D&D 5E Gaming session lessons: why moving slow is important all the time, and the kid learns kiting

[iserith]

No, that would be the opposite of fair since you're skewing the benefit in favor of one group over another (PCs vs everything else), and not treating all inhabitants the same---ergo, unfairly. Threats, along with everything else, should be telegraphed as they would normally be, and detected with a success based on the PC's abilities. That's it. Anything else is coddling the players.

I disagree. It looks like you are confusing what it means to be fair and what it means to be impartial. Sometimes these things can be used interchangeably, so it's an easy mistake to make.

You're obligated to create a fair game for your players - friends and relatives sitting at your table with the goal of having fun. You are not obligated to be fair to monsters and NPCs that do not exist. You are obligated to apply the rules impartially so long as you're achieving the goals of play. But I'm not talking about applying rules. I'm talking about presenting situations in which the players have a fair chance of making meaningful decisions to turn things in their favor. Sometimes they will. Sometimes they won't. This isn't about "coddling" at all.

You seem to be applying the rules impartially. But was the situation you created fair? By my standards, it is not. It relied upon the players reading your metagame tells to determine whether they should slow up their pace or to actively state they were looking around when this is something that is already assumed under passive Perception (passive checks representing the average result of tasks performed repeatedly). Now, you and yours may consider this a fair and standard practice. I'm saying that I do not, for whatever that's worth, and some other people agree with me. There is no right or wrong in a matter of preference.

 

[Sacrosanct]

But was the situation you created fair? By my standards, it is not. It relied upon the players reading your metagame tells to determine whether they should slow up their pace or to actively state they were looking around when this is something that is already assumed under passive Perception (passive checks representing the average result of tasks performed repeatedly)..

No it doesn't. It relies upon the players to listen to the advice they were given in game, and to not walk out into an alien hostile environment like it was a trip to the candy store. I keep getting this feeling from you that you're implying I am unfair or I wasn't thinking of their fun. I strongly disagree with such assumptions. FWIW, my players had a blast, as they always do. Maybe you like to coddle players and make sure that there's no way they could ever put themselves in a bad situation. Good on you. But do not for one second imply that I am unfair because I don't. I really don't know what else I could have done without just giving them a free get out of jail card.

* they were warned by the mayor
* they were heading out into a hostile alien environment
* the creatures acted like they normally do, with plenty of real life example of similar creatures that shows that they don't have a billboard advertising their location
* any possible signs that would give a clue to the PCs was handled by a passive perception rule.
* the players reaffirmed that they were moving in a normal pace and style, without any extra diligence to their surroundings.

And I'm the unfair one? Ok. Sounds to me if I were one of your players, I wouldn't bother being cautious or spend time planning or thinking things out, because I know you'd always give me an out. You know, to be fair...

 

[Psikerlord#]

Last night we played a session of my Felk Mor megadungeon for a few hours, and the group learned two valuable lessons:

1: Part of the campaign is a vast subterranean cavern. I'm talking big. Miles wide by miles long. It's pretty much it's own habitat, with mushroom forests, rivers of quicksilver, etc. The party needed to travel from one side to the other, and headed out. At regular pace. Like it was a normal stroll. What happened? They got surprised by two ankhegs, and in short order, the paladin was dropped and the sorcerer was at only a few HP remaining (they were a group of 4e level 5 PCs).

Lesson learned: Move slowly, and pay attention to your surroundings when in a hostile area, so you can make an actual perception check instead of relying on passive perception. Especially when the DM asks you more than once how you're moving

2: Upon approaching and being welcomed into an orc encampment (the PC was 1/2 orc), the rogue parlayed with the orc chieftain for a while, and eventually a duel to prove the rogue's worth was imminent. He had to fight one of the elite orc guards. It was only subdual damage, and not to the death. I was thinking, "Man, the rogue is going to get pasted. It's not set to his advantage, since it's a straight arena fight and he can't take advantage of his stealth. The elite orc guard had chain mail and 2 great ax attacks, and had 40 hp. Against a level 5 rogue in an arena? Not good. So what did the player do? Threw out caltrops and basically kited the orc to death. Between cunning action, taunting the orc, and ranged attacks with the elite orc being reduced in movement, it took a long time, but I (as the elite orc) could never quite get close enough.

Point of context: The player is my 13 year old son who hasn't played a single MMO or video game where something like kiting would even be something he would have done. It was a new concept for him and he figured it out quickly. The first time when I just moved around the caltrops, he immediately went into taunt mode, causing the orc to rage and forget they were there on the next pass.

Lesson learned: thinking outside of the box will often save your bacon (ha! pun. orc = pig. pig = bacon. get it?

As for 1, I dont use passive perception, and that is one example of why not.

As for 2... why didnt the orc have a ranged weapon? Or pick up a rock? Or his orc mate throw him some knives to toss? Just getting kited to death by virtue of cunning action feels.... highly unrealistic to me. Dont orcs have a special charge action too? I cant remember.

Anyways, this "duel" demonstrates one thing I very much dislike about the cunning action ability - the "gamey" ability to kite a melee only foe. But it's there, so.... yeah your player did well in the circumstances.

 

[iserith]

No it doesn't. It relies upon the players to listen to the advice they were given in game, and to not walk out into an alien hostile environment like it was a trip to the candy store. I keep getting this feeling from you that you're implying I am unfair or I wasn't thinking of their fun. I strongly disagree with such assumptions. FWIW, my players had a blast, as they always do. Maybe you like to coddle players and make sure that there's no way they could ever put themselves in a bad situation. Good on you. But do not for one second imply that I am unfair because I don't. I really don't know what else I could have done without just giving them a free get out of jail card.

You appear to be making assumptions about assumptions I'm not actually making and then making assumptions about how I handle my game. What I am stating is consistent and clear: What you did is not fair by my standards. That doesn't make you "unfair." I understand what you do is fair by the standards of your table.

* they were warned by the mayor
* they were heading out into a hostile alien environment
* the creatures acted like they normally do, with plenty of real life example of similar creatures that shows that they don't have a billboard advertising their location
* any possible signs that would give a clue to the PCs was handled by a passive perception rule.
* the players reaffirmed that they were moving in a normal pace and style, without any extra diligence to their surroundings.

...and then they were surprised by ankhegs. To make it a fair situation by my standards, I would have telegraphed the ankhegs specifically. That doesn't mean the outcome would have been different. The characters might still have ended up surprised. It just creates an opportunity for the situation not to be perceived as a "gotcha," and invites the players to have their characters engage with the exploration pillar of the game.

And I'm the unfair one? Ok.

No. I address this above.

Sounds to me if I were one of your players, I wouldn't bother being cautious or spend time planning or thinking things out, because I know you'd always give me an out. You know, to be fair...

You'd go through an awful lot of characters that way. Just because I present fair situations doesn't mean you'll always win. The more player skill you have, the better your chances though. You don't make it very far in my games without being skillful and that goes beyond the numbers on your character sheet (though those do help, as they should).

 

[LostSoul]

At some point the players need to be accountable for their decisions. As the DM, I'm the referee to keep things fair. I am not favoring the PCs and/or making up for their poor choices.

For me the question is "What decision did they make here?" It seems to me that they made the decision to travel at a normal pace. In the context of a dungeon or very dangerous wilderness (or urban, I guess) environment that is a meaningful decision. If it's not a dangerous wilderness environment - or if it is but the players have no way of knowing* - then I wouldn't think it's a meaningful decision. It sounds like this was a dangerous - or at least unknown - environment. I'd say that it was a meaningful decision to travel at a normal pace, especially if the ankheg encounter was a "wandering monster" because that creates time pressure.

In a typical wilderness environment I'd just roll the encounter distance and have the PCs spot furrowed ground and strange patterns of uneaten grasses (because the ankheg eats the things that eat the grass). If they checked it out I'd give them a chance to spot the hidden Ankheg. If the Ankheg desires to attack them based on its reaction roll I'd have it make a check to sneak up on them underground.

* - Though if your game has sages or a large amount of information provided by rumour, and this is an expected style of play, that's another way of providing information to the players.

3.) It would be AWESOME if the MM had info on hunting behavior, organization, signs that this creature is in the vicinity (e.g. Carrion Crawlers leave goo puddles that glow orange in the dark) so you didn't have to make up ankheg spoor on the fly.

This is a good idea.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

WH2e had the best MM ever since it was loaded with a lot of stuff like that.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

...and then they were surprised by ankhegs. To make it a fair situation by my standards, I would have telegraphed the ankhegs specifically. That doesn't mean the outcome would have been different. The characters might still have ended up surprised. It just creates an opportunity for the situation not to be perceived as a "gotcha," and invites the players to have their characters engage with the exploration pillar of the game.

For me, the telegraphs sound too much like being clubbed over the head with a giant neon sign reading "Ankheg!" for my tastes if they are automatically announced. To me, the more ideal would be to have perception, investigation, nature checks for noticing clues (since they shouldn't necessarily be automatic), and the players piece them together.

However this is coming from someone who generally dislikes the exploration pillar (I love social, problem solving and combat). As a player or DM its really just doesn't interest me to pixel bitch through ankheg poo and soil sample PH levels to avoid the whole one surprise round of combat. Puzzles/fun traps are another thing, but when it comes to a lurking monser, I'm lazy on this (and poor at it as a DM), and normally don't care that much as a player, so am fine with letting the dice largely sort it out.

 

[Sunseeker]

For me, the telegraphs sound too much like being clubbed over the head with a giant neon sign reading "Ankheg!" for my tastes if they are automatically announced. To me, the more ideal would be to have perception, investigation, nature checks for noticing clues (since they shouldn't necessarily be automatic), and the players piece them together.

I'm not saying they shouldn't have to do those things. I'm just saying that there might be things they notice without special checks. Perhaps a player unwittingly falls though some loose earth into an abandoned burrow. Perhaps such a burrow is noticed some ways off, add perception checks to notice this. My 4e monster manual is not on hand, but my 5th says that Ankhegs often attack farms. Perhaps an abandoned farm could be found nearby (which could mean a lot of things) and investigating the farm increases the risk of attack, but also increases the potential knowledge reward of the players.

However this is coming from someone who generally dislikes the exploration pillar (I love social, problem solving and combat). As a player or DM its really just doesn't interest me to pixel bitch through ankheg poo and soil sample PH levels to avoid the whole one surprise round of combat. Puzzles/fun traps are another thing, but when it comes to a lurking monser, I'm lazy on this (and poor at it as a DM), and normally don't care that much as a player, so am fine with letting the dice largely sort it out.

I don't know how much they were downgraded from 4th to 5th, I don't much like to run bugs in my game, I don't like bugs, but anhkegs are a CR2 in 5th edition, I'm surprised that 2 of them could almost wipe a 5th-level party even with a surprise round.

 

[iserith]

For me, the telegraphs sound too much like being clubbed over the head with a giant neon sign reading "Ankheg!" for my tastes if they are automatically announced. To me, the more ideal would be to have perception, investigation, nature checks for noticing clues (since they shouldn't necessarily be automatic), and the players piece them together.

Have you been playing long enough to know the telltale signs of an ankheg lurking about? If so, good! You're applying your hard-won player skill to the situation and that's just fine by me. No rolls are necessary in this case. You can simply act on the knowledge, justifying why your character would know such things as you see fit. (Of course, it's smart play to verify one's assumptions with in-game actions e.g. "I examine the molted chitin, examining its shape and recalling lore on molting beasts..." which may trigger an Intelligence (Nature) check if the DM thinks your action has an uncertain outcome.)

I don't ask for checks unless the players describe what they are doing and I find that the outcome of what they are doing is uncertain. Without context to look around, they can't take actions that might trigger those Investigation, Nature, or Perception checks. That's part of why I'm telegraphing - to paint a picture of the scene (as someone said upthread) and provide the context for meaningful exploration where players can take actions, make decisions, and sometimes roll dice.

However this is coming from someone who generally dislikes the exploration pillar (I love social, problem solving and combat). As a player or DM its really just doesn't interest me to pixel bitch through ankheg poo and soil sample PH levels to avoid the whole one surprise round of combat. Puzzles/fun traps are another thing, but when it comes to a lurking monser, I'm lazy on this (and poor at it as a DM), and normally don't care that much as a player, so am fine with letting the dice largely sort it out.

Notably, nobody is talking about pixel bitching which is a term that describes a DM applying this approach in a dysfunctional way.

 

[transtemporal]

So no fictional warnings like collapsed earthen tunnels, discarded molted chitin, a partially devoured cavern beast in a pool of acrid bile, or disconcerting tremors under the ground

This. Things like giant webs, monstrous carcasses, footprints, spoor, ranger signs that say "danger" telegraph danger.

If you ask "Are you really sure you want to do that?" after they answer, thats also a good hint. But simply asking is too subtle.