Community

AriaSilverhands wrote:

[...]with the illusion of the players being in control of their fate.

How is that different to "using DM fiat to steal player's ability to sucess?

My players never know when I break the rules on their behalf. All they know is that they're having fun.

I have a DM like you (i call them "Mom DM"). *Sometimes* you dont know *when* he breaks the rules, but you know that he *does*. So basically, whenever the Monster makes a saving throw, you have the *Suspicion* that he cheated.

It is the DM's responsibility to insure that the game be fun for everyone, including the DM themselves.

Me too, but i dont need a screen for that. Actually, i remember a player saying me that my games were funnier than the "mom DM" games becouse in my game, they feel what they do matters. In the other game, it does not.

Rule Zero. If the PC's are killing the big bad evil guy too quickly... give them more hitpoints.

If the BBEG is supposed to last 10 rounds, there is absolutelly no point in casting "finger of death" before the 11th round with a Dm like that. Zero chances to success. That is bad DMing (railroading in the worst sense of the word) in my opinion, and make the players mere spectators.

I find it ironic that the exalted confirmation roll of 3e for Crits is reverting to its roots from 1st and 2nd Ed and becoming a natural 20 always is a crit.

As for it always being a max damage roll, well, with all the new abilities classes are supposedly getting, it makes sense. Remember, from what we've been told, even a 1st lvl fighter will be doing more than 1d8+str with his longsword.

Arius wrote:

Come on Aria are you for real? EVERYBODY knows that DMs fudge rolls behind the screen, except all but greenest of newbs.

They may not know whether a particular roll was fudged or not, but they know it happens from time to time. When they succeed at a seemingly impossible task, and you hear them say "wow we got lucky", or "that was a really great plan" or "maybe the DM was just being nice" that deflates their own sense of accomplishment. Yeah it might have been luck or skill, or maybe it was just a kind DM cheating on behalf of his/her players.

I have never had any player suggest I cheated on their behalf.

Is it still called power gaming when the DM does it?

No, that's called good dm'ing. Ask any of my players from recent games. Well, not my most recent one... the flesh abomination took a little longer than I thought it would, but that was bad rolls by PC's over and over and over and over.

Besides, get used to boss npc's having that many hit points at low levels. They're meant to be a challenge for a party of four. A lvl 2 kobold with 16 hp is by no means a challenge to a party of four lvl 2's. Hence the increased hp and interesting special abilities and attacks.

triqui]How is that different to "using DM fiat to steal player's ability to sucess?

Because if you're good and maintain the illusion... the players will never know you cheated on their behalf.

How is that different to "using DM fiat to steal player's ability to sucess?[/quote]
Because if you're good and maintain the illusion... the players will never know you cheated on their behalf.

I have a DM like you (i call them "Mom DM"). *Sometimes* you dont know *when* he breaks the rules, but you know that he *does*. So basically, whenever the Monster makes a saving throw, you have the *Suspicion* that he cheated.

::shrugs:: That DM lost his player's trust.

Me too, but i dont need a screen for that. Actually, i remember a player saying me that my games were funnier than the "mom DM" games becouse in my game, they feel what they do matters. In the other game, it does not.

The player's decisions matter in my games too. Only I don't leave things to chance as much as others do as a DM. This is mostly in regards to fudging attack rolls, damage and saving throws. I'm not going to punish the player simply because they rolled low a half-dozen times while my dice roll 20's seven times in a row. That's just bad dm'ing.

If the BBEG is supposed to last 10 rounds, there is absolutelly no point in casting "finger of death" before the 11th round with a Dm like that. Zero chances to success. That is bad DMing (railroading in the worst sense of the word) in my opinion, and make the players mere spectators.

Hardly. Besides, save or die spells are going away. It's not about making the BBEG die at a specific number of rounds. It's about making the combat climactic, rather than... *SURPRISE ROUND* PC casts Finger of Death. BBEG dies. The other players yawn.

triqui wrote:

They never know *when* you cheated. But they know that, if you roll behind a screen, you fudge sometimes. That is the only reason to roll behind the screen for that matter, other than when you have to roll a secret roll (for example i roll secretly search rolls, so the player dont know if they didnt find anything becouse there is not anything, or becouse they rolled low). If you were not going to fudge a roll or two when attacking, you would roll the attack without a screen

That's true. But a couple of power attack crits with a 2 handed axe have the same effect (in 3e at least). It is pointless to powerattack in that kind of games. If i happen to do 100hp in two rounds to your lvl 2 kobold for some reason, then he just will have 200. So it is pointless to do more damage than the DM thinks its needed for the combat length to be "fun".

1d12+6(Str)+4(powerattack) at 2nd lvl. So that greataxe can do 3d12+30, 33 to 66. Those kind of crits don't happen everyday.

I agree with that part. However, i think the solution is not fudge the rolls, or cheat the hit points. It's avoiding the randomness of the game. It seems we both agree that high randomness make boring encounters. So i do not understand why you are against max damage steadier crits instead of double-triple damage spikier tricks. "surprise round->PC charge with power attack and gets a warpick crit and do 100+ damage and kills the bbeg" will also make the other players yawn, wouldnt it?

Because it's still exciting for players to get those big arse crits. The boss npc's are going to have tons of hp to soak up those crits for precisely that reason. 4th edition BOSS foes will have hundreds and thousands of hit points. Those big crits would have been interesting. Now it's just a steady spike in damage.

AriaSilverhands wrote:

1d12+6(Str)+4(powerattack) at 2nd lvl. So that greataxe can do 3d12+30, 33 to 66. Those kind of crits don't happen everyday.

At level 2 the wizard cant cast finger of death, and at lvl 15 the fighter would do way more than 66 damage

Besides that, level 2 human barbarian with 18 str, rage, power attack, warpick= 4d8+52. From 56 to 84 . At the level the wizard can cast Finger of Death, that might be a warpick +3, he can have +3 to STR from level advancement, and another +6 to str from magic items, +6 from rage, plus 13 BAB to pump into power attack. Maximum of 4d8+164, or 196 damage with no prestige class or feat beyond player handbook I.

Because it's still exciting for players to get those big arse crits. The boss npc's are going to have tons of hp to soak up those crits for precisely that reason.

Even with a Hp boost, you will still need to "pump your boss hp if they kill him too quickly" A couple of 100+ crits in a lucky turn will cut your BBEG in half. So you still will be needing to rulezero your ruleset constantly, instead of addresing the ruleset problem.

Having a rule that is good only when you ignore it is having a bad rule. This rule only works becouse your players have a "DM shielding versus rules". Those big arse crits *might* be fun in your 100hp lvel 2 kobold. But will kill your lvl2 elf rogue. The only reason spicky crit "work" and "are fun" in your games ruleset is becouse you dont follow the ruleset.