I tend to follow wealth by level for NPCs. That puts limits on spells that have costly material components such as wish or simulacrum.
I don't like to use Euphoric Tranquility on the players. I tend to not use spells that provide no save or means to counter during a combat.
Congratulations, Blood Money solves your NPC wealth problem. You just gotta know the right spells and items.
For example, the spell Form of the Dragon III gives you a +10 size bonus to Strength. The spell Blood Rage will give you up to a +10 morale bonus to strength. The Blood Reservoir of Physical Prowess will give you a temporary +8 inherent bonus to strength. A Belt of Physical Might will give you up to a +6 enhancement bonus to strength.
All together, you've got a +34 bonus to strength between those 4 abilities, even if you dump strength to 6, you've still got a 40 strength that can be used to fuel Blood Money.
It gets even more fun if your NPC is something like a Stone Giant Wizard or something.
Seriously, material costs for spells is basically a non-entity if you know how to bypass them.
Speaking of not using Save or Sucks there's another good reason for GMs not to use them at high levels.
We were taking inventory of our zoo earlier (just added a pair of Eldritch Knights to the collection, very nice) and remembered one of our pets' Feeble-ness was self-inflicted. He tried to cast Feeblemind on the party Sorcerer and, well, Spell Turning...
I would not use disjunction or SoD without the players having a lot of warning and the opportunity to do something about it.
SoS spells I will use sparingly. It puts the right level of scare into the players without making them sit out the rest of the game session while they make a new character or wait until the part can resurrect, and restore them.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another "what shouldn't the GM use" thread?
OK, well here it goes...
I have been talking about this with a few friends lately and I really don't get the attachment people get to their characters. I just really don't.
I have never had a character die and then had said death bother me. I had a level 6 psychic warrior/10 pyrokenetic in 3.5 who was the most fun character I have ever played, tons of damage, tons of cool abilities, extensive back-story (which the GM was kind enough to incorporate on several adventures), just a total blast. When he died I rolled up another character, no hard feelings, no bitterness, didn't call fault, nothing bad just rolled up a new character.
I think that if there is a spell/feat/combat maneuver/whatever written into the rules then it is fair game to use against the players.
I say save or die/sunder weapons/alter reality/whatever.
I have never understood the anger and disgust that so many other players experience when they die, lose a magical weapon/item, or have that feeling of unstoppable badass taken away for half a second.
Maybe I don’t take the game as seriously or maybe I have a broader sense of entertainment, IDK but threads like this confuse me.
...
I have never had a character die and then had said death bother me...
I say save or die/sunder weapons/alter reality/whatever.
I have never understood the anger and disgust that so many other players experience when they die, lose a magical weapon/item, or have that feeling of unstoppable badass taken away for half a second.
Maybe I don’t take the game as seriously or maybe I have a broader sense of entertainment, IDK but threads like this confuse me.
For me personally:
A few years ago, my GM liked to stop on a cliff hanger. Good idea. Gets you thinking about it, working on strategy, and the next game session usually starts with immediate action. Wondrous.
But several times I got hit with a finger of death or disintegrate within the first 10 minutes of sitting down to game. ... Ok, now my evening is shot. I literally have nothing to do for the rest of the evening, unless I want to rush build a sloppy PC that I will then be stuck with (he did not let us change our PC's after we started playing with them). The whole group frowned on having back-up PC's ready since that was Planning-to-Fail!
I try to not do things like that to my players.
About 1 time in 20 you are going to roll a 1 on the d20. If you get hit with SoD spells a couple of times a combat, you will not survive more than a couple of levels no matter how high your save modifier. That is not bad luck, that is just average.
If you failed your save vs 8 debuff, damage, and SoS spells that is different. Either you dumped your saves (stupid on player), the tactics are lousy so you constantly get hit with spells (stupid on character), or you have had a really bad string of rolls. Well that could still happen, but not constantly.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In terms of any activities that leave players with a major penalty, such as losing items or levels, I tend not to hold back - but I do have a rule of thumb that nobody leaves an adventure worse off than they entered it.
So if I take away a level, I make sure they have a way to restore it. If I take away an item, I'll find a way to replace it with something of equal or better usage (destroy longsword +2, find longsword +3.) If someone finds the bank they had all their gold in has been destroyed, there'll be plenty of opportunities to restore it. All of the above in addition to what they'd "normally" earn, of course.
After doing that a few times, my players learned to trust me as their GM. I may do incredibly evil things to them from time to time, but never to the overall detriment of the game. The result is they get to experience those in-character tragedy moments while not feeling they're being targetted or penalized as players.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Most of my players have had so many "soft" DMs that they specifically ask me to make my games more ruthless and deadly.
A game without frustration is a game without catharsis. Sometimes you need your players to be absolutely beside themselves with how bad things can get before they achieve the epic rebound and overcome the odds.
Most of my players have had so many "soft" DMs that they specifically ask me to make my games more ruthless and deadly.
A game without frustration is a game without catharsis. Sometimes you need your players to be absolutely beside themselves with how bad things can get before they achieve the epic rebound and overcome the odds.
Oh absolutely. My games are tough and getting tougher as the players learn to cope. But it is by multiple, ongoing, debuffing, and damaging threats. To many of us 1 roll of the die doesn't have nearly as much emotional impact. Either your fine or you died game over.
But when first guy is paralyzed, mentally communicating with the second guy that is blinded, to tell him where to strike to hit the demon is, that just swallowed the third guy, that is trying to fight his way out of the demon's gullet, while the other fourth and fifth guys are getting weakened by the poison of the spider ghoul swarm that they are trying to keep from getting to the others...
Plenty of bad things and rebound catharsis there.
2) I was Dominated by a Vampire during a fight (failed the save because of those negative levels), which turned me against my allies. I'm a martial-type built as a zone-controller. In one round I caused two casters to lose their spells, hit two other people with movement AoOs and used my own action to Sunder the paladin's magical sword.The "oh s~#%" factor went through the roof. The whole party was suddenly completely focused and on their toes. The drama of the situation was fantastic.
That WOULD be fun.
Sadly, that's never how Dominate works when I get hit by it.
Since you get another save to break it for doing something against your nature (like, say, attacking your allies), most people who Dominate my Barbarian (I need like a 4 to pass most times. So far every time someone's thrown a Dominate at him I've rolled a 1. =/) just say "Sit in the corner and don't help anyone".
That's not drama fuel.
That's "Well don't mind me I'ma go browse on the internet or watch a video since I'm out of the session for an hour or two" Fuel.
Honestly, I'd rule you'd get a save in that case. Sitting out of a fight is probably more against your barbarians nature than defending someone. Would it be against your character's nature to protect someone against your party if he wanted them to live? You wouldn't have to try to kill them, just disarm, sunder or otherwise disable.
That said, it really does come down to DM fiat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Loss of player control is extremely frustrating, and I tend to avoid it. THat being said, my players mostly enjoy the rare occasion they're mind controlled, so I mostly just avoid hold person, paralysis, and the totally unenjoyable level drain mechanic.
IForget it, inanity.
|
Save or Die effects I use extremely sparingly and only at high enough level resurrection is possible. Once spells like breath of life come online this is acceptable for me, but only occasionally.
It is never ok to use a single spell which could potentially kill more than 2 players outright (e.g., circle of death).
Also, anti-magic field, mage's dysjunction, wish, and similar spells that can remove the players equipment and/or abilities en masse even temporarily are not acceptable. This problem is exacerbated at higher levels. Consider a 20th level fighter who enters an antimagic field and loses all magic enhancements to armor and weapons, ring, amulet, headband, belt, cloak, boots, and any ioun stones. This could result in a -5 att/dmg, -18 ac, -5 all saves, and losing many other bonuses such as various armor and weapon abilities. The single casting has just destroyed the fighter and meanwhile the opposing side may have giants, dragons, or any other of a long list of magic free creatures that can walk over and rip the fighter to shreds. A spellcaster loses nearly all spells; non-spellcasting classes lose access to SU abilities and SLAs (e.g., totem rage powers). These abilities can end encounters just as easily as save or die, but the players get to watch their carefully crafted characters get ripped apart.
Shenanigans that can take a character out of the campaign exist and are sometimes mentioned as great tactics for PCs. One odd example is plane shift on a fighter to a random location on a random plane. The party is so unlikely to find him that you would essentially need divine intervention to reasonably explain it. The character has basically been targeted by a save or die effect which removes any chance of resurrection.
Finally, I am ok with mind control effects, but long term control effects should be something the players are aware of as a possibility and given time to prepare defenses against. As an example, I ran Castle Ravenloft recently and made it plain that he could control people and the players were aware of the general setting before starting the game. At no point was I concerned about using his mind controlling ability and probably should have made more use of it in key situations.
In summary, I think the biggest concern here is to make sure whatever you use the players feel that they had a chance to win and weren't reliant on a single roll of the dice to determine win/loss or blindsided by uncounterable abilities/effects. Dice add variability to the game and help keep players engaged, but seeing a Paladin with a will save higher than the DC of a death spell fail due to rolling a 1 is possible but not acceptable (imo). The DM is there to make the game fun as much as enforce rules. The toughest issue I have faced as a DM is making encounters that feel like the players could have died at any point, but not actually ending the campaign.
This actually came about from RotRL with Mokmurian...he has quickened disintegrate listed in his statblock. And the point above about a high Int caster getting the point after 2 or 3 times is how it happened. I actually forgot to roll half the damage dice so he didn't disintegrate.
Point is, taught my player that good tactics happens on both sides of the table.
Just want to say thanks for putting this information in spoiler tags. I mean I would hate to be playing my next session of Rise of the Runelords next week where we should be fighting this particular fellow and knowing some of his capabilities that I shouldn't know before hand... oh wait...
Sorry, I definitely believe that spoiler tags are unnecessary. Players should be able to keep their knowledge from their character. Especially when I'm talking to a bunch of GMs...while this isn't a GM thread per se it definitely is most likely to be a collection of GMs talking to each other.
I usually don't write any spell off the DM's reach, but there are spells (mainly spells that basically tell the player "you are no longer playing") that deserve more judicious use IMO. That dominate spell better bring something worthwhile to the story, and that bad guy's wish better be meaningful. Otherwise, all spells have their place.
Yup, Shattered Star probably still breaks every single 'thou shalt not' in this thread. Ahh... I love it when Paizo's published material breaks preconceptions on what's possible/allowable, especially my own.
GMs are players too, Pendin. GMs are players too.
The GM really doesn't need to use wish because the GM can do pretty much whatever. I say if it's plot related and isn't designed to just screw the PCs (or maybe it is because it's plot related) then it's allowed, even if it's NOT in a book. Of course, some GMs can't handle that sort of responsibility.
GMs are players too, Pendin. GMs are players too.
That's true...and they have to learn early on how to divorce player knowledge from character knowledge! :)
Not everyone wants to play their NPCs as cheese machines. I'll play my NPCs smartly, but I won't do something like that unless my players try to do it. Once that happens, it's fair game all around. Which basically sums up my thoughts on using or not using anything as a GM. If my players use it, so will I.
Though I did see a thread over in Advice once about someone GMing an Antipaladin BBEG who used Death Knell and got his players all up in arms about it. Personally, I think that might have been a bit of a bad move on the GM's part, but at the same time it was probably a very reasonable course of action for the BBEG.
So what you're saying is, Blood Money is a spell you won't use as a GM?
;)
I tend to avoid save or die spells as well as those that might cripple the PCs. Might be fun for some groups, but I'm more interested in party members surviving the entire story arc rather than having a rotating door of characters come and go due to the ruthlessness of the game; sometimes those sort of games are fun, for a change, but typically I'm not interested.
Example A.) Having a spellcaster delay his initiative to that of his minions or vice/versa to drop a sleep spell on the party, followed by said minions performing coup de graces seems, to me, a bit unfair.
Example B.) Having a spellcaster cast blindness/deafness on the party's fighter will render him or her practically useless, and that's no fun to play.
For those not playing it...
For those not playing it...
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **For those not playing it...
** spoiler omitted **
It still runs afoul of the "don't permanently mess with the PCs" vibe in this thread.
I dont use Save or Die spells. I avoid using Save or Suck spells that keep a player from playing (Hold person is an example) unless its a quick combat (2-3 rounds).
Other than that I just make sure I dont use spells that would keep others from having fun. Its a kind of a broad answer but there it is. I am there to make sure the group is having fun. Throwing AOE and CC over and over would probably keep the group from having fun.
Its a delicate balance between "Challenging" and "Frustrating"
even then, 2-3 rounds can still take up to a matter of hours.
|
One good bet is that you don't want to dominate the party member with improved sunder, an adamantine weapon, a +33 damage modifier in levels where it's unreasonably igh, and a crapton of iterative attacks. I had one party wind up with all of their gear completely destroyed after I got a 1 on two consecutive will saves. ... And yes, magic component pouches were indeed sundered. Those wizards were displeased.
... Well, I guess you COULD dominate them, but you might not want to be a jackass and abuse their over the top equipment destroying capacity.
the act of creating characters isn't simple and even a character created recently takes multiple hours. so inflicting a permanent hinderance, killing a character that has so much investment, or anything to a character that takes such a great deal of investment without including a means to remedy it later. is extremely irksome to the players more focused on immersion.
sure, it is easy to replace the name on Falchion Fred or change the number, Falchion Fred, is a gimmick. but a character with investment beyond the gimmick, a character built with immersion, shouldn't be lost to a save or die or permanently hindered.
Falchion Fred, can be replaced. Nodachi Ned, can be replaced. Nekogami Shuriken-Chan, Blood Tigress of Southern Minkai, Inherited General of the Tiger Brigade and War Championess of Emperor Shigure, cannot be so easily replaced, despite her having been built as a Nodachi Wielding Barbarian with the beast totem, superstitious and come and get me lines of rage powers.
builds can be replaced, experiences as the character cannot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe I would grow bored without risk of permanently losing my characters in games. Gotta have that challenge, otherwise what's the point? ... But there is a line between providing a challenge and trolling your party maliciously.
it's not the risk that is important, it's the illusion of risk that matters. as long as the players feel there is a risk, even if there truly isn't, you have done a good job. but i have issues with Slaughterhouse DMs and Monty Haul alike.
I believe I would grow bored without risk of permanently losing my characters in games. Gotta have that challenge, otherwise what's the point? ... But there is a line between providing a challenge and trolling your party maliciously.it's not the risk that is important, it's the illusion of risk that matters. as long as the players feel there is a risk, even if there truly isn't, you have done a good job. but i have issues with Slaughterhouse DMs and Monty Haul alike.
I keep death present in my games by design, just to make sure Characters don't do stupid things. I've heard of a few groups in my area where the GM makes sure the PCs never die, and so the PCs will do things like, "I heard a rumor about this super powerful dragon up north with lots of loot... Let's go kill him!"
"But we can't face him, he's way more powerful than us!"
"No worries, the GM won't lets us die!"
And so through the power of GM fiat, they kill the dragon 10 CRs higher than them and get his hoard at the same time.
I believe I would grow bored without risk of permanently losing my characters in games. Gotta have that challenge, otherwise what's the point? ... But there is a line between providing a challenge and trolling your party maliciously.it's not the risk that is important, it's the illusion of risk that matters. as long as the players feel there is a risk, even if there truly isn't, you have done a good job. but i have issues with Slaughterhouse DMs and Monty Haul alike.I keep death present in my games by design, just to make sure Characters don't do stupid things. I've heard of a few groups in my area where the GM makes sure the PCs never die, and so the PCs will do things like, "I heard a rumor about this super powerful dragon up north with lots of loot... Let's go kill him!"
"But we can't face him, he's way more powerful than us!"
"No worries, the GM won't lets us die!"
And so through the power of GM fiat, they kill the dragon 10 CRs higher than them and get his hoard at the same time.
the only time a character should really be killed or permanently penalized, if if they do something really stupid. i won't save the level 1 PC whom attracts the attention of the local guard, but i will respond first with arrest and a fine, if that fails or they resist arrest, they might die.
a level 1 PC trying to solo a Jaguar is likely going to die for trying unless they get really lucky.
but i won't fiat a level 5 Party into killing a CR 9 Foe. i will Fiat an army of a million level 1 NPCs killing the level 20 Party if they try to face an army on their own without sufficient help.
I'd say, "Darn, this thread's turning into another argument about PC killing," but y'know what? We made it two whole pages first. That's pretty good, all things considered.
It still runs afoul of the "don't permanently mess with the PCs" vibe in this thread.** spoiler omitted **For those not playing it...
** spoiler omitted **
To be fair, every encounter in which the enemies are dealing lethal damage runs afoul of that rule. Death is a pretty big "messes with you", after all. ;D
Blood Money is one of the only ways to make low-to-mid level Necromancy plausible.
The cost of raising and replacing undead is awful.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Firstly, I generally consider anything the PCs are willing to use is fair game.
I've heard people say that a lot, but it's something I completely disagree with. If the PC Save-or-Sucks, or oh no Save-or-Dies, on your NPCs you may be disappointed, but hey you literally have the rest of the universe to play. The players don't have that luxury; if you Stinking Cloud them and they fail, they might as well go do something else for the rest of the fight unless you have someone that can cure the status in one turn.
That aside, I came in here specially with Stinking Cloud in mind, but any Save-or-you-might-as-well-go-home spells are things I think should be avoided by a DM.
I'm not a fan of save-or-die either, but that doesn't mean I won't use them every once in a while. Save-or-suck even moreso. What's the challenge if your enemy has great abilities but doesn't use them? They were factored into the CR for a reason.Firstly, I generally consider anything the PCs are willing to use is fair game.I've heard people say that a lot, but it's something I completely disagree with. If the PC Save-or-Sucks, or oh no Save-or-Dies, on your NPCs you may be disappointed, but hey you literally have the rest of the universe to play. The players don't have that luxury; if you Stinking Cloud them and they fail, they might as well go do something else for the rest of the fight unless you have someone that can cure the status in one turn.
That aside, I came in here specially with Stinking Cloud in mind, but any Save-or-you-might-as-well-go-home spells are things I think should be avoided by a DM.
i might use a temporary save or suck, or a nonlethal short duration save or lose a turn, but i won't often use save or roll a new character.
I'd say, "Darn, this thread's turning into another argument about PC killing," but y'know what? We made it two whole pages first. That's pretty good, all things considered.
Just because nobody else has gone there yet, and because my chaotic side has always, always wanted the opportunity, and because this thread still seems good-natured enough for a joke to work:
Hitler wouldn't hold back on any spells if he was GM.
And necromancers are the characters I would expect to use it. But there shouldn't be too many times when they would need 40+ strength to raise a new minion or two. It's 25gp per HD, so an ancient red dragon would cost 625gp to raise. So that's 1d6 damage and 2 points of strength damage to raise a 25HD creature. No need for crazy strength-boosting shenanigans, since a single casting of Bull's Strength gets you everything you need to raise 2 of them without issue.Blood Money is one of the only ways to make low-to-mid level Necromancy plausible.
The cost of raising and replacing undead is awful.
Plus, it's perfectly acceptable to bend NPC WBL. Maybe the necromancer killed those two dragons and took their hordes. Boom. Justification.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Putting this in a separate post because I know it'll get deleted when you get permabanned! :)
Just because nobody else has gone there yet, and because my chaotic side has always, always wanted the opportunity, and because this thread still seems good-natured enough for a joke to work:Hitler wouldn't hold back on any spells if he was GM.
Outrageous!
He implied GM power should be limited!