|
4 years ago ::
May 29, 2009 - 1:35PM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
|
The players have a reasonable right to know what to expect at any given LFR game, and random DMs changing or throwing out rules as they see fit does not accomplish this.
I think that's missing the point.
CORE1-2 spoilers
Show
If a PC spent an hour healing up the party to full at any point, they should arguably fail the mod. A DM would be well within their rights to say when they come to the final room, they see a dead girl, dead newborn and no one else there. I doubt any DM would do that without warning, but most mods come with the assumption that spending an extended rest is a bad idea and short rests are fine. Enough short rests look a lot like an extended rest though and a not-so-subtle hint that time-based events in the mod will proceed without them at a certain point should put a stop to blatant abuse. Especially if you use that mod as an ilustration...
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 29, 2009 - 1:49PM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Mar 29, 2001
|
No, it's not missing the point.
The point is that the players should not have the rules changing on them from DM to DM, from game to game. Having your character's powers and abilities being altered back and forth based on each DM's personal views and foibles can be frustrating.
If the players are spending time dilly dallying when there's a time limit, they deserve to fail in the task. No matter what they happen to have been doing in that time, whether using Unicorn's Touch or playing Parcheesi.
This is a completely separate issue than a DM altering rules he doesn't like.
Now, it is advisable to let the players know that spending an hour healing up may have adverse effects on their mission, but if they want to go ahead and spend that time and risk failure, that's their prerogative.
I have plenty of things I'd change about the rules. Likes and dislikes, distinct views about what's working and what's broken.
I set those aside when judging RPGA games. My personal hangups about 4E are irrelevant when I'm running LFR. My players will get a game based on 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons, no more, no less. I'll make the game as enjoyable as I can - and I can do that without changing the rules.
-karma
LFR Characters:
Lady Tiana Elinden Kobori Silverwane - Drow Control Wizard
Kro'tak Warscream - Orc Bard
Fulcrum of Gond - Warforged Laser Cleric
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 29, 2009 - 2:11PM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
|
f he persists, oh well.
You should let players do what is perfectly legal by the rules.
No, it's not missing the point.
The point is that the players should not have the rules changing on them from DM to DM, from game to game. Having your character's powers and abilities being altered back and forth based on each DM's personal views and foibles can be frustrating.
You're not just stating that the DM shouldn't change the rules, but you're also stating that they should just let them do it. When there are perfectly valid, legal ways to stop them from abusing the rules like that.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 29, 2009 - 2:27PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
May 28, 2001
|
I've seen people run out of healing surges more than a few times. Usually, it's in parties that were running without much in the way of tactical skill or coordination (In a recent running of East 1-1, the swordmage ran out of healing surges before the final encounter (fortunately for him, there wasn't time to run the final encounter in the slot) and everyone else was pretty close), but every now and then, it's just party mix and a bit of bad luck (our gnome bard ran out of healing surges after the final combat in Agl 1-2 last night, but it was a four person table without a defender to prevent focused aggression--cleric, bard, warlord, wizard--and he failed about six ongoing damage saves in a row). There was also a certain eladrin tempest fighter who went down with no healing surges remaining in the final combat of Imp 1-1 and a drow rogue who was down to one healing surge after the first combat of Akan 1-2.
So you're saying that people run out of healing surges in an extremely unbalanced party or one with poor tactical skill?
Wouldn't the power actually be of more benefit to that type of group rather than the purely optimized and tactically minded party that end combats in 2-3 rounds and never runs out of surges?
So in the former, it shores up a weakness and in the latter, the ability to grant saves is more useful since they'll end up with extra healing surges anyway.
I agree that they should tone it down a bit (the heal only when bloodied was a good idea), but I don't think it warrants outright banning or modification in LFR games, especially in light of the fact that we still have:
* Guilefull Switch
* Rain of Blows to do 4 attacks
* Bloodclaw Weapons
* Righteous Rage of Tempus
etc.
All of which are of greater concern to game balance than surgeless healing (especially since surgeless healing gets tons easier as you go up in levels).
Check out my free online comic! Familiar Ground Fantasy Humor, Familiar Point of View
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 29, 2009 - 2:36PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2004
|
So you're saying that people run out of healing surges in an extremely unbalanced party or one with poor tactical skill?
Wouldn't the power actually be of more benefit to that type of group rather than the purely optimized and tactically minded party that end combats in 2-3 rounds and never runs out of surges?
So in the former, it shores up a weakness and in the latter, the ability to grant saves is more useful since they'll end up with extra healing surges anyway.
I agree that they should tone it down a bit (the heal only when bloodied was a good idea), but I don't think it warrants outright banning or modification in LFR games, especially in light of the fact that we still have:
* Guilefull Switch
* Rain of Blows to do 4 attacks
* Bloodclaw Weapons
* Righteous Rage of Tempus
etc.
All of which are of greater concern to game balance than surgeless healing (especially since surgeless healing gets tons easier as you go up in levels).
Surgeless healing isn't a problem. Unlimited surgeless healing is, as the identified professional game designer came in and pointed out.
The above things you mentioned are definitely overpowered and also in need of nerfs, but they don't break the mechanics of the game.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 29, 2009 - 2:53PM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
The mod, as written, had no real time limits. The nerfing of the power was purely an abuse of DME. Would it have been better to create an artificial reason why the party could not take multiple short rests? Or should I have just allowed the swordmage to remove the need for surges outside of combat?
Yes. This was, as you say, purely an abuse of DME.
The only times this power will be problematic are situations where both (a) the PCs can rest for an hour to several hours between encounters without any impact, and (b) the adventure is sufficiently tough (or the group is sufficiently leader-less) that a meaningful number of PCs would be running out of healing surges by the end otherwise.
Considering that the first is entirely within the control of the DM and the second is unlikely to be true for most adventures, I'd be hard-pressed to consider this a problem. Indeed, I'm not sure I'd even call this a "must have" power, let alone a problem power, given the existence of other goods powers of this level.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 29, 2009 - 2:57PM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Sep 12, 2007
|
Personally I just don't get why some try to compensate for certain character builds by making the monsters more tough.
If I see someone who build (a RAW-legal) character that is twice as powerfull as a standard character and thus defeats all monsters as written with half as much effort, I would assume that he was aware of that result while building his character and that this result is what he wanted. I wouldn't get the idea to just make the monsters facing this character twice as powerfull so that he effectively has the same effort as anyone else.
Because then why should he have bothered with building his character to begin with?
Maybe ask him "Wow, you're character looks really powerfull, I fear the adventure will be too easy for him. Do you wan't me to increase the challenge for him?" and if he says "No, I enjoy being badass, that's why I've chosen this build" then let him do what RAW allows him to do.
Maybe he'll get bored after some time and eventually ask the DMs to play it a little tougher against him, maybe he's just the type that doesn't need to be challenged to enjoy a game or enjoys the knowledge of how much this would have challenged weaker characters while his doesn't even break into sweat. As long as he doesn't rub the noses of the other players in his superiority I wouldn't see any problem.
Personally my characters somehow always end up on the lower end of the power spectrum (while not as bad as my 3.x LG character even my 4e character suffers a little from this) and thus I quite enjoy if I happen to have a powergamer at the table who'll effortlessly wade through the enemies so that my character can take a backseat during combat.
This, very much this. More this than you can shake a stick at. This all day and then some more.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 29, 2009 - 3:00PM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Mar 29, 2001
|
You're not just stating that the DM shouldn't change the rules, but you're also stating that they should just let them do it.
Yes, I am stating that.
I reiterate. This isn't your home game. There are standards.
When there are perfectly valid, legal ways to stop them from abusing the rules like that.
"Abuse" is a relative term. Some folks find certain things horribly abusive. Others don't find the same things to be much concern at all.
Whether you try and justify it by altering the adventure to achieve the result of stopping the 'abuse', or just outright alter the rules, trying to "stop" what you find to be abusive isn't running the games as it is written - you're interjecting your personal views on how this or that rule isn't "right".
There is an official process for getting the rules changed and errata'd. You bring it to the attention of WotC, via CustServ or other contact points, they review the issue, and if they agree they change it. If they do not, that's the way the rules lay.
DMs altering the rules at the table, either overtly or trying to disguise it with DME twisting, is NOT the official process.
There's nothing wrong with ASKING a player not to use a particular power in a way you as a DM are uncomfortable with.
I personally would find it hard to believe that you'd run into more than a handful of stubborn players that, given a DM telling them to their face, "Please don't use this power like that, I find it abusive.", still go ahead and do it.
This is coming from an DM that has hundreds upon hundreds of convention games run over the past decade, RPGA and non-RPGA, and has seen a staggering variety of player types.
The few that do, oh well. I'll know who to avoid next time.
-karma
LFR Characters:
Lady Tiana Elinden Kobori Silverwane - Drow Control Wizard
Kro'tak Warscream - Orc Bard
Fulcrum of Gond - Warforged Laser Cleric
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 29, 2009 - 3:13PM
#39
|
Date Joined:
Jul 26, 2003
|
a not-so-subtle hint that time-based events in the mod will proceed without them at a certain point should put a stop to blatant abuse.
The DM can also remind the party that sitting around for an hour or more without being fully healed can be dangerous, should any enemies happen by.
In my experience, a reminder such as one of these will impel most parties to use their other healing powers in order to heal up with no more than 2-3 short rests.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 29, 2009 - 3:17PM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2004
|
Yes, I am stating that.
I reiterate. This isn't your home game. There are standards.
"Abuse" is a relative term. Some folks find certain things horribly abusive. Others don't find the same things to be much concern at all.
Whether you try and justify it by altering the adventure to achieve the result of stopping the 'abuse', or just outright alter the rules, trying to "stop" what you find to be abusive isn't running the games as it is written - you're interjecting your personal views on how this or that rule isn't "right".
There is an official process for getting the rules changed and errata'd. You bring it to the attention of WotC, via CustServ or other contact points, they review the issue, and if they agree they change it. If they do not, that's the way the rules lay.
DMs altering the rules at the table, either overtly or trying to disguise it with DME twisting, is NOT the official process.
There's nothing wrong with ASKING a player not to use a particular power in a way you as a DM are uncomfortable with.
I personally would find it hard to believe that you'd run into more than a handful of stubborn players that, given a DM telling them to their face, "Please don't use this power like that, I find it abusive.", still go ahead and do it.
This is coming from an DM that has hundreds upon hundreds of convention games run over the past decade, RPGA and non-RPGA, and has seen a staggering variety of player types.
The few that do, oh well. I'll know who to avoid next time.
-karma
The standard of play is dead and gone. It died with LG. 18 months ago I would have completely agreed with you.
LFR is all about "fun". Sometimes to facilitate that fun certain things have to be moderated to give others a chance to shine. For every player who makes characters that appreciate being carried through the combats there is one that resents never being able to use his schtick because other PCs have invalidated him/her.
|
|
|
