The best laid plans of mice and DMs

[Steverooo]

...since his brother has had a few hundred years to hone his skills, he be a half-vampire half-drow half-fiend lich archmage (wouldn't want to disappoint the people posting on all the 'do you use templates, you non-purist scum' threads, would we?)

Nope, that's at least one half too many! If your templated NPC only had TWO halves, for a change... say a Half-Drow/Half-Fiend Archmage cum Vampire cum lich, that I could suspend disbelief in. It's these 3/2s-and-a-multiply-templated-NPCs that get me...

Back on topic, "PCs always run the wrong way!"

 

[robberbaron]

It is funny how players always throw curve balls at the most inopportune moments.

I threw a rather cool ancient Elf Vampire at my players. He had powerful defences against the normal stuff that harms Vamps so I thought he'd give them some lumps then bug out to taunt them some more later.

The major MU in the party sees him in the shadows, flies over, grapples him then Teleports (using an item) a couple of hundred miles straight up to where the sun is shining and holds my Vamp there until he's dry (Necklace of Adaptation).

I don't really mind this sort of thing happening 'cos it means the party are thinking about what is going on rather than just rolling some more dice.
And, once in a while the best laid plans of mice actually come off and it feels good. Swings and roundabouts.


To put my tuppenceworth in, I agree, in principle, that the dice should determine the outcome. If a PC does something incredibly stupid, I think it is OK to let him take the full consequences.
If he simply rolls 1 after 1 (I've seen 7 out of 8 including 5 in a row by one player) then that is just karma. I've had BBGs taken down by not being able to roll high enough to fight back successfully and, though I don't always like it, I owe it to my players to play by the same basic rules as them.

That doesn't mean that, if I realise an enemy is significantly more powerful than I had intended, I won't amend his powers slightly, to give a better balanced game.
My intent is always to challenge the players, and threaten them with death, but never put them in situations from which they can't escape with a little thought.

 

[Madfox]

Which shows that it is better not to plan on reoccuring villains, but to let events in the campaign dictate it. The unexpacted villains tend to be the best remembered as well. In my current campaign I have a long list to pick from - without fudging I have a very good idea of when a creature needs to flee before it is too late. This means that intelligent foes like highly intelligent aranea sorcerers and mindflayers flee on time.

 

[Old One]

Never discount the ability of players to throw a sabot into the best DM plots. It's what makes me play.

Sabot...good usage...

But is it APFSDUCDS?

~ Old One

 

[shilsen]

Nope, that's at least one half too many! If your templated NPC only had TWO halves, for a change... say a Half-Drow/Half-Fiend Archmage cum Vampire cum lich, that I could suspend disbelief in. It's these 3/2s-and-a-multiply-templated-NPCs that get me...

Back on topic, "PCs always run the wrong way!"

I was being facetious, hence the smiley.

I typically use few templates myself (my group met one templated creature in 6 levels of gaming). It's much more fun to beat the PCs down with a one-legged kobold gardener with skill focus (hedgerows), IMO.

 

[RangerWickett]

See, I come from a different camp than many of you, apparently. You play "kill the stat-monster," and I play, "show your heroism." They're very similar, but the distinctions are quite clear.

In KtSM, everything has statistics predefined, and when those statistics show that something is dead, it's dead. This is why we have things like the Challenge Rating system, so we know when our monster is suitably dangerous for the party. But of course, we all know the CR system is quite often flawed in the face of bad measurement, or merely bad rolling.

In SYH, the point of the game is not to win against the badguy; it's to be heroic in the face of overwhelming odds, ultimately (usually) winning against the badguy. A game of SYH in which the badguy is not sufficiently dangerous is a poor game, so it is the DM's duty to leave the statistics a little ambiguous, and finagle with things in minor ways to ensure there's not a complete breakdown of the heroic action.

Now, of course, in either game, you'll get elements of the other. An SYH DM can't just make stuff up off the top of his head all the time, or else the players will stop caring how hard they try; if they can always win, then they're not as driven to come up with ridiculous ways to win. On the other hand, no one is benefited if the climax of a three hour session takes only one minute. Good craftsmanship helps make pleasing endings easier, but when things go disastrously wrong, the DM should step in and convincingly make the encounter keep going. If the players don't believe it, the DM's magic has failed. They should never know you had to add an extra 5 points of damage reduction so the villain could start to make the players think they were in over their heads. They also should never know that the reinforcements coming in from their allies was a spur of the moment decision to make sure they don't die.

You never cheat just to dick over your players, dude. You can't cheat. You're the DM. You just . . . fix your own mistakes in the middle of the game. I mean, if you'd given the villain an extra level or two when you were designing him, then things would have worked out just fine. All the players care about is having fun and being cool, so if you made a mistake when planning your session, it is, again, your duty to set it right without ruining their fun.

 

[KarinsDad]

They also should never know that the reinforcements coming in from their allies was a spur of the moment decision to make sure they don't die.

Never happen in my game unless the reinforcements were previously scheduled to arrive. My players would always see that coming.

Two of my players are too smart for this stuff. I have only done a DM caveat once in the current campaign (sending wyverns after the PC horses when 2 PCs were many miles in front of the rest of the PCs so that all of the PCs would arrive at a given keep at approximately the same time).

One player said something to the effect: "Too bad you lost your horse." whereas the other player who lost his horse said "DM prerogative: he had to get us all back together again".

Don't underestimate your players. Some of them can probably read you like a book. It's usually just better to let the encounter play out like it was meant to without DM finagling to "improve it".

 

[Storminator]

Nope, that's at least one half too many! If your templated NPC only had TWO halves, for a change... say a Half-Drow/Half-Fiend Archmage cum Vampire cum lich, that I could suspend disbelief in. It's these 3/2s-and-a-multiply-templated-NPCs that get me...

Back on topic, "PCs always run the wrong way!"

What if the villian has the feat Extra Half?

PS

 

[barsoomcore]

RW -- we share that much philosophy, that's for sure.

KD -- nice that your players are so much smarter than everyone else's.

The DM's job is to make sure everyone has fun. Whatever it takes to make the game more fun, that's what I do. My players trust me to give them an entertaining session and to refrain from either railroading or unfairly burninating them. Beyond that, they have bigger things to care about than how "fair" everything is.

We have heaps of fun. It's got nothing to do with some perceived "sanctity of the dice". Fudge or don't as you prefer. One way isn't better than the other -- all that matters is the end result: fun.

 

[Mortanis]

The DM's job is to make sure everyone has fun. Whatever it takes to make the game more fun, that's what I do. My players trust me to give them an entertaining session and to refrain from either railroading or unfairly burninating them. Beyond that, they have bigger things to care about than how "fair" everything is.

We have heaps of fun. It's got nothing to do with some perceived "sanctity of the dice". Fudge or don't as you prefer. One way isn't better than the other -- all that matters is the end result: fun.

My thoughts exactly. My job is to make sure fun and entertainment is had by all. How I get there may be different than everyone else, but everyone else isn't my goal - my players are.



On the line being surprised by player actions: last night my players arrived at a small dwarven settlement on the edge of a mountain pass. Looking for entertainment, one party member promptly started a massive bar fight, lit the barroom on fire, and laughed as the inn went up in flames. At the end of the session, while packing up, he stared at me and said, "Hah! I bet you never saw THAT coming. Me burning down the inn!" I paused for a second, returned his smile, and stated "Why do you think the building was made of stone? So you couldn't burn it entirely down. I know how you work." That surprised him. In fact I'd never expected that to happen, but why should I let the players know they get me off balance.