The DM I'm playing with right now gets way too attached to his creatures, even the ones that we are supposed to kill so he keeps making them succeed on their saving throws no matter what. Literally, spells with saving throws just don't work in this campaign except against us, many of the players (myself included) probably won't be playing for much longer, but we are for now. I'm playing a wizard and want to know what the best spells are (up to 5th lvl) that don't allow any saving throws.
Stone Call is pretty good.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's face it, the guy's already cheating. Do you REALLY think anything you do matters?
Enervate is a good way to hurt the enemy without a save, 1D4 negative levels also lowers their saves and to hit pretty hard.
Lowering their saves isn't going to do much good in this situation...
Good no-save spells:
Haste, (Greater) Invisibility, Fly, Resist Energy (& variants), Black Tentacles, Dispel Magic, Wall of X, Summon Monster...
Enervate is a good way to hurt the enemy without a save, 1D4 negative levels also lowers their saves and to hit pretty hard.Lowering their saves isn't going to do much good in this situation...
Good no-save spells:
Haste, (Greater) Invisibility, Fly, Resist Energy (& variants), Black Tentacles, Dispel Magic, Wall of X, Summon Monster...
Spells like Dispel Magic/Black Tentalces where the player rolls against a set DC based on the NPC's stats are still likely to be ignored, but at least it is much more obvious and easier to call b@#*%*&@ on as you can easily backwards engineer what their numbers must look like to beat you rolls.
Enervate is great, but against things immune, the humble magic missile can really shine.
5D4+5 by level nine.
That's just fine.
Enervate is great, but against things immune, the humble magic missile can really shine.
5D4+5 by level nine.
That's just fine.
"Yeah man, they all have Shield up so nothing happens."
Let's face it, the guy's already cheating. Do you REALLY think anything you do matters?
Many GMs 'cheat' only in very specific ways. I prefer to roll dice openly and cheat in more subtle ways. (Like having the enemy reinforcements show up earlier or later, depending on how well the players are doing.)
Others are willing to cheat by fudging the dice they roll behind their screen (and only for specific reasons - to stop a battle they wanted to be big and dramatic from ending anticlimactically when the boss fails a save in round one, or to avoid killing a PC with a lucky crit) but not by, say, giving the enemy infinite hit points until it's time for them to die.
If that's the case, then the GM won't do anything to shut down spells that buff the martials or kill by inflicting damage.
"Yeah man, they all have Shield up so nothing happens."Enervate is great, but against things immune, the humble magic missile can really shine.
5D4+5 by level nine.
That's just fine.
Heck, the GM can just say that magic stops working.
It's up to the players to decide if they want to play, if the GM winds up rolling his dice alone... well... that's no longer your problem.
I would have walked after a)noticing the 100% success rate on saves and b)attempting to talk to GM about it.
One game more... then... no more players.
Don't stay in this abusive relationship, get out while you can. In every contest of GM vs Player, GM 'wins', so just don't play.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with everyone else that this is an awful set of behaviours from the GM. Do not play.
If you are determined to stick it out for a bit longer, a number of Ray spells don't allow saves, and if you can remain secure while casting then Summon Monster can reap dividends.
Alternatively, call him on it. "Since no enemies have ever failed a save, my character is being nerfed, may I change his class?" Then go archer ranger.
Is he an inexperienced GM? If he is, he's fallen into a classic trap: he thinks it's his role to work against the party. Getting precious about his characters is an easy sin to commit, but he needs to realise that it's not the bad guys whose success he should be invested in, it's the party's.
Or, for maximum passive aggressiveness (not recommended), just start declaring all of your results as if you had rolled maximum on the dice (even if you roll in the open), and if questioned, the answer is "well, that's how you're playing the monsters, I thought it was a house rule".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are they literally always succeeding on their saving throws - or just more often than you feel like they should? Statistically, I'll have very long stretches where I can't miss a saving throw and long ones where I can't make one to save my life. Probability can work that way.
Valid point here.
If the GM is seriously cheating, then the players (as a group) need to call him on it.It's one thing to "cheat" in the interest of a good story, but deliberately screwing over the players is a major no-go. If that really is what's going on then his players need to say something and then walk out the door when he refuses to change.
If you don't take the wise option and flat out leave, switching to a dual cursed oracle would be hilarious. Their misfortune ability requires the GM roll in the open or at least declare all their rolls(making it fairly easy to see if they are fudging).
Bonus points for combining it with a Slayer or Sanctified Slayer with blood reading, so the HP of monsters is known as well.
But you should probably just leave...
If you don't take the wise option and flat out leave, switching to a dual cursed oracle would be hilarious. Their misfortune ability requires the GM roll in the open or at least declare all their rolls(making it fairly easy to see if they are fudging).
Bonus points for combining it with a Slayer or Sanctified Slayer with blood reading, so the HP of monsters is known as well.
But you should probably just leave...
Ooh I like that...
@OP- Rather than go the route of circumventing him (as many have said, he may just find other ways to deal with it), Talk with him out of the game. Don't point fingers or attack him with words. Try to have a civil discussion with him. If you have a constructive, civil conversation with a reasonable person, then everything can be resolved. It is when you attack someone or have an unreasonable party that communication will not work. If discussing the problem (preferably as a entire group) does not work, then you should switch GMs. I would avoid an entire group disband if you can.
@GMs Cheating- There are two reasons (IMO) a GM should 'cheat' (well, categories really)
- To save the party/PCs from unfortunate events (not stupid decisions).
- To fix an issue (normally story-relevant or appropriate rules not available/applicable) to keep the game fun, entertaining, and cohesive.
If you'd like specific examples of the above, then let me know.
Cheating to screw over your players is a sign of a poor GM. If you can't challenge your players without resorting to cheating, then you need to step down or start reading and talking to other GMs.
Okay, off my soap-box now. Apologies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Something like this usually isn't a GM trying to screw over the players. It's more likely an attempt to keep things exciting. A GM wants a battle scene to be a tense combat that isn't made trivial early on by a single action.
Setting up a battle like that is really difficult.
You can err on the side of not killing the PCs, in which case battles are frequently anticlimactic.
You can err on the side of making things dangerous - but in every a genuinely close battle, there's a significant chance of a PC dying, so if you do those all the time, you'll probably have frequent deaths or TPKs.
Or you can fudge it (in both directions - keep the PCs alive but under threat), which works great right up until the point where the players start to suspect and lose their faith in you.
Something like this usually isn't a GM trying to screw over the players. It's more likely an attempt to keep things exciting. A GM wants a battle scene to be a tense combat that isn't made trivial early on by a single action.
Setting up a battle like that is really difficult.
You can err on the side of not killing the PCs, in which case battles are frequently anticlimactic.
You can err on the side of making things dangerous - but in every a genuinely close battle, there's a significant chance of a PC dying, so if you do those all the time, you'll probably have frequent deaths or TPKs.
Or you can fudge it (in both directions - keep the PCs alive but under threat), which works great right up until the point where the players start to suspect and lose their faith in you.
I am not disagreeing with you, it was just a broadened statement I made. Your tense combat example would fit under my second reason to 'cheat': Story-relevant to keep game fun and entertaining.
I posted this late last to get some answers by the time i woke up but now it looks like you want some answer's so here we go.
Looking to get a little passive-aggressive jab in before you go?
There's definitely a bit of that motivating me.
If that's the case, then the GM won't do anything to shut down spells that buff the martials or kill by inflicting damage.
This seems to be (mostly) the case, spells that just do damage work properly, but even the humble snowball has never staggered anyone.
Mostly he's just made our effects not work like they're supposed to but at one point he literally just flat out gave all his creatures DR 10 because he thought we were killing them too quickly.
Is he an inexperienced GM? If he is, he's fallen into a classic trap: he thinks it's his role to work against the party. Getting precious about his characters is an easy sin to commit, but he needs to realise that it's not the bad guys whose success he should be invested in, it's the party's.
It's literally his first game DMing, that's most of the reason we've stuck around for so long.
Rather than go the route of circumventing him (as many have said, he may just find other ways to deal with it), Talk with him out of the game. Don't point fingers or attack him with words. Try to have a civil discussion with him. If you have a constructive, civil conversation with a reasonable person, then everything can be resolved. It is when you attack someone or have an unreasonable party that communication will not work. If discussing the problem (preferably as a entire group) does not work, then you should switch GMs. I would avoid an entire group disband if you can.
We're in a group that has been rotating as DMs, its his turn but he is by far the least experienced RPGer in the group. We've all talked to him multiple times and he'll respond by fixing the exact problem that we mention (except for the saves, he's still too emotionally invested in his creatures to let them fail saves) but then making a similar mistake and generally not actually understanding what he's doing wrong.
If you guys rotate GMs like you mentioned, I would either tell him it's time he rotated to someone else or just stick with it if the rotation time is coming up soon. If the other players are just as annoyed as you are, it may be time to "vote him out" as a GM. Not all players are suitable GMs.
It's literally his first game DMing, that's most of the reason we've stuck around for so long.
&
We're in a group that has been rotating as DMs, its his turn but he is by far the least experienced RPGer in the group. We've all talked to him multiple times and he'll respond by fixing the exact problem that we mention (except for the saves, he's still too emotionally invested in his creatures to let them fail saves) but then making a similar...
I think the simple problem is just his inexperience.
Solutions: Ask if you may put his campaign on hold for the moment and move on. Spend time with him and show him sites/blogs/forums for advice on GMing/DMing. Have him join a fourm (here or elsewhere) to as questions (such as party burns through his monsters). Maybe he is making the CR of his encounters equal to the APL of the party, while not realizing these are meant to be fairly easy.
I would also suggest have him run a pre-made adventure (or two) and stick to the normal statistics. This way he can see how the encounters range in difficulty. Many adventures now explain the basic tactics of the monsters. When monsters (especially intelligent ones) fight tactically and to their full intent and purpose, they become more challenging (this the point at which they truly match their CR). After being used to GMing using published material, hopefully he will have a better sense of being a GM and then can return to his campaign.
If you guys rotate GMs like you mentioned, I would either tell him it's time he rotated to someone else or just stick with it if the rotation time is coming up soon. If the other players are just as annoyed as you are, it may be time to "vote him out" as a GM. Not all players are suitable GMs.
I think anyone that wants to be a GM is suitable to be one. Willingness to learn >>> experience. Some will learn and understand what they need sooner than others (experience helps a lot in this regard), but anyone can GM. Now not saying this makes everyone a good GM. Being a good GM takes a few skills, but they can all be acquired.
A whole bunch of reasonable stuff
While everything you said is great, in theory, I just don't see it translating to real life. Some people are simply jerks and they want to be GM for the power trip. Some people want to be GM but are completely unsuitable to it because they cannot grasp the rules. Just because someone wants to be able to do something doesn't mean they can, or should, do something.
I think the GM, through his behavior, has shown that he is simply unwilling to learn to be a better GM despite his inexperience. He is purposefully making the game only fun for him. I not only wouldn't play in a game he is GM-ing, I would strongly question if I want to continue spending my time with a person like this.
I think you need to talk him out of being emotionally invested in his NPCs. Personally its a double edged sword for a GM, for one you care about your creation enough to make a effort, but on the other you fall so easily into the trap such as not allowing them to die and result to cheating.
If the GM is unwilling to change his ways retire him and rotate early. If he protest just counter him with your already established reasons, i dont think a spiteful jab is going to help more than just mock him for his lack of mechanic expertise.
We're in a group that has been rotating as DMs, its his turn but he is by far the least experienced RPGer in the group.
I went from a game with a GM screen to a game without a GM screen, where the GM rolls all dice openly. And I thought: this is much better. You get everyone reacting in unison as the GM rolls a natural 20 on an attack or a natural one on a save, and everybody knows it's fair. If the GMing rotates back to you, try it out, and set a good example.
This kinda just occurred to me, but what if he had a GMPC? Just make sure he knows it can't be the star of the show. More, almost like a side-kick. That way, he would have a character to be emotionally invested in, but it would be on the party's side and not against them.
A skilled GM can make a GMPC work. An incompetent GM can make a GMPC super-annoying.
This does not sound like a skilled GM.
Idk, for my real life group, three people that were both newer to RPGs and GMing for the first time did well with the GMPCs they ran. I was just tossing the idea out so that way he would have something else to be attached to rather than the antagonists.
I played in a game with rotating DMs. When our turn arrived, our PC became an NPC (=GMPC) with unstated rules limiting the PCs actions to established things, and doing what the (majority of the) party asked him to do. This also allowed the PCs back-story to be illuminated, as the module played could be tied into it, and the PC could tell the history or legend and off the party goes.
/cevah