|
4 years ago ::
Nov 06, 2009 - 12:06AM
#1
|
|
|
As a DM, I find the encounters in LFR too easy for the most part. The PCs in my games run from average to seriously min-maxed. I have some questions and concerns about DME, and I'm hoping for some feedback from the larger LFR community. I am an experienced DM looking for ways to make the encounters more challenging. I am not out to wipe parties or punish players for savvy character creation. If something is too hard, I am perfectly capable of dialing it back. My point here is to provide a challenge, so that the players really feel that their characters have survived an ordeal and earned their rewards. 1. In general, I give Threatening Reach to monsters that have reach. Tonight, after a slot zero of the WitR adventure, we were discussing this and one guy said he would report me for doing this at a con and that it was just too powerful an effect to give to monsters as DME. Now if I can add a level or add a monster, I don't see how adding a power here or there is out of hand. What do you think? 2. I often go over the monsters in LFR mods using the monster generation guides in the DMG and DMG2. This generally results in their defenses going up by one or two. Sometimes I spot clear errors in the monster stat blocks and this has taught me a lot about how monsters are put together. Is this a violation or just pushing the boundaries of DME? I inform players at the beginning of a session that I buff the monsters a bit to provide a more challenging experience. 3. Is it acceptable to switch out two normal creatures for an elite? For example, in Silver Lining there is an Orc Beastmaster with some bugs. The first time I ran the mod for six players with four bugs, per the guidelines and the PCs just slaughtered them. The second time, also with six players, I used two elite bugs instead of four normals. It was a much more satisfying encounter, in my opinion, where the monsters actually had a chance to demonstrate their powers and pose a little bit of a threat. 4. In reading over the RPGA rules, I didn't see anything about punishment for DMs who modify the adventures, but I did notice some rules that might make the pushy, overbearing rules lawyers uncomfortable. =) With a con coming up, should I be worried? Is an event organizer really going to get upset that I gave a monster threatening reach? If so, I think I might be done with LFR. Thanks for reading such a long post. To me, the whole point is to have fun and create a challenging, yet ultimately satisfying D&D experience. But with a know-it-all rules lawyer in my face saying he would report me for my DME style, I thought I should get some other opinions.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 06, 2009 - 2:31AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2005
|
Chris Tulach explained that you cannot change/add monster powers or replace monsters as part of DME, so nr 1 and 3 are not valid for DME. I would avoid using it at Cons. Nr 2: correcting monsters is fine. Try to feedback if you gind an error. we do make mistakes. Note though that the Monster Builder levels and de-levels monster differently than the rules we have used so far (as the builder also changes stats, defenses, and damage dice). I don't know if we are suppsoed to sue the budielr - I expect we won't as long as it is still in beta and therefor prone to change. Nr 4: depends on the con organizer, but you should realize that at a Con, not every player caters to your taste, and they are in their right to complain about changes you makewhen these are not legal. In general, I believe you will get in trouble only if players feel slighted, but it is hard to predict if or when that happens. Ia dvsie to not make changes to an adventure at a Con that are not withing DME rules. You can add monsters or up their levels, but even that should be done with some care. Not every group acts like yours. I have been in enough adventures where just the standard fight was tough on the party.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 06, 2009 - 4:18AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jul 16, 2002
|
The newest iteration of the CCG has information on what is allowed with DME. You can find it on the Events download page.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 06, 2009 - 6:52AM
#4
|
|
|
The newest iteration of the CCG has information on what is allowed with DME. You can find it on the Events download page.
Of course I have poured over every word of documentation already. I understand what is there, I'm just trying to understand what the wiggle room is. Can anyone provide a reference for the Chris Tulach ruling above? In this post he mod author specifically suggests adding powers if the combat is too easy: community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 06, 2009 - 7:03AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2003
|
My opinion is that as long as any changes you make enchance the fun the table has, go for it. The tricky bit, and this will require your experience as a DM, is to gauge whether a particular change will enchance the fun. If you are going to beef up monsters, I'd run it by the table. Play the first fight by the book, then mention 'gee, guys. I noticed you kinda walked over that encounter. I was thinking about giving you a bit more of a challenge in the next one. Would you prefer a challenge, or shall I just run it as written?' Many tables will be fine with you upping the challenge, as long as 1) they don't perceive changes to be 'unfair' and 2) you don't run over time as a result. Other tables will prefer to munch through the combats quickly and leave more room to explore the story, RP etc.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 06, 2009 - 7:10AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Sep 28, 2004
|
I would agree. I tend to ask my players before we start if they are ok with adjustments to what is written if it enhances the game experience for them. If it makes a challenge more fun or interesting great, if it makes it memorable excellent. While I don't typically look at things like TR as this was about, I have adjusted a power that allowed a reach attack that also knocked the target prone to be adapted to hit everyone adjacent. Using it against 2 dwarfs did only slight damage over normal but to see them pump fists because they saved from bing knocked prone and thought they "won" the round because of it can be a great way to get people involved when they are simply sitting waiting for their turn again.
My opinion is that as long as any changes you make enchance the fun the table has, go for it.
The tricky bit, and this will require your experience as a DM, is to gauge whether a particular change will enchance the fun.
If you are going to beef up monsters, I'd run it by the table. Play the first fight by the book, then mention 'gee, guys. I noticed you kinda walked over that encounter. I was thinking about giving you a bit more of a challenge in the next one. Would you prefer a challenge, or shall I just run it as written?'
Many tables will be fine with you upping the challenge, as long as 1) they don't perceive changes to be 'unfair' and 2) you don't run over time as a result. Other tables will prefer to munch through the combats quickly and leave more room to explore the story, RP etc.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate.
"Abandon all hope ye who enter here."
A child of 5 could understand this, someone bring me a child of 5.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 06, 2009 - 7:32AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
To me, the whole point is to have fun and create a challenging, yet ultimately satisfying D&D experience. But with a know-it-all rules lawyer in my face saying he would report me for my DME style, I thought I should get some other opinions.
Your post had what I'd see as a few warning flags, though obviously I do not know enough about you or your gaming group to really say who's in the right here.
"What are the limits to how much I can change an adventure against the players' will without them being able to raise a legitimate complaint?" is almost always going to be the wrong question.
If players are having less fun because of your changes, then you're missing the point. If you will not enjoy DMing without making such changes, you might be better off not DMing.
As far as your changes go:
* In a public play environment, an adventure should be an appropriate challenge within the time constraints. If increasing the challenge causes an adventure to be unplayable in a four-hour time slot without rushing through the non-combat portions, your changes were not appropriate.
* The combats are play-tested with the creature statistics as given. You should only change a creature's statistics if you believe that doing so will have a beneficial result, not to conform to the rule-of-thumb guidelines for monster generation.
* Threatening reach is a big deal. There is a reason why most creatures that have reach do not have threatening reach.
I have always felt that DME was unnecessary--players empower DMs they trust. LFR certainly isn't the first campaign where DMs show up at a table and say, "Hey, I'm going to change things in the module to make it more fun." It is, however, the first campaign where players don't have the option to say, "Er, I'd really rather you not." I am of the belief that players should always have the right to ask for an adventure to be ran as written (though, conversely, DMs always have the right to decide they're not interested in running for a particular group).
DME is there to allow you to deal with the unusual, with corner cases the adventure author couldn't have predicted and to allow you to customize an adventure for the group. The default assumption should be that you pick up and run the module without changes. If you are making meaningful changes to most adventures you run, then you're going beyond what most people will reasonably expect out of convention play, and you would be better off finding a group of friends who enjoy your DMing style rather than imposing it on strangers showing up to play standard LFR adventures.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 06, 2009 - 8:04AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2008
|
I have always felt that DME was unnecessary--players empower DMs they trust. LFR certainly isn't the first campaign where DMs show up at a table and say, "Hey, I'm going to change things in the module to make it more fun." It is, however, the first campaign where players don't have the option to say, "Er, I'd really rather you not." I am of the belief that players should always have the right to ask for an adventure to be ran as written (though, conversely, DMs always have the right to decide they're not interested in running for a particular group).
Well previous campaigns also didn't have an explicit "means" for players to tell GMs that they didn't like what they were doing but I'm sure it happened. I think that in the same way, players are still "empowered" to seek their own enjoyment and to give feedback to the GMs and to con/gameday organizers. That includes saying, "please run the adventure as written.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 06, 2009 - 8:28AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2005
|
Can anyone provide a reference for the Chris Tulach ruling above?
In the CCG ver 1.9: What can be done: The DM can make slight modifications to an encounter to make it the right challenge for the group. Examples include adding another monster of the same type as one existing in an encounter (such as adding a 4th gobli sharpshooter to an encounter that normally has 3), removing a monster from an encounter, adjusting the level of a monster by +/- 1 level (and thereby adjusting hit points, defenses, and attacks), or changing the tactics present for a monster to something more/less optimal than listed.
What cannot be done: The DM cannot add monsters or NPCs to encounters that are not present in the adventure. The DM must use the monsters present in the adventure. For example, if an encounter includes an adult green dragon, the DM cannot change the dragon to an adult white dragon or an elder green dragon.
Adding powers changes the monster to a different monster, so is not legal. I woudl avoid it at cons where you don't know the players. Gomez
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 06, 2009 - 9:25AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Sep 28, 2004
|
You should also remember that at Cons it can be a much bigger issue. People pay to play many times, also it is possible some players have played or GM'ed the module before. While they should tell you (and it could be a problem if they did not) they could be expecting something specific and might be more likely to complain than a home game where you know your people and what they expect from you. I would stear clear of changing monsters/powers outright. Tactics can get interesting and it is many times hard to keep with the tactics but it is a way things can play out significantly differently than a playtest.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate.
"Abandon all hope ye who enter here."
A child of 5 could understand this, someone bring me a child of 5.
|
|
|
