Nowadays, players always seem to think the world revolves around them. It used to be that if some orc with an axe got a lucky crit and took your head off, you sucked it up like a sir and rolled a new character. Now? They'll complain about how the game is so unfair and you get demonized as a GM - and that's even with the new change to -CON. It's like they don't want life fighting monsters to be dangerous.
I know people who played back in the days of AD&D, and didn't like games like that. I know people who play now, who only got into the hobby fairly recently, who LOVE high-danger games like that. It's a matter of preference, not age. It's unfair of you to claim that all players nowadays will complain about player death, when only some will--and of them, most will very quickly suck it up and roll a new character, because hey, they're upset they lost a character they liked, but they can try out a new idea, and maybe give the old one a shot later.
If you send monsters at them that they can't beat? You're a bad GM.
Not always--there's a thread right now, about whether it's a good idea to expect your players to run from impossible fights or not. Again, there are new, modern players that greatly enjoy having to run from some encounters. It's not too fair of you to say (or at least imply) that EVERY modern player will hate you for unbeatable encounters, when MANY players, myself included, enjoy being faced with those tough encounters you have to run from.
If the dumbass fighter overspecializes and spends five feats that only work with some obscure weapon? Apparently everyone in the world is supposed to suddenly start using that weapon and drop new ones for the fighter, otherwise you're a bad GM. As if you forced the fighter to take Greater Weapon Specialization (Whip), or as if goblins would really have a +4 whip lying around. If you make players track rations and arrows after level 1? The way players today act, you may as well have killed their dog.
First, I don't think a fighter is overspecializing by focusing on one weapon--he's a bit based around a primary weapon, with some backups--but that said, the fighter is still versatile, and will often not specialize in an obscure weapon, unless he's sure that he can obtain one. And I've never seen a player act like you've killed a dog for not giving them a certain magic items, or tracking rations and arrows past the first level. Some players do that, yes, but they're the exception, not the rule.
The game seems to cater to this sense of entitlement. d8 hit dice for rogues?
I don't see how d8 hit dice for rogues is catering to player entitlement.
Raise Dead guaranteed to work with no XP penalty?
I can see your complaint with that, but Raise Dead in Pathfinder is generally an NPC villain skill, and I don't see how letting some (usually evil) PCs access it easier is an issue.
[quote[ Wealth by level? Magic loot should be special; you can't put it on a tight schedule like that. But if you deny the players the +3 armor they're totally entitled to at level 9 or whatever, somehow that makes you the bad guy. Should the game world notice that the characters have hit level 9 and spontaneously generate a large pile of cash in their bank accounts?
Wealth by Level is simply a guideline--I've seen few players say they're 'entitled' to +3 armour by a certain level. And Wealth by Level isn't that the players get a ton of cash at a certain level--players are still supposed to EARN that gold, through adventuring. You can run low-magic campaigns just fine--the game is based around players having access to magic items, but you can still give them less magic items and still have the game be just as playable.
And that's not even getting into magical healing becoming so easy to get now.Didn't clerics always have cure spells?
Players weren't always like this. Once upon a time, the DM was god, and the players loved it. If the random encounter table gave them an ancient red dragon, they ran away, or they died, but they didn't complain about this CR junk. Poisons were deadly, traps were deadly, combat was deadly, bringing people back from the dead wasn't a matter of routine. Life was cheap, and players didn't think they were action movie heroes entitled to kill all the baddies and save the world with their specialness. Please. Give me a break.I've rarely seen players complain about CR--most that I've met recognize that it's a GM guideline, not a hard rule. And poisons and traps could be more deadly, I agree. Also, the players being action movie heroes who would kill the baddies and save the world has, and always will be, a legitimate storyline and playstyle. Just like a gritty, realistic campaign where player-character death can easily happen if player's aren't careful. Both styles, as well as various others, have fans, and detractors.
[quote[Nobody appreciates what a true GM goes through anymore. I spend hours creating a living, breathing world, of which the PC's are merely one small part. The world doesn't revolve around you. If you walk into a dragon's den, it doesn't spontaneously turn into a kobold because a dragon would be too hard. Traps don't magically stop existing just because you all wanted to play fighters with fifty special snowflake "feats" so nobody bothered to be a rogue. You're not special, you're not heroes, you're some average people who picked up swords, and you're not entitled to anything. That's what gives my game world verisimilitude: it's not just a game or a story, it's a real world that exists for reasons beyond mere gameplay. Whether you find save or die spells "fun" is of no consequence; magic exists, so those spells will exist, and if one kills you, man up, because that's how life works.
I appreciate the work that many GMs go through--I love a living, breathing world. Some like the world to revolve around them--as I said above, legitimate playstyle--others love being a small piece of a living world. Your playstyle is different than what's become the 'norm', it seems, but still a playstyle that's enjoyed by a large number of tabletop RPG players.
But for the WOW generation, the only real fun comes from maximizing your damage per attack to mow through faceless mobs, and even a mild inconvenience ruins the game forever. Face it, sometimes goblins kill people; if you can't have fun roleplaying one of them, maybe ROLEplaying games aren't for you.There's my problem--the 'WoW fallacy'. This playstyle didn't appear in WoW--it was acknowledged in RPG handbooks published years before WoW. That said, again, it's a legitimate playstyle--but there are MANY who enjoy Roleplaying, rather than min-maxing and powergaming. I, and many others, play videogames when we want to carefully power up a character. We play tabletop RPGs when we want to socialize, and engage in a story.
My point is: when did everyone suddenly decide that the point of games was for the DM to create a cardboard world to cater to the players' warped, shallow perception of "fun"?I haven't seen anybody decide that was the role of the GM--most players I know realize the GM is there to create an intriguing, wonderful world for their adventures--whether they're larger-than-life heroes, like the ones of legends, or simple mortals, trying to survive in a harsh world.
It sounds like you've had some bad experiences with players, who wanted something different than you from the game, but I'm sure you can find players who want to play in your style of game.
IF you believe that things like WoW and 4e haven't had a meaningful impact on PnP RPGs then I have a '76 Pinto I'd love to sell you. Mint condition.
Has it changed EVERY player? No. But I've seen enough examples of the things people have said on here and games I've seen in person to know it's not just people trolling or anecdotal incidents. Players now are beginning to feel like they should have much more control over their characters than they ever used to have.
What makes you think that has to do with WoW? Why can the player base have moved away from "The DM controls all!" on its own. It might have to do with the average age of gamers being older now. We all have less time to play then we would like and expect more fun out of our all to short free time.
Life is to short to waste on not having fun. And the idea that its DM vs players is not fun. The game is DM with players.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This discussion is irrelevant except between an individual GM and her players.
This discussion is irrelevant except between an individual GM and her players.
I do not completely agree. A lot of the complaints are about how the system not the players (magic not being rare and so on.) Now of course one could change the system as much as they want but expecting anyone else to care about how they want the system to be is... silly.
Change it to play as you want to at your table or find another system. But this "my fun is more valid then yours!" bull needs to go.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This discussion is irrelevant except between an individual GM and her players.I do not completely agree. A lot of the complaints are about how the system not the players (magic not being rare and so on.) Now of course one could change the system as much as they want but expecting anyone else to care about how they want the system to be is... silly.
Change it to play as you want to at your table or find another system. But this "my fun is more valid then yours!" bull needs to go.
But then what can we argue about besides paladins, alignments and monks?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's a feedback loop. Change the rules to make magic more common and give each character absurd powers, and you make the playerbase expect this, and attract a playerbase that wants this. Next time you change the rules, you follow what your playerbase wants, and so you get even more common magic and powers. Repeat for a few cycles and you get monks who can teleport just by meditating really hard and a CR system where players are assumed to survive and win constantly instead of needing to be worried.
If you don't like it don't play. Sorry to break this to you but your opinion is worth next to nothing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a feedback loop. Change the rules to make magic more common and give each character absurd powers, and you make the playerbase expect this, and attract a playerbase that wants this. Next time you change the rules, you follow what your playerbase wants, and so you get even more common magic and powers. Repeat for a few cycles and you get monks who can teleport just by meditating really hard and a CR system where players are assumed to survive and win constantly instead of needing to be worried.
So what you're saying is:
People want this. The game obliges.
This is somehow a bad thing because your rose colored glasses have merged with your face and are now impossible to take off, and you're pissed because the glasses look at what the game is now and it hurts your eyes.
Yes?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sorry, I'm all for "realism" but this is a fantasy roleplaying game, there really should be a sense of escapism for the players that you seem to be missing. I don't want to play some scrubby farmer with a rusty shortsword, I want to be the hero of the story.Thank you for proving my point. Players today want to sacrifice verisimilitude in favor of totally owning all the demons.Who gives a f&~% about "verisimilitude" in a game with where demons exist in the first place?
If you want a realistic game, go play "Farmland and Turnips" not Pathfinder.
In the meantime, I'll be having fun in a game where I can be a guy who can shoot lightning bolts from his fingertips.
I do actually
Just because the game contains things that aren't real doesn't mean you have to throw believability out the window, nor is it an auto license to do so. A lot of people I know want to be able to say to themselves that if it were real they could see that happening.
|
|
There's a feedback loop. Change the rules to make magic more common and give each character absurd powers, and you make the playerbase expect this, and attract a playerbase that wants this. Next time you change the rules, you follow what your playerbase wants, and so you get even more common magic and powers. Repeat for a few cycles and you get monks who can teleport just by meditating really hard and a CR system where players are assumed to survive and win constantly instead of needing to be worried.If you don't like it don't play. Sorry to break this to you but your opinion is worth next to nothing.
Neither is your opinion of his opinion.
So now where does that leave ya?
Yep this thread will end well...
As a GM in 2e, Ravenloft was my fave setting. Even at the time I was pretty aware that the setting was kind of a screw to players what with the dark powers and all. PCs died, got corrupted, but still mostly had a chance to kick in the villain's head at the end (or at least die trying). There probably was a fair amount of railroading (though I never did anything as extreme as some of the RL modules -like killing the party in the first encounter a la Adam's Wrath). But we had fun. Because of the players and I assume that I was doing an OK job to keep them at the table.
So today Gming PF there are some things I roll my eyes about but I'm still having fun Gming or as a player. There's player entitlement but there's always been player entitlement like most of these discussions it boils down to the group agreeing what they're interested in playing, a few guidelines and finding something that appeals to them (at least most of the time). The rules have changed and yes given players more options vis a vis their characters but the GM can still drop a red dragon or have the dark powers steal away their artifact of shiny goodness if thats what he wants. Whether the players stay is up to them as it always has been.
There's a feedback loop. Change the rules to make magic more common and give each character absurd powers, and you make the playerbase expect this, and attract a playerbase that wants this. Next time you change the rules, you follow what your playerbase wants, and so you get even more common magic and powers. Repeat for a few cycles and you get monks who can teleport just by meditating really hard and a CR system where players are assumed to survive and win constantly instead of needing to be worried.If you don't like it don't play. Sorry to break this to you but your opinion is worth next to nothing.Neither is your opinion of his opinion.
So now where does that leave ya?
Never said it did nor am I stupid enough to think any company should base its design on one persons opinion.
They base it on the majority of the player base. Since they have already done that people that post with this attitude that the game should be changed to their opinion are out of touch with reality.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Soooo...
The obvious answer is to be an entitled, power-hungry DM who wants to make his players feel small and worthless? How is that fun for anyone but you?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do actually
Just because the game contains things that aren't real doesn't mean you have to throw believability out the window, nor is it an auto license to do so. A lot of people I know want to be able to say to themselves that if it were real they could see that happening.
I can get behind "If it were real, I could see this happening". That's good storytelling.
What I cannot get behind is "Every character starts as a level 0 commoner with a short sword and if you don't like it you're a whiny entitled brat who needs to GTFO from my table".
Even though I posted my sarcastic "Hurr, betcha this is shallowsoul's alt" comment, I sincerely doubt that is how you run games, regardless of your disagreements with the game system.
WHAT KIND OF GM RUNS 1ST LEVEL CHARACTERS INTO A DRAGON's DEN? I would get up and leave as soon as the encounter happened because just the idea of it is so friggin asinine.
This game takes getting used to. My friends are I just follow the rules of the game because there's less arguing that way. We are so thankful for pathfinder adventures because we can enjoy table top without devoting our lives to running a campaign.
I am a very ruthless GM. I love being super harsh on my players but I always reward them greatly and there's always some way to fix what horrible thing has happened. If a character wants to come back who's invested 7 levels I just let them. Sometime they aren't lucky and the only thing available is a low level raise dead scroll. they come back 2 levels behind. Same thing as rolling a new. Sucks, super bad but it's better than losing it permanently. Sheesh. My players are my FRIENDS it's just a good time.
You gotta chill out a little bit. I love making encounters I know will ruin my players hopes and dreams. And we always laugh that nobody wins at this game you only lose. But maybe we've just played the game so long and are really good we dont mind rolling a new character because it's fun no matter what class we're playing. We just like hanging out. That's what this game is. Hanging out and having a good time. You can't forget that.
In the words of Jean Paul Sartre:
One of the complaints most frequently made about The Ways of Freedom can be summed up as follows: "After all, these people are so spineless, how are you going to make heroes out of them?" This objection almost makes me laugh, for it assumes that people are born heroes. That's what people really want to think. If you're born cowardly, you may set your mind perfectly at rest; there's nothing you can do about it; you'll be cowardly all your life, whatever you may do. If you're born a hero, you may set your mind just as much at rest; you'll be a hero all your life; you'll drink like a hero and eat like a hero. What the existentialist says is that the coward makes himself cowardly, that the hero makes himself heroic. There's always a possibility for the coward not to be cowardly any more and for the hero to stop being heroic.
Player entitlement becomes a factor when the player believes that their PC has "PC" stamped on his forehead, that he is guaranteed to be a hero, that he cannot die an ignoble death so some goblins due to foolishness or poor fortune, because merely by virtue of existing he is intrinsically the hero and the world will warp itself to make sure his deeds are heroic and successful.
But that's not how the world works. You are not born a hero, you become a hero - or perhaps you don't become a hero, or perhaps you do become a hero but later fall and become a coward, or perhaps one of a hundred other things happens. But the dice fall where they may, your owns skill will determine your fate, and you most certainly don't have plot armor to protect your heroic heroness.
In the words of a wise lemur:
"Chill out bro, it's just a game."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are right that is not how the world works. But it is how the GAME works. Players do in fact play the exceptional people. And that has been a core of design since 1E at lest.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But that's not how the world works. You are not born a hero, you become a hero - or perhaps you don't become a hero, or perhaps you do become a hero but later fall and become a coward, or perhaps one of a hundred other things happens. But the dice fall where they may, your owns skill will determine your fate, and you most certainly don't have plot armor to protect your heroic heroness.
That is not how YOUR world works (mine either), but it IS how some people's world works.
Again. This discussion is nothing more than some people telling others that they are "doing it wrong". We might as well talk about religion or politics.
WHAT KIND OF GM RUNS 1ST LEVEL CHARACTERS INTO A DRAGON's DEN? I would get up and leave as soon as the encounter happened because just the idea of it is so friggin asinine.The dragon's den exists in the world. It's not the DM's fault if the PCs stumble upon it, it's not the DM's responsibility to fiat away the dragon and replace it with a baby goblin, and it's certainly not the DM's fault if the 1st-level characters decide attacking the dragon head-on - instead of sneaking around, or running away, or poisoning it, or doing pretty much anything else - would be a wise course of action.
Does your world just not have dragons until the PCs hit a certain level, at which point dragons suddenly spring to life fully-grown?
How in the hell is a 1st level party supposed to do anything but run away from an adult dragon? Though I get the feeling you wouldn't even allow that because I'm sure you'd have the dragon wake up chase down the party and have a snack.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
When did this game become about playing heroes?
I thought thats what marvel super heroes, DC, Champions, and Heroes Unlimted was for.
I keep reading about how this game is all about heroes?
when did that happen?
I never said I wasn't strawmanning, I just pointed out that you seem to have a very adversarial relationship with your players.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
WHAT KIND OF GM RUNS 1ST LEVEL CHARACTERS INTO A DRAGON's DEN? I would get up and leave as soon as the encounter happened because just the idea of it is so friggin asinine.The dragon's den exists in the world. It's not the DM's fault if the PCs stumble upon it, it's not the DM's responsibility to fiat away the dragon and replace it with a baby goblin, and it's certainly not the DM's fault if the 1st-level characters decide attacking the dragon head-on - instead of sneaking around, or running away, or poisoning it, or doing pretty much anything else - would be a wise course of action.
Does your world just not have dragons until the PCs hit a certain level, at which point dragons suddenly spring to life fully-grown?
Let's look at this, shall we?
Sneaking around: Your stealthiest character likely has at maximum, a 9 or 10 in Stealth (4 from an 18 Dex, 3 from class skill, 1 from skill point, 1 from trait). An adult red dragon has a +23 Perception. Plus 120 ft of Darkvision and 60 ft of Blindsense.
Yeah that'll turn out well.
Running away: Using aforementioned Perception score, the dragon probably heard them coming from a mile away, and is likely to be pissed off these guys wandered into his cave. He has a 40 ft ground speed and a 200 ft Fly speed. Your fastest character is likely to have 30 foot movement, and your party has no way to beat a hasty retreat other than the guy who can cast Expeditious Retreat on himself, which'll at least bump him up to almost 1/3 of the dragon's fly speed.
Poisoning it: It has a +16 Fort save. The highest DC poison I can find is a 20 DC. Then the effects of poison are so minimal they might as well not even exist. Even 1d6 Con damage on a max roll bumps said dragon down to a infinitesimal...17 Con. Likely nearly as high as the Barbarian of the group, and this dragon has more HD so he still has more HP than said Barbarian (likely the beefiest of your group).
Now to combat. Your Barbarian has what, 22 HP (18 Con plus the rule of max HD + half HD at 1st level) and around 18-20 AC? The Dragon has a bite and 2 claws all at +25 (hits on all but a natural 1), the bite dealing 2d8+15 (minimum damage 17) and claws dealing 2d6+10 apiece (minimum 24 damage). This is ignoring the tailslap and wings at +23 for a total of another 29 damage minimum.
He has a 29 AC. Your guys can't touch him with their +5 or so to hit except on a Nat 20. At which point they'd do something like 2d6+7 damage to his 212 HP and he'd laugh and kill them for trying.
In short, there is no tactic that will avail your party. They cannot fight. They cannot run. They cannot sneak. They will die, because you f~@%ed up in your world building. And then you spend the next hour building characters and not playing the damn game.
When did this game become about playing heroes?
I thought thats what marvel super heroes, DC, Champions, and Heroes Unlimted was for.
I keep reading about how this game is all about heroes?
when did that happen?
The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game is a tabletop fantasy game in which the players take on the roles of heroes who form a group (or party) to set out on dangerous adventures.
This is the first line of the core rulebook. Note a keyword in there.
|
I didn't read everything, so my apologies if I'm redundant here.
Just my $.02...I've been gaming since the white box, and GMing as 'Against the Giants' came out...Pathfinder is an excellent representation of one style of fantasy...but it's not the only. If you want realism, you'd probably be happier with Runequest...there are others, but I think it's the best for the game you seem to want, as well as being my favorite...if Pathfinder isn't.
That aside, the same players that you describe probably wouldn't feel happy with it. I'd look for a more mature (agewise) group, as they're usually more into the roleplaying and less into pure optimization for hack and slash. I like both, all depending.
Strawmen, and WoW fallacy, all in one post. Intriguing
LOL - You don't think logical fallacies are wasted on a clearly anecdotal post?
Silly you.
WHAT KIND OF GM RUNS 1ST LEVEL CHARACTERS INTO A DRAGON's DEN? I would get up and leave as soon as the encounter happened because just the idea of it is so friggin asinine.The dragon's den exists in the world. It's not the DM's fault if the PCs stumble upon it, it's not the DM's responsibility to fiat away the dragon and replace it with a baby goblin, and it's certainly not the DM's fault if the 1st-level characters decide attacking the dragon head-on - instead of sneaking around, or running away, or poisoning it, or doing pretty much anything else - would be a wise course of action.
Does your world just not have dragons until the PCs hit a certain level, at which point dragons suddenly spring to life fully-grown?
Actually it is your fault that the PC's "stumbled" upon a dragons nest. You're the one who put it there. While they were out looking for goblin eggs in the forest (or something else equally ridiculous) you decided to put a dragons nest there. While what happens to the PC's after they "stumble" on is completely up to them, them finding it is completely on you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, lessee, counting Supernatural Abilities, there are what, 6 classes with no magic whatsoever?
Fighter, Rogue, Cavalier, Samurai, Gunslinger, and Barbarian?
And of those classes, two are the same class pretty much (Cavalier and Samurai) and one MIGHT AS WELL be magic since he can karate chop spells in half whenever he feels like it and other such things.
This is a bit off I know for a fact a number of rage powers are SU and while I am not as familiar with rogues I think its likely some talents are as well. So that just leaves fighter and Cav/Sam amnd I would not be shocked if some of the order abilities are SU.
-EDIT- Ninja'd
Rogue Talent, Minor and Major(?) Magic allows the casting of a zero and a first level spell.
Kmal how much for the Pinto, I love those cars.
@ the OP. If you want to run a gritty low powered campaign, do so. But you need to modify the monsters, if there are no or only exceedingly rare magic weapons, then you can't have multitudes of monsters running around that can only be hurt with magic weapons. If you don't want flashy damage dealing spells, then get rid of them, change Raise Dead to have penalties. Change whatever you would like (that's actually part of the rules), BUT be sure to hand out all the changes to your players beforehand.
BTW, how exactly to wander into a dragon's lair? We are talking about something the size of a bus that flies and breathes fire (or something noxious)?
The dragon's den exists in the world. It's not the DM's fault if the PCs stumble upon it, it's not the DM's responsibility to fiat away the dragon and replace it with a baby goblin, and it's certainly not the DM's fault if the 1st-level characters decide attacking the dragon head-on - instead of sneaking around, or running away, or poisoning it, or doing pretty much anything else - would be a wise course of action.
Does your world just not have dragons until the PCs hit a certain level, at which point dragons suddenly spring to life fully-grown?
Actually it is the DMs fault if the PCs just stumble into a dragons den, at least without some warning. "Hey there are 5 foot long lizard paw prints in the ground here." "Look at all the black soot and charring of the stone and plant life near the cave entrance." "Look at the BONES!!!" "The entire village says 'Stay away from the caves to the northwest, there is a huge dragon living there.'" So yeah, if a group of PCs just stumble into the cave of an adult dragon, it's pretty much the DMs fault.
BTW, in my world nearly every dragon is any adult, the others are either infants or at most very very young. (The dragons along with most monsters were artificially created.)
The only thing that changed from back in the old times is that in it's early days D&D/RPGs were only for the die hards, inner circle, whatnot.
Nowadays many people play this game and do it casually expecting more fun than "serious gaming" and "ye olde magic shoppe" may be a part of this.
This could lead one to open a thread like "omg, omg, today players are pampered spoiled brats" but it would be stupid...
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
People who dedicate hours out of their week to playing a game feel entitled to have fun doing it?
Outrageous!!!
*rabble rabble*
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You sir need someone else to play with, because my crew, all under 30, dont have most of the problems you are talking about
Nowadays, players always seem to think the world revolves around them. It used to be that if some orc with an axe got a lucky crit and took your head off, you sucked it up like a sir and rolled a new character. Now? They'll complain about how the game is so unfair and you get demonized as a GM - and that's even with the new change to -CON. It's like they don't want life fighting monsters to be dangerous.
In the game that I DM, I have had three players lose their characters in the last 3 game sessions, the first two by trolls, and the third by a fellow player, and guess what, they all sucked it up, and have made new characters.
If you send monsters at them that they can't beat? You're a bad GM. If the dumbass fighter overspecializes and spends five feats that only work with some obscure weapon? Apparently everyone in the world is supposed to suddenly start using that weapon and drop new ones for the fighter, otherwise you're a bad GM. As if you forced the fighter to take Greater Weapon Specialization (Whip), or as if goblins would really have a +4 whip lying around. If you make players track rations and arrows after level 1? The way players today act, you may as well have killed their dog.
Magic weapons? HA my Players are out in the boonies, they only have access to magic weapons they find, or they could pay a HUGE amount to get some smiths and magicians to come out and make a small selection available, and they are having loads of fun with it.
The game seems to cater to this sense of entitlement. d8 hit dice for rogues? Raise Dead guaranteed to work with no XP penalty? Wealth by level? Magic loot should be special; you can't put it on a tight schedule like that. But if you deny the players the +3 armor they're totally entitled to at level 9 or whatever, somehow that makes you the bad guy. Should the game world notice that the characters have hit level 9 and spontaneously generate a large pile of cash in their bank accounts? And that's not even getting into magical healing becoming so easy to get now.
Rogues should have a D8, they are often a melee centered class. If you need an example, look to anything with Harrison Ford. That man is a rogue if I have ever seen one, and there is no way in hell that he is running around on a d6 for hp
Players weren't always like this. Once upon a time, the DM was god, and the players loved it. If the random encounter table gave them an ancient red dragon, they ran away, or they died, but they didn't complain about this CR junk. Poisons were deadly, traps were deadly, combat was deadly, bringing people back from the dead wasn't a matter of routine. Life was cheap, and players didn't think they were action movie heroes entitled to kill all the baddies and save the world with...
Players loved it, but by george, players hated it too, it just depended on how it was done. Also "back in the day" there were not many options, so people were much happier with what they had. I would have to say that I would love to see more powerful poisons, but traps seem to kill just as easily as ever. Oh, in my career in dungeons and dragons, I have only seen two characters come back to life, once at the near end of the campaign, for thematic purposes, and the second because "Max Fightmaster" was reincarnated into a bird, and therefor became "Max Flightmaster"
Basically, stop your b&~+&ing, and figure out who the problem is, and remove that person from your group.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nobody appreciates what a true GM goes through anymore. I spend hours creating a living, breathing world, of which the PC's are merely one small part. The world doesn't revolve around you.
If a dungeon collapses in the woods, and no players are there to hear it, is there any sound?
|
Because I'm not sure how "3/4 of all classes have magic" translates to "Goldurn players are muckin' about with makin' magic common!".
Likewise, what some people on this forum seem to have absolutely no comprehension of is the fact that 3/4 of all PC classes doesn't even remotely translate to 3/4 of population.
About 90% of the population are going to be lowish level experts or commoners.
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nowadays, players always seem to think the world revolves around them.
Indeed! Can't they understand that their true role in all of this is to stare in slack-jawed awe at the world the GM has crafted?
It used to be that if some orc with an axe got a lucky crit and took your head off, you sucked it up like a sir and rolled a new character. Now? They'll complain about how the game is so unfair and you get demonized as a GM - and that's even with the new change to -CON. It's like they don't want life fighting monsters to be dangerous.If you send monsters at them that they can't beat? You're a bad GM.
Indeed! Never mind that running away is probably pointless too. Players should just accept that their PCs will live or die at the random whimsy of the GM. The players' time is worthless, it doesn't really matter what happens to their PCs, as long as the sacred integrity of the game world is preserved.
After all, if you wanted to play a PC with a shot at survival or heroism you'd be playing a different game, like Kult, or Call of Cthulhu.
If the dumbass fighter overspecializes and spends five feats that only work with some obscure weapon? Apparently everyone in the world is supposed to suddenly start using that weapon and drop new ones for the fighter, otherwise you're a bad GM. As if you forced the fighter to take Greater Weapon Specialization (Whip), or as if goblins would really have a +4 whip lying around.
Yes! It's so much more fun if you have to specialize in the things the GM graciously lets you find. I don't know what the game designers were thinking when they put in martial weapons other than the longsword. And what are exotic weapons anyway? That's got no place in proper fantasy.
If you make players track rations and arrows after level 1? The way players today act, you may as well have killed their dog.
Yes. Working as a beancounter at the office is so exciting, you should be doing it in your free time as well. Just because you've got the means to carry all the food and arrows you need in a bag of holding doesn't mean it gets any less exciting to keep tracking them for the remaining nineteen levels.
The game seems to cater to this sense of entitlement. d8 hit dice for rogues? Raise Dead guaranteed to work with no XP penalty?
Yes, give me back my death spiral where the losers keep losing more because they have to pay for their weakness with XP.
Wealth by level? Magic loot should be special; you can't put it on a tight schedule like that.
Indeed. Nearly every PC can perform some magic, but magic items are completely different. Those are inherently wonderful. Especially if they're the same magical longswords as in the previous campaign, because the GM in his infinite wisdom had decided you're not ready for anything more exotic yet.
But if you deny the players the +3 armor they're totally entitled to at level 9 or whatever, somehow that makes you the bad guy. Should the game world notice that the characters have hit level 9 and spontaneously generate a large pile of cash in their bank accounts?
Nope, of course not. All those previous adventures didn't generate any cashflow whatsoever.. I looted the dragon's lair and all I got was a set of traveler's clothing worth no more than 10gp. I'm not sure why I'm still adventuring, since a safer job would probably pay more. I must be a hero. Oh, wait...
And that's not even getting into magical healing becoming so easy to get now.
Yes, you stole my five months of hospital recuperation just to throw me back into dungeoncrawling and exciting adventure. How dare you!
Players weren't always like this. Once upon a time, the DM was god, and the players loved it.
Indeed. Ever since we abolished slavery things have been going downhill.
If the random encounter table gave them an ancient red dragon, they ran away, or they died, but they didn't complain about this CR junk. Poisons were deadly, traps were deadly, combat was deadly, bringing people back from the dead wasn't a matter of routine. Life was cheap, and players didn't think they were action movie heroes entitled to kill all the baddies and save the world with their specialness. Please. Give me a break.
I too get more fun from games where I'm abruptly expelled through no real fault of my own. But I understand that: random chance or GM whimsy was against me, and who am I to resent that? I should know my place.
Nobody appreciates what a true GM goes through anymore. I spend hours creating a living, breathing world, of which the PC's are merely one small part. The world doesn't revolve around you.
Indeed. Stare in slack-jawed amazement. You may walk around in this museum but don't you dare touch any of the displays. Be sure to pay for my pizza on the way out.
If you walk into a dragon's den, it doesn't spontaneously turn into a kobold because a dragon would be too hard. Traps don't magically stop existing just because you all wanted to play fighters with fifty special snowflake "feats" so nobody bothered to be a rogue.
Indeed. It's not up to the players to decide what they'll enjoy. The GM knows what you should want.
You're not special, you're not heroes, you're some average people who picked up swords, and you're not entitled to anything. That's what gives my game world verisimilitude: it's not just a game or a story, it's a real world that exists for reasons beyond mere gameplay.
Obviously. Why did the players ever think they mattered at all?
Whether you find save or die spells "fun" is of no consequence; magic exists, so those spells will exist, and if one kills you, man up, because that's how life works.
But remember: this is nothing special. After all, spellcasting PCs don't make magic items special, so this is just perfectly routine. Like catching the common cold, or PW:Kill; it happens for no reason at all.
But for the WOW generation, the only real fun comes from maximizing your damage per attack to mow through faceless mobs, and even a mild inconvenience ruins the game forever. Face it, sometimes goblins kill people; if you can't have fun roleplaying one of them, maybe ROLEplaying games aren't for you.
Don't they understand that these games are not for fun, but out of a sense of duty towards the GM?
My point is: when did everyone suddenly decide that the point of games was for the DM to create a cardboard world to cater to the players' warped, shallow perception of "fun"?
"Fun" is such a bourgeois concept.
Because I'm not sure how "3/4 of all classes have magic" translates to "Goldurn players are muckin' about with makin' magic common!".Likewise, what some people on this forum seem to have absolutely no comprehension of is the fact that 3/4 of all PC classes doesn't even remotely translate to 3/4 of population.
About 90% of the population are going to be lowish level experts or commoners.
Then the other 10% must be magic item factory line workers to be cranking out all the items found in a typical campaign.