some real adjustment, and was kinda fun being able to do wild and amazing stuff, and we all had a good time; but the scope of the game was squewed way way out there; so would this be a munchkin game? any thoughts on what this type gm might be called.
The term you're probably looking for is Monty Haul (spelled variously). Not only do they exist, they're a cliche. While I suspect there are those who like this kind of GM, I'd count myself fortunate were I to have missed the experience of playing with one.
First, let me start by saying, "Let's not get into the deffinition of a munchkin thing again." Some people believe in them, some don't. It's not worth it. So, let's all save our breath and spare the comments and flame war.
Can DMs have the same motivations and styles as their players? Absolutely. Given the different roles, it appears slightly differently, and thus may not fit to the general concept of "munchkin" (whatever that is, and whether you believe in them or not), and since the term "munchkin" is used almost exclusively by DMs to players, it would be odd to hear it applied to another dungeon master, but yes, it is certainly possible.
Case closed. Everyone, chain up your trolls. Nothing to see here folks, just move along. Let's all go wonder about the merits of changing the feats of the Tarrasque or something else actually productive to the hobby....
Thanks to Hieroneous I've never had a Dm like that....and I don't dm like that.
Well, I don't think what you described is a power DM. A power DM would be someone who examines the rules and finds ways to empower encounters so that they maximize challenge.
Players walk along a corridor and run into a permanent Stinking Cloud and Fog Cloud. They pass through it coughing and making their saves and nothings on the other side. Non-Power DM.
Same situation but in the middle of the stinking cloud and fog cloud is a construct that attacks them. Power DM.
Players walk along and find a trap. They are able to bypass the trap but can't disable it. Non-Power DM.
Players in same situation bypass a trap only to trigger a Cause Fear Glyph of Warding that sends them fleeing back into same trap. Power DM.
DM on principal refuses to challenge PC's with lycanthropes before third level because he's afraid they can't penetrate the silver DR. Non-Power DM.
DM throws were-rats at first level PC's because they're low CR and therefore "legal". Power DM.
DM decides on monsters for an encounter. He decides on humanoids and gives them a bunch of character classes that raises their CR with a lot of abilities they won't actually use during that encounter. Non-Power DM.
DM gives those same humanoids mixed character and NPC classes for the sole purpose of making every single ability combat-useful especially considering the terrain and battlefield the encounter takes place on. Power DM.
Adventures can be "optimized" just like characters can be. And for my money, it's a much more challenging task, especially when trying to stick to the EL and Treasure guidelines outlined in the DMG.
It seems to me many of the authors of Dungeon Magazine are power DM's, and that's the way I, personally, like it.
|
First, let me start by saying, "Let's not get into the deffinition of a munchkin thing again." Some people believe in them, some don't. It's not worth it. So, let's all save our breath and spare the comments and flame war.
Quite, but....
Can DMs have the same motivations and styles as their players? Absolutely. Given the different roles, it appears slightly differently, and thus may not fit to the general concept of "munchkin" (whatever that is, and whether you believe in them or not), and since the term "munchkin" is used almost exclusively by DMs to players, it would be odd to hear it applied to another dungeon master, but yes, it is certainly possible.
As a power-gamer, I doubtless hold over those traits into my DM'ing. Most of my NPCs and monsters are min-maxed for maximum effectiveness. But then again, so are my PCs, so it seems only fair.
The stuff SgtHulka describes doesn't really seem too excessive PROVIDED it is used in extreme moderation. A few tough and unusual encounters (construct in a poison cloud, the glyph of fear thing - I might use them) make things less routine for the PCs from a tactical perspective. Overdo it, of course, and they learn to hate you, and become over-cautious (and the game grinds to a halt). But something nasty lurking once every few adventures....
What I wouldn't stoop to is a killer dungeon or such-like. When we were at school (albeit 25 years ago) a DM of my acquaintance had a room containing a vacuum. Open door, get sucked in, die, no save. Well, we were only 12. Personally, I hate "save or die" (or just die) situations - they lack drama. Going down hacking at the horde - now that is a good death.
Personally, I hate "save or die" (or just die) situations - they lack drama. Going down hacking at the horde - now that is a good death.
It can be really frustrating, and things like beholders are particularly bad about that. But it did lead to one of the more amusing sequences on the online campaign I play in. Whole party is 14-15th level, I'm playing a wizard, and the party is trying to reach the top of the tower where the evil epic level mage is casting this enormous spell to sacrifice the population of an entire city to help release the embodiment of chaos in the universe.
So we use invisibility and climb in a window, only to find two beholders, some insigificant guards, and no invisibility (the beholders noticed the window open and then...anti-magic field). We're doing pretty well against them when one of them manages to get off a full-attack with its eyes:
(1) GM: The southern beholder unleashes a volley into gaul.
(1) GM: 1d20+9 -> 6,9 = (15)
(1) GM: 1d20+9 -> 6,9 = (15)
(1) GM: 1d20+9 -> 11,9 = (20)
(1) GM: 1d20+9 -> 11,9 = (20)
(1) GM: 1d20+9 -> 4,9 = (13)
(1) GM: What's Gaul's touch AC?
(5) Daidoji Shian: 12
(1) GM: I need 5 will saves.
(6) Gaul: *sick bastard*
(6) Gaul: 1d20+6 -> 7,6 = (13)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+6 -> 11,6 = (17)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+6 -> 10,6 = (16)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+6 -> 10,6 = (16)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+6 -> 2,6 = (8)
(1) GM: Gaul glows green as he fails his first save, and is reduced to a pile of ash.
(4) Toratsume: (isn't disintigrate a fort save?)
(1) GM: All beholder saves are will saves.
(1) GM: Wow, my bad
(1) GM: Yes, they are fort. :)
** (1) GM wonders what I was reading. **
(1) GM: Please reroll the first, third, and fourth saves.
(6) Gaul: 1d20+16 -> 1,16 = (17)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+16 -> 1,16 = (17)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+16 -> 20,16 = (36)
(5) Daidoji Shian: (You have got to be kidding me.)
(1) GM: ...
(1) GM: *clears throat*
(6) Gaul: Pile of ash, I know
Well, after the session it was determined that some type of immunity Gaul had (I don't remember what it was, exactly) should've saved him from being disintegrated, so some time further into the castle, we come across an imprisoned cleric who can cast reincarnate and since magic in the vicinity was functioning bizarrely as a result of the sacrifice spell being cast, the spell's duration was cut down from 10 minutes to something much shorter. And so Gaul was back into the mix as we assaulted Jakata, the evil epic mage, at the top of his tower. After I took down his defensive spell with a couple of artillery type spells (fireball, cone of cold) Gaul steps up to try to take him down, but they both had the same init...
(2) GM: Gaul and Jakata go at the same time.
(2) GM: Jakata: "You don't have any idea how much energy has to go into restarting that ritual."
(3) Gaul: I'm going to close and show him how to dance with death
(2) GM: Jakata casts a quick spell.
(2) GM: Naked d4, high roll goes first.
(2) GM: 1d4 -> 4 = (4)
(3) Gaul: 1d4 -> 4 = (4)
(2) GM: Ohh, roll again.
(2) GM: 1d4 -> 4 = (4)
(3) Gaul: You've hacked these dice...
(3) Gaul: 1d4 -> 3 = (3)
(2) GM: Jakata completes his spell and unleashes a fell word of power.
(2) GM: Gaul, do you have 101 or more hp?
(3) Gaul: *grumbles*
(2) GM: Jakata reaches out with power-word kill and snuffs out Gaul's life force. Gaul crumples to the ground.
|
What I wouldn't stoop to is a killer dungeon or such-like. When we were at school (albeit 25 years ago) a DM of my acquaintance had a room containing a vacuum. Open door, get sucked in, die, no save. Well, we were only 12. Personally, I hate "save or die" (or just die) situations - they lack drama. Going down hacking at the horde - now that is a good death.
Wouldn't the room flood with air when you opened the door, making it not deadly at all?
What I wouldn't stoop to is a killer dungeon or such-like. When we were at school (albeit 25 years ago) a DM of my acquaintance had a room containing a vacuum. Open door, get sucked in, die, no save. Well, we were only 12. Personally, I hate "save or die" (or just die) situations - they lack drama. Going down hacking at the horde - now that is a good death.Wouldn't the room flood with air when you opened the door, making it not deadly at all?
For that matter, would it be possible to open the door? :)
Was wondering; I know we all have an idea of a Monte Haul dungeon and munchkin players, but can the true be said of gms that they are munchkins? ...
Munchkins (to me) are people who take advantage of the rules (in any of a variety of ways) to the detriment of others.
That said, I have most certainly seen 'munchkin' DMs. My experience has been DMs that take advantage of every little bit of fine print to prohibit the PCs from doing what they want, or outright ignore whatever rule is necessary to stop the players from succeeding.
In a couple of cases the DMs were trying to keep the game on the track they wanted followed -- they were unwilling or unable to cope with unexpected actions or solutions in the game. Some of the DMs were just jerks :/
Regards,
Jack
Absolutely
I have always referred to them as Santa Claus Dm's because each game is like Christmas. New toys, new powers, new stuff stuff stuff! Is that always fun? No. Is it sometimes fun? sure. Some Dm's that's just their style and you cna have a fun lighthearted game that way or just get all your uber-weird ideas for characters out of the way.
|
|
[Wouldn't the room flood with air when you opened the door, making it not deadly at all?
"Ah, but the door slams shut behind you due to the air pressure, sealing you in."
Yes, you are right of course, but the physics of the situation was never the primary point. After all, how do you get a room with a vacuum in it anyway, with a simple wooden door on the outside?
Thinking about it I don't really think I buy into the concept that there can be a Munchkin DM. Certianly DMs vary by mortality. In some games you rarely die while in others your average life span might be 3 sessions or less. I think the second example might be of a 'Killer DM' and he might be exploiting rules (just like the proverbial munchkin) to get this kind of a high kill rate but I'd still not say that was a munchkin DM.
This high mortality rate will either soon loose the DM his group or the DM is so good at making the whole thing fun (in some kind of brutal way) that his players will keep coming back for more and likely love to hate the DM.
In the first case the DM has no group and a DM with no group can't be a Munchkin - he or she is not even really a DM. In the second case the DM has some how overcome the problems associated with Munchkinism in order to keep the players coming back looking for more. In otherwords whatever the DM is doing its not a problem because the players are loving it.
I certainly am not a munchkin GM, but I've probably earned my reputation as a killer GM. I keep the magic and gold available pretty low on the average for the players and the villains. However my players have never complained much about my "sadistic tendencies", in fact they laugh about it, and keep coming. One of my players draws comic book quality art (www.cloudeagle.com) and I use the villains he draws for me to "enhance the experience" with certain villains that the players come very quickly to dislike. When said villain kills their character, they're even more fired up to roll up a new one to come after said villain again. It's a beautiful arrangement, I think...
Thinking about it I don't really think I buy into the concept that there can be a Munchkin DM. Certianly DMs vary by mortality...
We might be working with different concepts of what munchkin means. I've played with challenging DMs -- I've got no problem there. I've also played with killer DMs -- OK, this one's a problem.
There's still another group: some DMs are competing against the PCs, and using their position to negate any success the players might otherwise have. I've played with more than one, so I know they're out there. Fortunately, I think they're pretty rare.
Jack
I would agree with earlier folks, in that there are two sorts of DMs who are counterparts to munchkins. The Killer GM, who kills PCs ruthlessly, is not a bad guy, but is making the game less fun by killing more often than is necessary or to get himself off. An adversarial DM, on the other hand, is against the players, and uses his arbitrary power to make himself win. A kind of "i'll take my ball and go home" kind of guy.
Munchkinry, to me, implies a sort of reading of the rules in ways they weren't intended, coupled with a DM scared to put his foot down or players who are babies. DMs can enable this behavior, obviously, but I don't think they engage in it themselve to often.
Mostly I am wondering about what term to call a gm like I described; I dont really think Monty Haul fits as I dont consider a Monty Haul type game to be challenging; while my friend make very challenging fights against mobs that are mostly god-like, players have power tools to fight such creatures but not necessarily "power gamers" as it is just the game style; was just wondering if there was a general term to describe this type gm.
How about a "WOG" DM - for "Wrath of God" sees himself as the god of his world, and the characters as adversaries - rather than collaboraters in the game. Maybe not a perfect fit - but I could totally see myself saying something like, "Hey, quit being such a £$£$%*( WOG!
The term also has the benefit of already used in some places as a perjoritive (unfortunately the origins are as an ethnic slur) that has evolved to be the rough equivalent of "dumb jerk".
Personally, I hate "save or die" (or just die) situations - they lack drama. Going down hacking at the horde - now that is a good death.It can be really frustrating, and things like beholders are particularly bad about that. But it did lead to one of the more amusing sequences on the online campaign I play in. Whole party is 14-15th level, I'm playing a wizard, and the party is trying to reach the top of the tower where the evil epic level mage is casting this enormous spell to sacrifice the population of an entire city to help release the embodiment of chaos in the universe.
So we use invisibility and climb in a window, only to find two beholders, some insigificant guards, and no invisibility (the beholders noticed the window open and then...anti-magic field). We're doing pretty well against them when one of them manages to get off a full-attack with its eyes:
(1) GM: The southern beholder unleashes a volley into gaul.
(1) GM: 1d20+9 -> 6,9 = (15)
(1) GM: 1d20+9 -> 6,9 = (15)
(1) GM: 1d20+9 -> 11,9 = (20)
(1) GM: 1d20+9 -> 11,9 = (20)
(1) GM: 1d20+9 -> 4,9 = (13)
(1) GM: What's Gaul's touch AC?
(5) Daidoji Shian: 12
(1) GM: I need 5 will saves.
(6) Gaul: *sick bastard*
(6) Gaul: 1d20+6 -> 7,6 = (13)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+6 -> 11,6 = (17)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+6 -> 10,6 = (16)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+6 -> 10,6 = (16)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+6 -> 2,6 = (8)
(1) GM: Gaul glows green as he fails his first save, and is reduced to a pile of ash.
(4) Toratsume: (isn't disintigrate a fort save?)
(1) GM: All beholder saves are will saves.
(1) GM: Wow, my bad
(1) GM: Yes, they are fort. :)
** (1) GM wonders what I was reading. **
(1) GM: Please reroll the first, third, and fourth saves.
(6) Gaul: 1d20+16 -> 1,16 = (17)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+16 -> 1,16 = (17)
(6) Gaul: 1d20+16 -> 20,16 = (36)
(5) Daidoji Shian: (You have got to be kidding me.)
(1) GM: ...
(1) GM: *clears throat*
(6) Gaul: Pile of ash, I knowWell, after the session it was determined that some type of immunity Gaul...
Nasty...
you're going to have to let me sit in on and watch one of those online sessions some time or show me how it works so I can do it in a pinch with my campaign...as necessary.
Mostly I am wondering about what term to call a gm like I described; I dont really think Monty Haul fits as I dont consider a Monty Haul type game to be challenging; while my friend make very challenging fights against mobs that are mostly god-like, players have power tools to fight such creatures but not necessarily "power gamers" as it is just the game style; was just wondering if there was a general term to describe this type gm.
Presuming you mean that you have powerful players fighting powerful monsters for large amounts of treasure then I would call that a high powered campaign. I'd go so far as to say that 3rd edition in general encourages a high powered game compared to say 1st or 2nd edition.
We might be working with different concepts of what munchkin means. I've played with challenging DMs -- I've got no problem there.
Well Munchkin means different things to different people but I think there is an underlying commonality in that a munchkin is a problem because she somehow unbalances the game over the long term.
A DM can't normally be this - It is the DM that sets the tone for what constitutes balanced in his campaign. If that balance is good for the players (either because it is what they actually desire or because the DM manages to make the whole thing fun despite their initial desires) then one has a good campaign and a good DM. If its not then one probably will soon not have a game and even if the players decide to persevere despite not having fun then I would consider the DM to be a bad DM as opposed to a Munchkin DM.
Basically I see a munchkin as implying an ongoing problem with game balance and I think its extraordinary to be in a campaign in which the whole campaign could be described as having an ongoing problem with power balance originating from the DMs chair.
you're going to have to let me sit in on and watch one of those online sessions some time or show me how it works so I can do it in a pinch with my campaign...as necessary.
It's really pretty simple; we use a program called OpenRPG. http://openrpg.com/ It allows chat, dice rolling, mini-map, etc. The 1.6 version has a couple of ugly bugs which are fixed in the CVS version. I extracted the relevant portions of the code for my not-technical group. Also added a bit of code to implement our rules on rolling d20s in most situations (a 1 equals a -10 while a 20 equals a 30).
That said, we're moving to voice chat because typing is slow, slow, slow by comparison.
you're going to have to let me sit in on and watch one of those online sessions some time or show me how it works so I can do it in a pinch with my campaign...as necessary.It's really pretty simple; we use a program called OpenRPG. http://openrpg.com/ It allows chat, dice rolling, mini-map, etc. The 1.6 version has a couple of ugly bugs which are fixed in the CVS version. I extracted the relevant portions of the code for my not-technical group. Also added a bit of code to implement our rules on rolling d20s in most situations (a 1 equals a -10 while a 20 equals a 30).
That said, we're moving to voice chat because typing is slow, slow, slow by comparison.
gimme gimme...
(by that I mean tell me the secrets of your code, oh wise and benevolent Charles, DM of my current favorite campaign. Or better yet, fork over the results of your toil and let me bask it its glory like a giddy school girl.)