| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's not turn this into "Roll Stats versus Point Buy..."I don't think that's what he was saying at all.
I've been in enough of those threads to smell it coming a mile away. If I'm wrong, no biggie. It still bears mentioning at least as a precautionary measure.
The issue he had was that they were claiming to be using the 'hardcore' mode while actually using the effective opposite. Since they weren't actually using Roll Stats, I didn't think it'd become an argument.
However, it's good you said something, because I can see somebody dropping in and saying something like "issues like these are why I use Point Buy" or whatever. I didn't need to go stickin' my kobold snout in this. My bad. :P
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I remember a dm who threw three level 3 weretiger rogues with spring attack against a party of four level 8 pcs. The downside was, the weretigers combined spring attack with pounce. That was a devastating combination. Top it off with the fact that the weretigers could feint as a free action and had a bluff modifier so high that even the party cleric with maxed out wisdom and sense motive couldn't see through the feints and disaster strikes. Party was dead within 3 rounds. Dm congratulates himself on a job well done and then looks up to realise that everyone has left the game and his house.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I remember a dm who threw three level 3 weretiger rogues with spring attack against a party of four level 8 pcs. The downside was, the weretigers combined spring attack with pounce. That was a devastating combination. Top it off with the fact that the weretigers could feint as a free action and had a bluff modifier so high that even the party cleric with maxed out wisdom and sense motive couldn't see through the feints and disaster strikes. Party was dead within 3 rounds. Dm congratulates himself on a job well done and then looks up to realise that everyone has left the game and his house.
Did anyone eventually tell the DM that you can't combine spring attack and pounce? Assuming the two abilities worked the same way in that game as PF at least, lol.
I remember a dm who threw three level 3 weretiger rogues with spring attack against a party of four level 8 pcs. The downside was, the weretigers combined spring attack with pounce. That was a devastating combination. Top it off with the fact that the weretigers could feint as a free action and had a bluff modifier so high that even the party cleric with maxed out wisdom and sense motive couldn't see through the feints and disaster strikes. Party was dead within 3 rounds. Dm congratulates himself on a job well done and then looks up to realise that everyone has left the game and his house.
Wow, that is some bad stuff. I remember there was a vicious monster that gave the monk Choi a bad time, 3.5 feline monster, a pounce creature with many limbs and a number of attacks. Still, had to use them in small numbers, since their damage output was great.
I remember a dm who threw three level 3 weretiger rogues with spring attack against a party of four level 8 pcs. The downside was, the weretigers combined spring attack with pounce. That was a devastating combination. Top it off with the fact that the weretigers could feint as a free action and had a bluff modifier so high that even the party cleric with maxed out wisdom and sense motive couldn't see through the feints and disaster strikes. Party was dead within 3 rounds. Dm congratulates himself on a job well done and then looks up to realise that everyone has left the game and his house.Did anyone eventually tell the DM that you can't combine spring attack and pounce? Assuming the two abilities worked the same way in that game as PF at least, lol.
Spring attack, pounce, free feint, sneak attack, lol. Someone should have said, the more abilities you combine in a single monster over a single round, the more cheese you use and less fun we have.
The leaving the house immediately, a damn clear statement though. What happened next? Did he try to bargain them back for next week?
Dire tigers...why did it have to be dire tigers?
Weretigers. So they are smart enough to have levels.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cr 5 weretigers in the monster manual + 3 rogue levels. So each tiger was able to make 5 sneak attacks a round. In the surprise round, the tigers proceed to make their 15 sneak attack rolls. Party wizard and rogue proceed to explode in a hail of blood. The tigers win initiative and proceed to feint (from distance) as a free action, charge with their pounce ability and use their remaining base speed to move away aftet the charge. Remaining pc cleric and his full plate gets shredded. Then it comes down to the last pc, the party barbarian notices that everyone is dead. Draws his halberd, sets for charge. Milks hold the line, combat reflexes and improved combat reflexes feat tree. Managed to injure 2 of them a bit and kill one. Then got torn to shreds in the third round.
Game was 3.5. Impressive performance by the barbarian considering how b!**$*&+ the opponents were.
The DM didn't try to get them back into the game. Laughed at the players and told them they made characters which were weak. Something along the lines of:"Wow, you guys suck!. A party of four level 8 characters can't even take 3 level three rogues."
It is examples like this, as to why I don't allow multiple sneaks in a round. It just gets abused, by players and dms. Remember those low CR demons? The barb's hp wasted away as every claw attack becomes a fighter's greatsword strike.
Didn't Denis say the same line of dialogue? Yeah, sadist dms.
It is examples like this, as to why I don't allow multiple sneaks in a round.Wait, per RAW/RAI you could sneak attack more than once per round? That's insane, especially given that thanks to feats that let you feint easier you could still pull off one sneak attack every round.
Yeah, so they say, and I have been really chastised here (ha ha ha) for saying otherwise. I'd recommend against it, and it was quite a point of argument amongst some dms in my area. Tri provides an example, but there is awesome and then there is OP.
Awesomely OP and no thanks, all other rogue combat builds pale in comparison to this sneak spam cheese.
You could go improved feint, beef defences, have a rogue with a two handed weapon, invest whatever you like, and the TWF WTF rogue will sh*t all over them. That is one of my major beefs with it. It became the obvious solution for a combat rogue because the damage can get so high. Because it is very effective, and minces through monsters and opponents (unless they have a very high natural armour ac) it was seen as right and proper. Mmm yes, that is the way some said, why aren't you taking it? But the line of cheese had been passed long ago.
If you want a TWF rogue, try it with a sneak on one attack per round (usually the main unless you are trying something odd). The damage is a lot more balanced, but the TWF is still cool for the extra on top, and the possibility of the double crit (take a normal and small rapier for instance).
And then there is awesomely OP. Which varies from table to table.
Also one of the pro multiple sneak attack dms actually threw it into his games. Then quickly took it right out once he started seeing the damage, and the party getting mincified with extra cheese.
Let's not turn this into a discussion on game balance.
Funny, why am I feeling a bit of deja vu?
All around vision doesn't stop improved invisibility and hasted TWF WTF rogue.
Concealment rarely comes up in base to base attacks.
Displacement requires such spells to be on, right at that moment (or displacer beasts).
Fortification is starting to get into high level magic items.
So everything gets grinded up that doesn't have these options or a very high natural ac? OP. It is cheap and cheesy because it doesn't require many feats to get massive damage and makes a class ability usable over and over in a single round.
|
Funny, why am I feeling a bit of deja vu?
Because this isn't the first 'multiple SA a round' argument we've had?
I don't know why he thinks he can change my mind. I already said it was a table variance issue. Him screaming cheese like a broken record doesn't change that.
Ah weretiger rogues spamming sneak in a pounce with feints while coming in. mmmm. CHEESE!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ah weretiger rogues spamming sneak in a pounce with feints while coming in. mmmm. CHEESE!
Given the PURE GOUDA in that scenario, I'm surprised the one thing that makes it 'too much' is the Sneak part.
It's the illegal use of spring attack and pounce that gets me.
Uhuh. Thats what had me stunned.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm, lets try and get this thread back on the rails, shall we?
Last session, the DM decided he would play my character in my place, just to advance the narrative of the campaign. Not only he did some actions and took some choices I would never have played, but he actively placed my character against another player's one (we're playing clerics of different faiths), because "the religious splinter within the group will be a defining element of the next adventures" - again, something we players have always underplayed in a friendly competition of sorts, just for the laughs.
I've been DMing and playing RPGs since the late '80s, and this was the first time I was that close to having a fit, and leaving the table with a big "$#&£§ you!".
Wrongbadnonono.
DMs taking control of players is an absolute deal breaker for me. If I were you, this would've absolutely called for a table flip or two. I remember being in a game once where the DM assumed something as minor as opening a door, and I even lost it then. 'Did I say I opened the door?' I asked.
I was admittedly, probably being a bit of a jerk about it on that occasion. But it really really bothers me when a DM robs a player of control. That's all a player has. I don't even like taking control of a PC when a player hasn't shown up for the game, even if it's just to remove them from play for a session.
It is examples like this, as to why I don't allow multiple sneaks in a round. It just gets abused, by players and dms. Remember those low CR demons? The barb's hp wasted away as every claw attack becomes a fighter's greatsword strike.
Didn't Denis say the same line of dialogue? Yeah, sadist dms.
That is not a sneak attack issue. That is a GM that sucks and does not know the rules issue. It could have been a power attacking barbarian, and the results actually would have been worse, but we have had this discussion already. ;)
It is examples like this, as to why I don't allow multiple sneaks in a round.Wait, per RAW/RAI you could sneak attack more than once per round? That's insane, especially given that thanks to feats that let you feint easier you could still pull off one sneak attack every round.
Yes by RAW and RAI. SA is highly overrated. I don't want to derail the thread, but you can PM me for details.
I now return you to your post of horrible GMs.It is examples like this, as to why I don't allow multiple sneaks in a round.Wait, per RAW/RAI you could sneak attack more than once per round? That's insane, especially given that thanks to feats that let you feint easier you could still pull off one sneak attack every round.
Heck I may as well take a turn.
I was play Star Wars Saga, and we had to go to a planet and find a temple. We ended up crashing(don't ask me how) and we had no map of the planet so we did not know where the temple was. Since we crashed in the middle of forest we just sort of wandered around aimlessly, but the droids were able to find us. Before I go any farther the planet had been abandoned since before droids were invented, and there was no sign of a spaceship following us, so how these droids got to the planet is beyond me. At the end of the session the clouds parted and the temple appears in front of us. It did not take me long to figure out that the GM had not put a session together so he just had us do random things until it was time for everyone to go home.
This would not had been an issue had several of us almost died with no chance to advance the plot because there was no plot, and another player had a game he could have ran, that probably would have had us at risking our lives in a meaningful manner.
PS:When I say the clouds parted that is not me taking artistic license with the story. That is actually how it was described in game. SMDH
Hmm, lets try and get this thread back on the rails, shall we?Last session, the DM decided he would play my character in my place, just to advance the narrative of the campaign. Not only he did some actions and took some choices I would never have played, but he actively placed my character against another player's one (we're playing clerics of different faiths), because "the religious splinter within the group will be a defining element of the next adventures" - again, something we players have always underplayed in a friendly competition of sorts, just for the laughs.
I've been DMing and playing RPGs since the late '80s, and this was the first time I was that close to having a fit, and leaving the table with a big "$#&£§ you!".
Wrongbadnonono.
DMs taking control of players is an absolute deal breaker for me. If I were you, this would've absolutely called for a table flip or two. I remember being in a game once where the DM assumed something as minor as opening a door, and I even lost it then. 'Did I say I opened the door?' I asked.
I was admittedly, probably being a bit of a jerk about it on that occasion. But it really really bothers me when a DM robs a player of control. That's all a player has. I don't even like taking control of a PC when a player hasn't shown up for the game, even if it's just to remove them from play for a session.
You know, table flipping may be just what is needed when a dm is an utter ars*. Play your novel how you say?!? FLIP.
It is childish, but its a childish hobby. Might just work out problems early on.
... I don't even like taking control of a PC when a player hasn't shown up for the game, even if it's just to remove them from play for a session.
Uhmm...
This may be a bit extreme. That leaves the option of ... what? Sitting silently hoping the player shows up eventually? =0
... I don't even like taking control of a PC when a player hasn't shown up for the game, even if it's just to remove them from play for a session.Uhmm...
This may be a bit extreme. That leaves the option of ... what? Sitting silently hoping the player shows up eventually? =0
Haha. Yeah. I know.
I've been known to message my players to ask them what they want their character to do in the interim. Gaming via SMS! It's the way of the future!
... I don't even like taking control of a PC when a player hasn't shown up for the game, even if it's just to remove them from play for a session.Uhmm...
This may be a bit extreme. That leaves the option of ... what? Sitting silently hoping the player shows up eventually? =0
I don't like it either. I do do it, but I generally refrain from roleplaying for them.
I typically do the bare minimum of playing for an absent character as necessary, and control them in combat if needed. But if I'm required to do that, even the most talkative party member will become very quiet and withdrawn for that session to let the players who are actually here take the forefront, rather than me taking the reins.
I usually find an excuse why the PC isn't here. Sometimes it is calamity ("remember the end of the last session? arrows used by the gnolls were poisoned and Orin went to temple for healing where he is tended"), sometimes it is duty ("Orin was recalled by the city guard command to lead the attack on the monster-occupied gate on ground level while you were asked to assault the battlement through the portal") and sometimes it's just that PC could not be found ("you haven't seen witch and Orin for two days" party: "witch is probably sleeping around and Orin is stoned again... we have to manage without them").
I try to avoid session in the middle of action so there is rarely problem with directing absent character in combat.
What I usually do when a player doesn't show is, "Ok, Jimmy-Joe-Bob has a severe case of dysentery and is riding in the cart at the back of the caravan."
Or something equivalent that takes them out of the action but doesn't make them a liability.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Kenny Method: Suggested by some other poster I have forgotten whom. Characters with absent players are killed by the first monster, trap or hazard encounter in the most gruesome manner imaginable. When they return for the next session, the character is alive again, and no other character can ever mention anything about it.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was admittedly, probably being a bit of a jerk about it on that occasion. But it really bothers me when a DM robs a player of control. That's all a player has. I don't even like taking control of a PC when a player hasn't shown up for the game, even if it's just to remove them from play for a session.
Yeah, you actually were being bit of a jerk.
You know what bothers me? When a single player robs me and everyone else of quality gaming time.If you can't make it to the session in my game, check with me or another player to see if everyone is alive after the session is over.
Sorry, just because you decided to cancel doesn't mean you get to:
- Suspend/Screw up the game
- Break the immersion with your teleporting character
- F-over everyone at the gaming table (who already get to hear it from their wives and GF's why men in their 30's-40's need to play a fantasy role playing game every other Wednesday night).
For the most part when I am running a game (which is almost always) I try to have an extra current copy of each PC so we can play if there is a no show. If it's a planned no show we decide in advance of the next session if we are going still play and maybe run through the session with some heavy rp, planning and purchases (one of my players loves this stuff) or instead if we are just going to play Arkham Horror, Mansions of Madness or some other board game. Depends on where we're at in the game (slow/down time = play, middle of a fight = wait for player to return).
In the event that we are going to play and we know we are going down a person I usually only proceed with the session if there is light combat/exploration or if they are in town doing some dealing/rp/side stuff.
If it's an unplanned/last minute absence we put it to a vote to see if we are going to carry on without the player. If we do decide to play there usually will be a joke or two about what your character did while they were out (doesn't happen, we just like to rib the missing player) and we carry on - I even give partial xp if his NPC PC was in a fight and he used his stats/abilities/hp out in a fight. But the risk of death is there. I have had total party wipes because the attending players wanted to go on without the missing one (against my advice), and then yeah, post session the absent player gets the call/email/text saying "we all died".
You're a player, show up and play.
If you can't do that then give as much forewarning as possible that you can't. Barring emergencies (for which I will call off the whole session) you probably know you are not going to make it ahead of time - so call.
If it's a repeat occurrence of flakiness you get dropped from the gaming group entirely. I can understand that life is crap sometimes, and sometimes people need to focus on other things, but I don't want your character around from session to session as a special npc.
I don't narrate or force actions; I narrate assumed actions to keep things moving. This isn't a question of "trick the player" into opening a trap or doing something stupid, this is a case of facilitating a damn game.
I've dealt with snap case players before - guy's that wanted to start fights, ruin the game, steal stuff (irl) or just break other peoples things (irl) - they usually ended up out on the street with their head/back used as a battering ram on the way out (true story). I'm here to run the game, not to deal with mommy issues or to provide cheap psychiatric care.
Show up, bring your sheet - keep good records, don't cheat and rp you stupid character. Not asking much.
Sorry for the rant...sort of.
The Kenny Method: Suggested by some other poster I have forgotten whom. Characters with absent players are killed by the first monster, trap or hazard encounter in the most gruesome manner imaginable. When they return for the next session, the character is alive again, and no other character can ever mention anything about it.
Lol! I want to use this on my players, but I really shouldn't XD
What I usually do when a player doesn't show is, "Ok, Jimmy-Joe-Bob has a severe case of dysentery and is riding in the cart at the back of the caravan."
Or something equivalent that takes them out of the action but doesn't make them a liability.
One of PCs could not make to the session so we joked that he suffered from diarrhea. Because the player stopped attending the session permanently, there were often repeated joke that his character was stuck in the toilet.
I was admittedly, probably being a bit of a jerk about it on that occasion. But it really bothers me when a DM robs a player of control. That's all a player has. I don't even like taking control of a PC when a player hasn't shown up for the game, even if it's just to remove them from play for a session.Yeah, you actually were being bit of a jerk.
You know what bothers me? When a single player robs me and everyone else of quality gaming time.
If you can't make it to the session in my game, check with me or another player to see if everyone is alive after the session is over.Sorry, just because you decided to cancel doesn't mean you get to:
- Suspend/Screw up the game
- Break the immersion with your teleporting character
- F-over everyone at the gaming table (who already get to hear it from their wives and GF's why men in their 30's-40's need to play a fantasy role playing game every other Wednesday night).For the most part when I am running a game (which is almost always) I try to have an extra current copy of each PC so we can play if there is a no show. If it's a planned no show we decide in advance of the next session if we are going still play and maybe run through the session with some heavy rp, planning and purchases (one of my players loves this stuff) or instead if we are just going to play Arkham Horror, Mansions of Madness or some other board game. Depends on where we're at in the game (slow/down time = play, middle of a fight = wait for player to return).
In the event that we are going to play and we know we are going down a person I usually only proceed with the session if there is light combat/exploration or if they are in town doing some dealing/rp/side stuff.
If it's an unplanned/last minute absence we put it to a vote to see if we are going to carry on without the player. If we do decide to play there usually will be a joke or two about what your character did while they were out (doesn't happen, we just like to rib the missing player) and we...
Snap case players are the worse. Always so edgy and eager to go. Urgh.
I often say the absent player's character has the flu, and in most games, that means I also don't have to enforce the disease rules.
Re: DM taking control, I had a disgruntling episode once as a player. The DM apparently needed us to interact with an over-eager adventurer-wannabe prince in the nearby tower. So the session opens with, "Your thief is practicing his skills by picking the lock on the king's safe when..." My PC thief, still low level, hadn't put any points into lockpicking at all, and had been trying not to be picked out by the royals as a potential criminal (an honest horse-dealer, I was!).
Not the Goblin flu!
One thing that really annoys me is the "bait-and-switch" campaign: where the GM gives you some campaign backstory, you build a character around it, then the GM pretty much ignores the backstory for something completely different. Especially after "okaying" the character concept.
I've accidentally done this. I ran a very long campaign where fighting undead was going to be a focus of the adventure. I had a necromancer set up as an eventual BBEG. One player created a ranger who specialized in killing undead. Then the campaign evolved (over years). It was somewhere after 10th level when the player asked me, "so when are we finally going to encounter some undead?". In my defense, the campaign evolved based on the groups decisions, and I realized they never got around to exploring the "undead" threat plot thread. I think they may have only encountered one group of ghouls up to that point. I felt so bad that I let him re-write some of those abilities.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can only imagine what stories can be told of my poor DMing, especially when first starting out. Since I DM 90% or more, I don't have too many Worst DM stories . . .
But there was a time I was invited by some new friends to a new game. I arrived at the DMs house to find that the DM lived in his mother's basement, and we were reminded (by the mother if I remember correctly) that there were strict rules (no rough-housing, swearing, yelling, etc). Not that there's anything wrong with being respectful in someone else's home. It just felt odd being among a group of 25 year old (or older adults) and being addressed like children. I believe we needed to be quiet because Mother was watching one of her shows.
We were playing in an Arabian Nights type setting and I played some sort of female enchanter with ranks in perform (belly dancing). We were then told that we were in some city, and then asked what we were going to do. We then spent several hours trying to figure out what we were supposed to do, and never really figured that out. I did discover that being a wizard, I couldn't just start off with some basic spell components, even though everyone else started with their basic equipment. I had to role-play shopping for bat guano. Of course, I didn't know where to find bat guano, so researching where spell components could be purchased took up RL game time. I think I gave up since no one seemed to know where to purchase spell components.
Eventually, we learned there was a catacomb in the city and decided to explore it. We wandered empty dark hallways for what seemed like hours in RL, mapping what was an apparent maze of empty tunnels. I eventually began to use my perform skills to dance and sing down the halls in a vain attempt to have some interaction happen in the game.
Near the end of the session, Mother called down the stairs to remind the DM that his friends needed to go home. We then ran into a single undead giant ant. It was crushed in a sad unsatisfying melee. We packed up and quietly left.
I just couldn't bring myself to go back.
I can only imagine what stories can be told of my poor DMing, especially when first starting out. Since I DM 90% or more, I don't have too many Worst DM stories . . .
But there was a time I was invited by some new friends to a new game. I arrived at the DMs house to find that the DM lived in his mother's basement, and we were reminded (by the mother if I remember correctly) that there were strict rules (no rough-housing, swearing, yelling, etc). Not that there's anything wrong with being respectful in someone else's home. It just felt odd being among a group of 25 year old (or older adults) and being addressed like children. I believe we needed to be quiet because Mother was watching one of her shows.
We were playing in an Arabian Nights type setting and I played some sort of female enchanter with ranks in perform (belly dancing). We were then told that we were in some city, and then asked what we were going to do. We then spent several hours trying to figure out what we were supposed to do, and never really figured that out. I did discover that being a wizard, I couldn't just start off with some basic spell components, even though everyone else started with their basic equipment. I had to role-play shopping for bat guano. Of course, I didn't know where to find bat guano, so researching where spell components could be purchased took up RL game time. I think I gave up since no one seemed to know where to purchase spell components.
Eventually, we learned there was a catacomb in the city and decided to explore it. We wandered empty dark hallways for what seemed like hours in RL, mapping what was an apparent maze of empty tunnels. I eventually began to use my perform skills to dance and sing down the halls in a vain attempt to have some interaction happen in the game.
Near the end of the session, Mother called down the stairs to remind the DM that his friends needed to go home. We then ran into a single undead giant ant. It was crushed in a sad unsatisfying melee. We packed up and...
I thought gamers in basements was a myth.
I have also been stuck in the long halls of nothing, with doors, so many doors, behind which was nothing.
I often say the absent player's character has the flu, and in most games, that means I also don't have to enforce the disease rules.
Re: DM taking control, I had a disgruntling episode once as a player. The DM apparently needed us to interact with an over-eager adventurer-wannabe prince in the nearby tower. So the session opens with, "Your thief is practicing his skills by picking the lock on the king's safe when..." My PC thief, still low level, hadn't put any points into lockpicking at all, and had been trying not to be picked out by the royals as a potential criminal (an honest horse-dealer, I was!).
I completely see why this disgruntled you as a player, but often times, this sort of DM-control is harmless. The DM was just flavoring up the scene. Still doesn't make it right, but it wasn't the "Deific mind control" mentioned upthread that intentionally caused strife between characters. If anything, I think the bigger "oops" is on the DM for assuming you were a lock-picking thief when you had no ranks in the skill.
As a DM, I have done this, just to set up a scene. And YES, the player's jumped me for it. It was just something off the cuff I tossed in to make the scene a little more alive, but in doing so I stepped on the PC's toes.
All I'm saying is that if it's just a little background flavor, the DM is just trying to bring the scene to life a little bit. Playing a good, character-rich game requires some give and take on the part of everyone at the table. As a player, if my PC is at the local tavern schmoozing things up, I'm not going to flip out if the DM says" As you guys are enjoying your drinks and conversing about..." unless for some reason my character is abstinent from alcohol or something...
What I usually do when a player doesn't show is, "Ok, Jimmy-Joe-Bob has a severe case of dysentery and is riding in the cart at the back of the caravan."
Or something equivalent that takes them out of the action but doesn't make them a liability.
Our common reason for player absence is they have jury duty.
So I started this thread because I have a terrible DM. I am now at the point where I want to just quit. However there are no other games that I can get into because I dont know anyone else here in Mesa AZ.
Hm. Isn't Spoony also from Mesa, Arizona?
<checks Twitter>
Yep. Maybe you can get in contact with him? He has been looking for a group for a while.
So I started this thread because I have a terrible DM. I am now at the point where I want to just quit. However there are no other games that I can get into because I dont know anyone else here in Mesa AZ.
Hm. Isn't Spoony also from Mesa, Arizona?
<checks Twitter>
Yep. Maybe you can get in contact with him? He has been looking for a group for a while.
Wait, really? O.o And I never knew this the eight years I was out there?! x_X