DMing for CHEATERS!


3.5/d20/OGL

51 to 94 of 94 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

magdalena thiriet wrote:


Oh, and when I DM I fudge dice rolls. Players know that. The monsters really don't throw 1's and 2's that often in damage rolls.

You know I did this for years. Most of the dice fudging was in favor of the players. Sometimes though, if an encounter would seem to easy or the players found away to trump my villians or thwart my plans easily, I would fudge dice, so the encounter would follow along with my plans.

But now I like to play the dice as they roll. It keeps me on my toes as a DM. I have to adjust my plans to the outcome of the dice rolls. It is tricky, makes the game play and outcome more spontaneous. I just find it more fun.

As a Dm what do you do when your red dragon fumbles on a will save against a sanctuary spell? Then the cleric slips away into the forest with the rest of the party hiding in a portable hole. Do you say no way, my dragon is to powerful to fall for such a trick and force the encounter, or do you let the players escape because they were lucky? Luck plays a part in a lot of story telling.

Dm die fudging is neither right or wrong, it is a matter of style.


Sir Kaikillah wrote:
magdalena thiriet wrote:


Oh, and when I DM I fudge dice rolls. Players know that. The monsters really don't throw 1's and 2's that often in damage rolls.

You know I did this for years. Most of the dice fudging was in favor of the players. Sometimes though, if an encounter would seem to easy or the players found away to trump my villians or thwart my plans easily, I would fudge dice, so the encounter would follow along with my plans.

But now I like to play the dice as they roll. It keeps me on my toes as a DM. I have to adjust my plans to the outcome of the dice rolls. It is tricky, makes the game play and outcome more spontaneous. I just find it more fun.

As a Dm what do you do when your red dragon fumbles on a will save against a sanctuary spell? Then the cleric slips away into the forest with the rest of the party hiding in a portable hole. Do you say no way, my dragon is to powerful to fall for such a trick and force the encounter, or do you let the players escape because they were lucky? Luck plays a part in a lot of story telling.

Dm die fudging is neither right or wrong, it is a matter of style.

Ya, I did this too. But when I realized that players were coming to relie on my "DM initiative" to keep them alive, I began to not mess with the dice rolls. It also makes my players focus a little more on tactics and roleplaying which they sorely lack.

On the other hand, having your red dragon go down so easily is a problem so I allow myself some leniancy when it comes to important fights or other critical moments in the campaign.


Sir Kaikillah wrote:
As a Dm what do you do when your red dragon fumbles on a will save against a sanctuary spell? Then the cleric slips away into the forest with the rest of the party hiding in a portable hole. Do you say no way, my dragon is to powerful to fall for such a trick and force the encounter, or do you let the players escape because they were lucky?

Not too long ago my players fought against Vranthis, a Young Adult Green Dragon. The druid of the party cast a Baleful Polymorph spell onto the dragon and the only way that Vranthis could fail the initial Fortitude save was by rolling a '1', which is exactly what happened. So several seconds later the fight turns from an all-out brawl into a "Catch the Toad" competition (Vranthis also failed his Will save and so had the mind of a toad as well as the body of one).

I was slightly taken aback but went with it, even when the party later came into conflict with a Huge Red Adult Dragon, Lady Chymon. During the course of the battle, the PCs managed to feed her a backpack containing the Toad. The druid then dispelled the Baleful Polymorph spell so that the toad reverted back into a Large Green Dragon, whilst within the belly of the Huge Red! In this case I ruled that the Green died, and that the Red lost half her hit points.

For those that wish to know, the battle still didn't go the party's way (they hadn't been expecting the fight with her), and shortly after this they had to retreat. It got to the stage where all the PCs had between 2hp to 15hp left and Lady Chymon had about 30hp left! It was the wizard's turn, with Chymon's turn taking place directly afterwards (and she was in a position to use her Breath Weapon on the whole group), so he wisely Teleported them all out of there.
(Afterward the session ended we returned to this point to see what could have happened if the wizard hadn't cast Teleport but instead tried to take the dragon down; in short she survived and it would have been a TPK.)
(Of course the PCs returned several days later fully prepared and whooped her good, but were nearly killed by the traps that were in place near her hoard, but that's another story)


Sir Kaikillah wrote:


As a Dm what do you do when your red dragon fumbles on a will save ...

I used to fudge dice either way, for players or the monsters, as I felt it would make the game better. But then I played in a game where the inexperienced DM kept using encounters at least 2 EL's higher than the group. Yeah we would win most of the fights, but someone was always in danger of dying and the DM would resort to fudging. It was so blatant and really took away from the fun to know we really shouldn't have won. After that I started using the "players roll all the dice" rules from Unearthed Arcana. Now people die with a bit more frequency, but when they win a tough fight they know they've earned it. Sometimes a fight won't be as challenging as I'd like, but the players will probably still have fun.

This past weekend, when the warmage forced a very powerful yuan-ti cleric to make a save vs. massive damage and the player rolled a nat 20 (the same as if I rolled a nat 1), the players were pretty excited about it. No one complained "Oh, that's it? That guy was a wuss."

Dark Archive RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

llaletin wrote:

Not too long ago my players fought against Vranthis, a Young Adult Green Dragon. The druid of the party cast a Baleful Polymorph spell onto the dragon and the only way that Vranthis could fail the initial Fortitude save was by rolling a '1', which is exactly what happened. So several seconds later the fight turns from an all-out brawl into a "Catch the Toad" competition (Vranthis also failed his Will save and so had the mind of a toad as well as the body of one).

Isn't Polymorph one of the many things that dragons are immune to?


Atlas wrote:
Sir Kaikillah wrote:
magdalena thiriet wrote:


Oh, and when I DM I fudge dice rolls. Players know that. The monsters really don't throw 1's and 2's that often in damage rolls.

As a Dm what do you do when your red dragon fumbles on a will save against a sanctuary spell? Then the cleric slips away into the forest with the rest of the party hiding in a portable hole. Do you say no way, my dragon is to powerful to fall for such a trick and force the encounter, or do you let the players escape because they were lucky? Luck plays a part in a lot of story telling.

Dm die fudging is neither right or wrong, it is a matter of style.

Ya, I did this too. But when I realized that players were coming to relie on my "DM initiative" to keep them alive, I began to not mess with the dice rolls. It also makes my players focus a little more on tactics and roleplaying which they sorely lack.

On the other hand, having your red dragon go down so easily is a problem so I allow myself some leniancy when it comes to important fights or other critical moments in the campaign.

I let the plan work. My players were cleaver they came up with a good idea to get past the dragon. To accomplish the quest they were on, the only had to get past the dragon, not defeat it in battle. As I remember the Dragon had a +13 Wil save v. DC 13, that ment only a fumble would fail (I use the 1 always fails and a 20 always succedes rule with regards to saving throws and attack rolls), On a 20 sided die, thier is only a 5% chance of rolling a 1. So the odds were in the Dragons favor. I rewarded them with 1/2 the experience points they would have gotten for battling the creature.

They had to return later and deal with the dragon. But this time it was on there own terms. They had leveled up and came prepared with scrolls of fire protection and fly.

All in all, the encounter was fum, I think even more fun because I gave a little chance for them to succede and they did. Everyone new I needed to fumble on the savong throw for the spell to work and everyone attention was on that saving throw.

Fun lots of fun.

Anyway don't feel scared to give your players a chance to easily defeat your most well laid out plan. The outcome will be a surprise and could be lots of fun.


Fatespinner wrote:
Isn't Polymorph one of the many things that dragons are immune to?

Unfortunately not.

(Although it's just as well really, otherwise I'd be banging my head against the wall right now ;-))


I knew a player who would roll the dice just before his turn, like a good player should. However, if he got a poor roll he would pick the dice back up and roll it on their turn. It turns out that someone on another forum had a player named Mike who did this, and henceforth the practice has been known as "Miking the dice".

This player would just not bother to write down his low-level spells and cast them spontaneously. Not that big a deal, but I heard of a druid in another group who would do this with all his spells. Ever since, players in that group feared opponents whose spells were so well-suited to the situation that they seemed to be "casting like a druid".

On the topic of fudging the dice, I find it important that you don't do it, or at least, don't let your players work out that you're doing it. If they do, they can get complacent, and taking the risk out of the game takes out a lot of the challenge and thus a lot of the fun for many players.


hmm I can understand people cheating on dice rolls to a certain extent, sad, but I have a certain empathy for rolling bad because it just happens and people have the desire to artifically change their luck by cheating on dice rolls. I have a guy in my game who I suspect fudges his rolls from time to time, but I really dont care to much.

Now this other thing you guys are talking about is just heineous; running a module or something and somebody reading a copy of it playing along cheating; this would really piss me off. Like, what is the point of even playing; isnt that whole point to solve the mystery and overcome a challenge; this is just an assassination of the intent and fun of the game and I wouldn't tolerate that.

Now; if it was a game concept to have fun with; that is a whole nother peanut. Might be fun to run a module where everybody reads the module as written and everyone know it; is all above board; then you could run it like a dream everyone had as they have knowledge of the module; but then the gm changes mobs or traps or something as real life differs from a dream; or it would be like an old dungeon that some other group smashed years back and this information was in some scholars notes or library and the area has rerisen in evil and needs to be put down; pc's have some knowledge, but it is not current or precisely accurate.


Hi everyone, how's it going. First, before I talk pertaining to the post, I would like to introduce myself. I am a long time player and a good time DM, and I am new to Paizo. Anyway, about cheating.....I can't stand it at the least!!! I once ran a home campaign and a player rolled a "20"(actually a 2) in the game to make a will save against being dominated and wasn't enthralled by the end boss(a powerful lich). Well, his turn came around, and I had let him think I didn't know, it did suprise me however because he had never done it before to my knowing. So, he attacks the lich by rolling a 18, and he got a 26 in total. I say, alright, you hit the tank because your enthralled by the liches power and he commands you to attack the tank, besides, I doubt when you roll a 2 you will make a will save of 29....wouldn't you agree? Now...we won't be cheating again will we?

He was caught red handed, ever since that day he has never cheated, or at least I have never caught him cheating. Just let them think they got away with it, then catch them at a bad time or let them handle the big guys...always works...

Sir Smashes Alot...smashing your problems to bits!


cheating players should be killed out of the game.

(yes, I said players, not characters) :)


how about cheating GM's; and yes there are lots of them; I feel that way about cheating GM's. Are you now gonna tell me some blarney that GM's can't cheat? They can; and they do.


Valegrim wrote:
how about cheating GM's; and yes there are lots of them; I feel that way about cheating GM's. Are you now gonna tell me some blarney that GM's can't cheat? They can; and they do.

What do you consider cheating on the DMs part? Fudging die rolls? Thats a sin I easily confess. I have to adapt my enemies sometimes in mid-game, when I notice that I made them too hard or too soft. In my last session, the ranger rolled his tracking roll one too low - I still let him succeed, to further my story. He needed a 21, and he came up with a 20. (Not that bad for a 1st level ranger, anyway).

Cheating DMs are ok to me as long as the cheating is not too blatant and as long as it furthers the story and enhances everybodies´ fun. Cheating is not ok to save the DMs pets, or to take revenge on the player for whatever reason.

Stefan


I sometimes don't even design my monsters. Specially the big or important ones or the fights that further the plot. I rough up te characters, make the opposition cool, let him go down in the end and give everyone the feeling they've done a great job in defeating something really powerful.

Stats are guidelines to the story, as far as I'm concerned. Players need a bit of balance to keep fair to each other. Monsters are just supposed to go down in a spectacular fashion and make players go 'yay we beat them!'.

I don't consider that cheating, really.


About "cheating"
I will freely admit, that as a GM, I cheat, frequently, in favour of the players and a good, ripping story. Usually only with "unconfirmed" criticals, if I am too lucky, and a clever, solid strategy of the PCs goes down the drain because the monsters roll like Tymorians. Call it "fudging".. and never more often then once or twice a session.

As player, I don't and if I suspect my (co-)players of cheating (even for our common good ) , I usually start making remarks about their incredible lucky day, which, in our (rather mature) groups works fine, usually the "lucky-string" runs out there and then. If players try shenannigans with their spellbooks/spelllists, I usually ask them for a masterlist of their spells loaded (or seek a reason to check their list ingame ), and inform me of pertinent changes, say, some specifics for a special dungeon or encounter for which they prepare ahead.

As for "prior or partial knowledge of adventures", I actually have played campaigns which I knew before (DMing and gaming for 24+ years has its sideeffects ), partially or in their entirity. But that is the player, not the character, and several chars of mine have gone to their gory doom, despite the player knowing fully well what was about to happen - but the character did not. Which, in its own way was great fun, and neither the GM(s) nor my co-players ever felt anything problematic about it.

And if a player of mine actually has read part of my campaigns, woe be unto him, since I hardly ever play anything straight out of the box and/or as written. They usually learn that such knowledge is not beneficial at all - as NPCs are not quite who they are written to be, treasures get adapted and sideplots enter or disappear the storyline, often a short notice (through player instigation - some of the best sub-plots of campaigns only came up through player initiative ingame...).


No; cheating by a gm is unfairly altering the rules or more likely not letting the pc's win a scenario or most likely changing monsters and adventures on the fly from what was prepared. We still joke about one incident in a scoffing manner of a weasel that attacked out party once and started off as an ordinary giant weasel of 4hd but by the end of the fight this guy had so many spontaneous powers of damage reduction, fast healing, crit and weapon immunity, spiderclimb; the list goes on; we started calling it names like the undeadwereweasel of death and over the years the name keeps getting longer and longer. And doors; like how important can a door be to the story anyway; so you approach a door; find no traps and it is locked; ok so we fail the open locks and it is magically resistant to the magic from the wizard to open the lock; so we try to chop it down; can chop it down; cant attack the hinges; can't damage the wall holding the door or use picks, hammers, spikes or whatnot to do anything, we can look beyond the door a few feet with remote viewing magic. About this time we are praying for a wandering monster to put us out of our misery. Some GM's just play like this; they hate to see their monsters get killed; traps overcome and let pcs win the adventure and just muck it up for spite I guess; not really sure why. Some gms want everybody to play farmers who have minium stats and have no equipment and cant do jack; why is this? A whole lot of GM's dont give experience; and when they do it is so piddly you just laugh in despair; we played with this one gm for 4 months and at the end of 4 months of finishing a long term scenario and killing mobs and mobs and more mobs of monsters; well; we were still the same level we started at; this is cheating; I hate spending a few months playing a game only to find out I am playing with a cheating gm who doesnt really give a crap about his players.

Luckily; this has only happened 4 or 5 times over the last couple decades, but sheesh, it really ticks me off. I am not talking about fudging in the players favor.


Valegrim wrote:
doors; like how important can a door be to the story anyway; so you approach a door; find no traps and it is locked; ok so we fail the open locks and it is magically resistant to the magic from the wizard to open the lock; so we try to chop it down; can chop it down; cant attack the hinges; can't damage the wall holding the door or use picks, hammers, spikes or whatnot to do anything, we can look beyond the door a few feet with remote viewing magic.

The DM smirks at the rest of the players from behind his DM screen. Why? Because he is in control and there is nothing the players can do (or is there?)

Valegrim wrote:

Some GM's just play like this; they hate to see their monsters get killed; traps overcome and let pcs win the adventure and just muck it up for spite I guess; not really sure why.

I think some DMs Have an idea of how things are supposed to happen. When players do something the DM did not think of, these DM always "correct" the situation. I hate that, its cheating.

Other cheat thing that Dms do I hate, is create the uber NPC. These NPCs can't be killed, dismissed by PCs and DMs are fond of reminding players of how this NPC will kill your PC if you "act stuipid". This kind of stuff is plain selfish.

On the other extreme, I don't care for the benevolent DM cheaters. Fudging the dice so I can win, steals from the fun as far as I am concerned. A Dm who is scared to kill my character is robbing me of that "Do or die" experience. Truly it is only a game, but as a player, that fear of losing your character is part of the excitement. I even think that feeling of lose when your PC is uterly destroyed is a part of the game. Then again, I could be a pen and paper, virtual masochist.


Yeah, I forgot to mention the GM that makes up a character who is more or less their avatar in the game under some guise of an npc so this guy has the gms RL personae and is more or less him in dreamland; you cant kill him or do anything to him ever and you practically become a demigod if you think he is cool and hang out with him and just ignore that he is a normal human that can pick up and shake a maxed out greater treant in one fist and tell him off. yep; gm abuse like that is cheating in my book; but, really just wanted to say it goes both ways and that players are not the only ones that abuse the rules and the game; just trying to make a point since so many people seem to be so hostile about this whole thing.


I used to fudge numbers to a degree, always telling myself I was doing it for the purpose of "game balance" or the entertaiment value. Lately though, I've been going strictly with what rolls and to heck with the consequences. If I can't handle it, I shouldn't be DM'ing. If the players can't handle it they shouldn't be playing. It's been interesting and I think I kind of like it... *sigh*.


Valegrim wrote:
Yeah, I forgot to mention the GM that makes up a character who is more or less their avatar in the game under some guise of an npc so this guy has the gms RL personae and is more or less him in dreamland; you cant kill him or do anything to him ever and you practically become a demigod if you think he is cool and hang out with him and just ignore that he is a normal human that can pick up and shake a maxed out greater treant in one fist and tell him off. yep; gm abuse like that is cheating in my book; but, really just wanted to say it goes both ways and that players are not the only ones that abuse the rules and the game; just trying to make a point since so many people seem to be so hostile about this whole thing.

I agree that the DM can seriously stretch the rules to the point where the game is almost unrecognizable to the experienced player, but I still believe that the DM cannot cheat. I have dealt with those NPCs that are average on the outside but a god once in combat and I hate them with a passion. A DM who does not consider how the players might feel in a situation he created is only DMing for himself.


Atlas wrote:


.., but I still believe that the DM cannot cheat. ... A DM who does not consider how the players might feel in a situation he created is only DMing for himself.

The DM is supposed to DM for the other players. A DM gives up his own player ambition for the creative freedom of bringing the game world to life. If he's DMing for himself, then he turns the PCs into NPCs. If you ask me that is cheating the players out of there gaming experience. Who wants to play a character under the control of the whims of the Dm, just supporting cast for the DMs script.


Atlas wrote:
Valegrim wrote:
Yeah, I forgot to mention the GM that makes up a character who is more or less their avatar in the game under some guise of an npc so this guy has the gms RL personae and is more or less him in dreamland; you cant kill him or do anything to him ever and you practically become a demigod if you think he is cool and hang out with him and just ignore that he is a normal human that can pick up and shake a maxed out greater treant in one fist and tell him off. yep; gm abuse like that is cheating in my book; but, really just wanted to say it goes both ways and that players are not the only ones that abuse the rules and the game; just trying to make a point since so many people seem to be so hostile about this whole thing.
I agree that the DM can seriously stretch the rules to the point where the game is almost unrecognizable to the experienced player, but I still believe that the DM cannot cheat. I have dealt with those NPCs that are average on the outside but a god once in combat and I hate them with a passion. A DM who does not consider how the players might feel in a situation he created is only DMing for himself.

Yep, I played in a few games like that, where different Dm's have this super character who is recruiting us and is super hard.

It just makes it boring, or else one of the players who was bored had a halfling thief spent the whole time winding this character(and therefore the DM up)Or even worst you sit back and at the climax there is this big battle which you are not really part of the DM has got his super character solve everything.
Yeah Dm's can play the super hard character, but they should be like the head of the town guard, but sitting around while the DM's character dominates the game, WHY??!


Sir Kaikillah wrote:
Atlas wrote:


.., but I still believe that the DM cannot cheat. ... A DM who does not consider how the players might feel in a situation he created is only DMing for himself.

The DM is supposed to DM for the other players. A DM gives up his own player ambition for the creative freedom of bringing the game world to life. If he's DMing for himself, then he turns the PCs into NPCs. If you ask me that is cheating the players out of there gaming experience. Who wants to play a character under the control of the whims of the Dm, just supporting cast for the DMs script.

I couldn't tell whether or not you are agreeing with my quote or not but I do agree with yours. To clarify my post I only meant that the DM cannot cheat when it comes to rule making, not game playing. A DM who robs his players of their freewill by any means is an @ss and should be immediatly raplaced by a DM who wants everyone at the table to have fun. A game that is not fun, is not worth my time or money.


Sir Kaikillah wrote:

Other cheat thing that Dms do I hate, is create the uber NPC. These NPCs can't be killed, dismissed by PCs and DMs are fond of reminding players of how this NPC will kill your PC if you "act stuipid". This kind of stuff is plain selfish.

Ahh, these are bad. I have made couple of these though, but then their purpose really was to mock and annoy the characters (and players). Being helpful was an occaisonal side effect.

Like I said, I do fudge occasionally die rolls, especially on side of the players, but major encounters are usually played as they fall...so that BBEG can definitely kill the character, their close henchmen can too, but random goblin guard usually can't (it can cause some damage, require spellcasting or whatnot to make you less-than-optimum shape when you meet that "real encounter" though).
That said, when I play (and at least some players I game with do similarly) I also don't minmax in roleplay and have made bad decisions against my own judgment since "that's what my character would do". And suffer the consequences. Naturally it is ok for DM to kill characters when it is caused by own stupidity...I guess our campaigns have more deaths like these than is normal (PC vs PC fights seem also to be more common in our games than is the case with most people).


I think I see where you are coming from Atlas, but am right there with Sir K. I think a gm who hasn't scripted out his adventure is just a bad gm, I think a gm that changes monster in the middle of combat or things in the scenario on the fly like the door I mentioned is just plain cheating though; if any player ever wants to question any of my monsters or my door or stuff they can certainly do so their are two caviats though; 1) I will show them the monster or any part of the adventure they want; but if they are wrong; they will get no exps for the entire adventure; after all; they have just seen the master plan/sheet. 2) if they are right; I will appologize and make amens to the entire group and step down if they wish.

Trust between players and a GM are extremely important; to me it is nearly as sacred as that trust between me and my wife. If players dont trust you; and you as a gm cheat your players or you as a player cheat other players or the gm you are poisoning the trust between you and killing the game, your fun, and your personal integrity. If you like to cheat then play a game that allows it and have fun with it in a competition between other players; dont let it kill your game. Take Illuminatii for instance; it is allowable to cheat as long as you dont get caught; if you get caught your cheating is undone; players expect you to cheat and try to catch you; you try to cheat and try to catch them; hehe we all laugh and have fun with it. Any rpg is fluid enough to allow this with the right kind of players that can laugh at themselves; sheesh a game doesnt have to be all serious like going to a funeral.


PulpCruciFiction wrote:
Going over the DM Kill Board thread again, I noticed that you managed to take the cheating player's character out with a paralysis/fireball combo, ZeroCharisma, so kudos on that!

*wicked grin* and he's been much better ever since, although he did try to cheat back the level he lost from dying.


Atlas wrote:
Sir Kaikillah wrote:
If he's DMing for himself, then he turns the PCs into NPCs. If you ask me that is cheating the players out of there gaming experience.
Atlas wrote:


I couldn't tell whether or not you are agreeing with my quote or not but I do agree with yours.

Both, I think. I can be terribly ambiguous at times.

Atlas wrote:


To clarify my post I only meant that the DM cannot cheat when it comes to rule making, not game playing.

I think I did not make the distinction between rule making and game play. Regardless cheating is cheating.

Liberty's Edge

Valegrim wrote:
I think a gm who hasn't scripted out his adventure is just a bad gm....

I can't agree with that. If a GM can only run scripted adventures, I might call him a bad GM, but not the reverse. The only way to script everything is if you are the conductor, the brakeman, and the engineer of your own railroad. It is not possible to allow the players significant free will while still scripting everything.

That said, on the track I consider the most likely for the PCs, I usually have names even for the mooks, but if necessary I think it's entirely reasonable to GM on the fly (to specifically include removing or adding an NPC or two to match my players' demonstrated ability for the day*).

* Players have good days and bad days, and an encounter that would be a charming bit of mayhem on a good day can be a TPK on a bad day. I game for fun; random TPKs aren't fun.


Doug Sundseth wrote:


...; random TPKs aren't fun.

I wouldn't know i haven't accomplished that feat yet. But we all have goals. Someday I will achieve TPK. TOTAL PARTY KILL. It just sounds like an achievment I need to attain as a DM.

Liberty's Edge

Sir Kaikillah wrote:
I wouldn't know i haven't accomplished that feat yet. But we all have goals. Someday I will achieve TPK. TOTAL PARTY KILL. It just sounds like an achievment I need to attain as a DM.

Please note that I said random TPKs aren't fun. I said nothing about the other sorts.

8-)

Dark Archive

Doug Sundseth wrote:
Sir Kaikillah wrote:
I wouldn't know i haven't accomplished that feat yet. But we all have goals. Someday I will achieve TPK. TOTAL PARTY KILL. It just sounds like an achievment I need to attain as a DM.

Please note that I said random TPKs aren't fun. I said nothing about the other sorts.

8-)

Nice. I'm running the SCAP right now, and I think it would be hilarious to run them through a 2+ year campaign, only to mercilessly TPK them in the final encounter. "...Wow. I guess Adimarchus takes over. He probably leads a demon army and destroys Cauldron without you to stop him. Sorry."

Sadly, I'm not quite evil enough to make the odds against them completely impossible to overcome.


Doug Sundseth wrote:
Valegrim wrote:
I think a gm who hasn't scripted out his adventure is just a bad gm....

I can't agree with that. If a GM can only run scripted adventures, I might call him a bad GM, but not the reverse. The only way to script everything is if you are the conductor, the brakeman, and the engineer of your own railroad. It is not possible to allow the players significant free will while still scripting everything.

That said, on the track I consider the most likely for the PCs, I usually have names even for the mooks, but if necessary I think it's entirely reasonable to GM on the fly (to specifically include removing or adding an NPC or two to match my players' demonstrated ability for the day*).

The vast majority of campaigns that I have DMed were mostly unscripted. I would make a broad outline of what I plan on doing and then I would let things just take there course. I find it easier to incorporate late plans into the game and I dont have to worry about the characters getting way off track. My players have a habit of changing characters often and I usually allow this because I can still bring them into the game one way or another (and I do it too when I play). It also allows greater flexibility in game design and character design. For example: my munchkin players have been lagging when it comes to role playing as they just assume a kill-all attitude for every situation. So I present them with a situation where diplomacy wins full XP and killing only gets them half XP. One way or another they get XP and they get the hint that I would like them to be a little more character oriented.

I only started using scripted campaigns when I got my fist Dungeon Mag about three months ago. Now I am considering reading the adventures through once, then DMing them. Meanwhile I will only refer to the mag for monsters, overall plotline and maps. I think this might work better because I won't feel any pressure to keep my players in character or in line and I don't have to worry about the threat of having them level too fast or too slow.

Freelance DMing is a good way to test your own ability to create a viable story, memorable NPCs, cool villians and a new world all on the go.


I agree. Freelance DMing is really the only way I can do it, as I have almost no prep time in which to sit at a table and put pen to paper as a "set in stone" path. So what do I do? I think up ideas on my way home from work or school, and let my mind think of where those could lead. Out of all the possibilities I can consider in that time, I use maybe three or four and pretty much let the players run the campaign whatever way they want (my primary campaign's players are all blowing their loot from their last campaign arc on a "vacation" of sorts...it feels more like a "mini-retirement", though...)

But, I digress. CHEATERS. Oh boy. I have had to deal with two in my time (both roll-augmenters). Both times I allowed their cheating to go unconfronted, but similarly ramped up the die rolls for their opposition while keeping it at the original level for the others. I think it worked.


yep, I also get my ideas elsewhere. Mostly in my math class or when people I don't like are talking to me. It's nice to day dream about things that I actually care about.


PulpCruciFiction wrote:

Nice. I'm running the SCAP right now, and I think it would be hilarious to run them through a 2+ year campaign, only to mercilessly TPK them in the final encounter. "...Wow. I guess Adimarchus takes over. He probably leads a demon army and destroys Cauldron without you to stop him. Sorry."

I think someone was thinking about doing something like this in AoW...and then the next campaign takes place in the same world when Age of Worms has started and Kyuss reigns supreme.


I brought up that very idea awhile back, and was given a thorough drubbing (http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/community/gaming/dnd/archives/endingA Campaign&page=1#151653&source=search) YMMV :)


Now that I know what valegrim considers cheating on the DMs part, I can agree for the most part. It is absolutely stupid and unfair to rob the players of their earned reward for their play just because the DM feels pissed, because the players dared to foil or ignore his brilliant ideas (or out of spite). It is childish to have a Deus Ex Machina DM character to show off to the players - as the DM, you are of course more powerful than any group of PCs, if you want to. If you have the need to show this off, grow up!
Changing details in the adventure, like details of a monster or even a whole monster or the number of enemies or whatever, is ok to me as long as does serve the goal of the adventure and does not ruin the fun. If the Pcs need to get beyond that damn door to continue the adventure, they will manage to open the door - and if they find a new way to do so, more power to them. But if they just don´t get it, I will think of some other solution. I deviate from the set course of the adventure (my script) if my players run off in the "wrong" direction. My scripts leave room for players deviating from my ideas, they are not set in stone. Is this already cheating? I obviously don´t think so.

Stefan

Liberty's Edge

PulpCruciFiction wrote:
Sadly, I'm not quite evil enough to make the odds against them completely impossible to overcome.

Nor am I. (At least, I've neither done it nor seriously contemplated it.)

But I'm much more willing to run to script and let the bodies fall where they stand in a climactic encounter than in an alley fight with a couple of lucky pickpockets.

Joe, Hero of the Battle of the Pass: Died when he blew a Balance check while running near the edge a cliff.

Joe II, Dragonslayer and Savior of Eisenturm: Died when he was run over by an out-of-control beer wagon.

Joe III, Lichbane and Commander of the Omnipotent Azure Legion: Died when he fell overboard and couldn't make a swim check.

Not for me. If you're going to kill them, let them die with a bit of heroism and/or dignity.


Stebehil wrote:

Now that I know what valegrim considers cheating on the DMs part, I can agree for the most part. It is absolutely stupid and unfair to rob the players of their earned reward for their play just because the DM feels pissed, because the players dared to foil or ignore his brilliant ideas (or out of spite). It is childish to have a Deus Ex Machina DM character to show off to the players - as the DM, you are of course more powerful than any group of PCs, if you want to. If you have the need to show this off, grow up!

Changing details in the adventure, like details of a monster or even a whole monster or the number of enemies or whatever, is ok to me as long as does serve the goal of the adventure and does not ruin the fun. If the Pcs need to get beyond that damn door to continue the adventure, they will manage to open the door - and if they find a new way to do so, more power to them. But if they just don´t get it, I will think of some other solution. I deviate from the set course of the adventure (my script) if my players run off in the "wrong" direction. My scripts leave room for players deviating from my ideas, they are not set in stone. Is this already cheating? I obviously don´t think so.

Stefan

I hope that you are not refering to me in your first paragraph.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Player point of view here.

My husband is running SCAP for two non-overlapping groups of players. When we got to a particularly nasty module, one group (mine) played it completely by the rules, no cheating. The other group, I believe, did some cheating on to-hit and damage rolls.

They had a heck of a lot more fun than we did. Based on results, I'd have to say that the cheating was probably a service to the game. I'd have preferred the GM to do it, but if that wasn't possible, having the players do it was the next best thing.

Why? Because that encounter, played fair and square, took seven frustrating hours to play out (about 70 rounds of combat) and depressed my group so badly that they nearly abandoned SCAP permanently. It was enormous amounts of dice rolling against a villain who was nearly invulnerable to anything the PCs could do. It was the failure of every cute trick the players could come up with, one after another. I know I didn't feel any satisfaction at the end--I had known for the last four hours that my PC deserved to die, and I was just impatient to get it over with.

When I read accounts on the boards of this particular fight, it looks as though most GMs do some "creative" rules interpretation to make the fight a little more possible. I've also seen a couple of accounts where no one did anything, it was a TPK, and the group abandoned the module.

So it's worth considering, if the players cheat, it is possibly because they believe the game won't be fun otherwise. And possibly they are right; in which case cheating is a poor overall solution, so maybe you as GM can find a better one.

I wish we had never run this scenario, at least not as written. I don't like to cheat, but maybe it would have been better for everyone concerned if I had. It did an awful lot of damage to the players' enthusiasm for the game; took months to recover.

Mary


Atlas wrote:


I hope that you are not refering to me in your first paragraph.

Knowing Stefan's posting style for quite some time now, I'd say not a chance. Then again, maybe he's gone wild, flashing his boobs on the beach and what not, being rude to other posters, going outside without a necktie. Happens to the best of us.


I have no problem with, and will admit to occasionally fudging the dice on the player's behalf.

That said there is something neat about having the "radom" facet within the game.

A story that has gone down in legend is that of the bluffing goblin. Whilethird level the party was in camp, two goblins snuck up... one hit from a magic missle sent one to the forest floor and the other one running. the sorceror (who was on watch) went over to the seemingly unconcious goblin, failed his sense motive check, and got double 20's and a confirmation through his gut (instant kill in my game). It was also fun to describe toi the other characters just waking up...

Bad luck happens as often as good luck, why skew the balance?


Doug Sundseth wrote:
Sir Kaikillah wrote:
I wouldn't know i haven't accomplished that feat yet. But we all have goals. Someday I will achieve TPK. TOTAL PARTY KILL. It just sounds like an achievment I need to attain as a DM.

Please note that I said random TPKs aren't fun. I said nothing about the other sorts.

8-)

I'll take them any way I can.

Any advice on TPK?


PulpCruciFiction wrote:
Doug Sundseth wrote:
Sir Kaikillah wrote:
I wouldn't know i haven't accomplished that feat yet. But we all have goals. Someday I will achieve TPK. TOTAL PARTY KILL. It just sounds like an achievment I need to attain as a DM.

Please note that I said random TPKs aren't fun. I said nothing about the other sorts.

8-)

Nice. I'm running the SCAP right now, and I think it would be hilarious to run them through a 2+ year campaign, only to mercilessly TPK them in the final encounter. "...Wow. I guess Adimarchus takes over. He probably leads a demon army and destroys Cauldron without you to stop him. Sorry."

Sounds cool, good luck.

PulpCruciFiction wrote:


Sadly, I'm not quite evil enough to make the odds against them completely impossible to overcome.

I'm not that evil either (Sigh), but with a little luck, its TPK baby!!!


Doug Sundseth wrote:
PulpCruciFiction wrote:
Sadly, I'm not quite evil enough to make the odds against them completely impossible to overcome.

Nor am I. (At least, I've neither done it nor seriously contemplated it.)

But I'm much more willing to run to script and let the bodies fall where they stand in a climactic encounter than in an alley fight with a couple of lucky pickpockets.

Joe, Hero of the Battle of the Pass: Died when he blew a Balance check while running near the edge a cliff.

Joe II, Dragonslayer and Savior of Eisenturm: Died when he was run over by an out-of-control beer wagon.

Joe III, Lichbane and Commander of the Omnipotent Azure Legion: Died when he fell overboard and couldn't make a swim check.

Not for me. If you're going to kill them, let them die with a bit of heroism and/or dignity.

You couldn't write an ending to a hero like that. Only in D&D, baby, do heroes go down like that. Life and death by a single die.

Although Joe, Hero of the Battle of the Pass: Survives after making a reflex save to grap a small bush before falling to his death. Jasmine, Sorceress, cast levitate on Joe carring him to the cliff edge. Then Ralf, halfing rogue, throws the lucky Joe a rope.

Joe II, Dragonslayer and Savior of Eisenturm: Died when he was run over by an out-of-control beer wagon. (This ones to good I can't touch it)

Joe III, Lichbane and Commander of the Omnipotent Azure Legion: After failing his first swim check, begins to sink. But then musters the strength to reach the surface. Seeing their cammander in peril, the Azure Legionnaires react. Unarmored marine leap into the water to rescue their commander. Jack, the cleric of the sea god, leaps into the water and casts water breathing upon the Commander of the Azure legions, and he is save.

I have always found it a little more difficult to kill PCs. It would take a series of bad die rolls for a PC to die in such situations in my game. But I always leave the chance. Keeps the players frosty. You would be amazed at how resourceful a players can be when they know the Dm is not going to save them. Players have given me acceptable reasons for another chance (i.e. reflex save to grab a branch, melee attack roll to grab a hold of him before a fall). I don't need to cheat to keep PCs alive, players are good enough to do that on thier own


The Jade wrote:
Atlas wrote:


I hope that you are not refering to me in your first paragraph.
Knowing Stefan's posting style for quite some time now, I'd say not a chance. Then again, maybe he's gone wild, flashing his boobs on the beach and what not, being rude to other posters, going outside without a necktie. Happens to the best of us.

Thanks dude.


Sir Kaikillah wrote:

You couldn't write an ending to a hero like that. Only in D&D, baby, do heroes go down like that. Life and death by a single die.

I take it you have never played Rolemaster or Spacemaster?

I do remember one particularly unsatisfactory character death in Spacemaster, DM decided to throw in a random drive-by-shooting scene...of course one of the characters was hit, and oops, a crit from hell. Instant death. Rest of us were just left wondering what on earth happened.

Liberty's Edge

Sir Kaikillah wrote:
I have always found it a little more difficult to kill PCs. It would take a series of bad die rolls for a PC to die in such situations in my game.

I generally prefer maiming. (In those kinds of situations in a role-playing game, not in general. 8-)

Instead of killing a PC, I usually come up with save rolls of one sort or another. But if it takes several before the save is successful, I'll sometimes impose a permanent penalty of some sort. For a drowning character, that might be a permanent CON hit for lung damage caused by water inhalation or maybe a phobia about ships or water. In addition to not killing the character, this can be fun for role-playing too, though penalties other than simple reductions to a stat work better for that.

Oh, and spectacular scars are nearly a requirement, of course.


Sometimes there are worse things than death for a character. I played a campaign for six months once, and it had such a terrible ending that the group chose to not play the sequal the dm had.

It started with us waking up at a military school (1st level) and its grad day. We played for six months and reached 22nd level and had two divine ranks. Every player created characters that remain their favorites to this day. The reason we stopped, after destroying the cult of Tiamat and stopping her army from taking over the world we WOKE THE F!*K UP IN THE SAME F#&%ING PLACE WE STARTED. Every level, every divine rank, every artifact and special ability we had acquiired was gone! It was all a dream! Not only that but throughout the campaign we had to deal with those uber NPCs of doom, DR 1,500/- my @ss!, and massive dice fugding by the DM.

I would have rather let my character die early on if I had known what all my hard work was going to add up to.


magdalena thiriet wrote:
Sir Kaikillah wrote:

You couldn't write an ending to a hero like that. Only in D&D, baby, do heroes go down like that. Life and death by a single die.

I take it you have never played Rolemaster or Spacemaster?

I do remember one particularly unsatisfactory character death in Spacemaster, DM decided to throw in a random drive-by-shooting scene...of course one of the characters was hit, and oops, a crit from hell. Instant death. Rest of us were just left wondering what on earth happened.

No, never.

Are thier any dice to roll?

51 to 94 of 94 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 3.5/d20/OGL / DMing for CHEATERS! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in 3.5/d20/OGL