Your money or your life?

[Akaiku]

By the rules:
Spot checks are for encounters or noticing something special about an object/creature.

Unless you are planning on fighting the moon: it shouldn't come up.

When a dragon is trying to follow someone for an encounter they must use spot checks or we are assuming DM fiat.

My houserule regarding the spot check on the moon is that that goddes of the moon casts faerie fire on said moon each night, then the god of the sun dispells it each morning. YMMV though.

 

[Maldor]

see below

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

How is it a permanent nerf? I can still get equipment and the other PCs can help me out. It may take time but now you've got me wondering about your interesting definition of permanent.

Gear is supposed to accumulate.

PC 1 has 50,000 gp worth of gear. They lose it all.

They're now 50,000 gp behind, forever, unless they get gear at a faster rate. How are the players supposed to know if their characters will get gear at a faster rate or not? Unless the DM starts showering them with loot, they'll always be behind, hence, a permanent nerf.

 

[Maldor]

Hmmm. Can you think of any possible explanation for that?

sure you said that the party had split up 2 guys in one party and i would guess 3 in the other you had the dragon attack the 2 guy party to weaken the full party by removing part of its power why did your dragon not attack the 3 guy party that wronged it and is already missing the power your attack is hoping to remove

In a minute? Really? My Sharn doesn't have any Elminsters running around. The PCs -- 12th level -- are among the 50 or so most powerful people in the city at this point.

you don't need high level if you have numbers 30 5d6 fireballs or 40 scorching rays (touch AC 8 or 9 )in a city of 200,000 with wands and magewright and wizards and warmage and sorcerer is more then realistic. and a minute get real a hair a drop of blood a speck of the dust left by disintegrate it going to take at least a 5 minutes to clean up the battle and fight alone with the talking would have take 10 rounds I bet plus the likely hood that the 40 foot dragon was spoted in the sky very likely

P.S. all that other stuff is really off topic as others have siad PC don't hand over their gear because its a loss and it's not fun DM should never doing any of the fallowing ever level loss, sundering, or take gear I would also aviod save or get
@#$%ed as these do not add to the fun of the game and no that doesn't mean you have to take it easy on them it just mean don't be a @$!hole becuase it not rat bastude it @$!hole both in game and out. damnit i got off topic again

 

[Spatula]

sure you said that the party had split up 2 guys in one party and i would guess 3 in the other you had the dragon attack the 2 guy party to weaken the full party by removing part of its power why did your dragon not attack the 3 guy party that wronged it and is already missing the power your attack is hoping to remove

you don't need high level if you have numbers 30 5d6 fireballs or 40 scorching rays (touch AC 8 or 9 )in a city of 200,000 with wands and magewright and wizards and warmage and sorcerer is more then realistic. and a minute get real a hair a drop of blood a speck of the dust left by disintegrate it going to take at least a 5 minutes to clean up the battle and fight alone with the talking would have take 10 rounds I bet plus the likely hood that the 40 foot dragon was spoted in the sky very likely

Your posts might actually be readable if you used punctuation.

Anyway, a huge white dragon has SR of at least 20, which is going to block most wand attacks against it.

 

[billd91]

Gear is supposed to accumulate.

PC 1 has 50,000 gp worth of gear. They lose it all.

They're now 50,000 gp behind, forever, unless they get gear at a faster rate. How are the players supposed to know if their characters will get gear at a faster rate or not? Unless the DM starts showering them with loot, they'll always be behind, hence, a permanent nerf.

Not really, the PC could have expected to have that amount of wealth come by his way by then based on XP generating encounters (though plenty of other income-generating ventures may have come by that way as well). What he's done with it is his business. He could have invested in in business concerns, a succession of healing services, several expendable resources like magic ammunition or potions.
In any event, it's a loss that can be easily spread over the rest of the party, particularly as more treasure comes in. Maybe it's not so bad to have PCs actually work at making cash sometimes or seeking out credit and loans to make up for losses they've suffered.
Permanent nerf? Hardly.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

By the rules:
Spot checks are for encounters or noticing something special about an object/creature. Unless you are planning on fighting the moon: it shouldn't come up.

Oddly (or not), you didn't actually quote the rules when stating them incorrectly, so let me. From the 3.5 SRD:

"The Spot skill is used primarily to detect characters or creatures who are hiding. Typically, your Spot check is opposed by the Hide check of the creature trying not to be seen. Sometimes a creature isn’t intentionally hiding but is still difficult to see, so a successful Spot check is necessary to notice it.

"[...] Spot is also used to detect someone in disguise, and to read lips when you can’t hear or understand what someone is saying.

"Spot checks may be called for to determine the distance at which an encounter begins. A penalty applies on such checks, depending on the distance between the two individuals or groups, and an additional penalty may apply if the character making the Spot check is distracted (not concentrating on being observant)."

In short, if you have been using Spot as you have been telling me I should be using Spot, you're using house rules. By 3.5 (and Pathfinder) rules, a Spot (Perception) check isn't required to see something that is out in the open, easy to see, and making no attempt to conceal itself.

This is what I was getting at with the "moons of Eberron" questions, but I guess hints sometimes aren't enough.

When a dragon is trying to follow someone for an encounter they must use spot checks or we are assuming DM fiat.

Even if your premise were true (it's not), there's nothing wrong with DM fiat. It's literally what keeps the game world moving.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

No, I think you're not understanding the situation.

What I did was have a dragon that had been stalking the characters show up when they were vulnerable. I did so in such a fashion that if they had run immediately, they probably could have escaped. They decided to fight, despite having fought the dragon before, with three other allies, and barely defeated it. The dragon of course defeated them this time with extreme ease. The dragon then offered the PCs a way to live that was consistent with its goals and personality. They declined, and the dragon killed them, then, again consistent with its goals and personality, the dragon made sure that they would not be likely to trouble it again.

You're blatently ignoring my point.

The problem isn't that you defeated the PCs. The problem is that you humiliated them and then tried to take away everything that they saw as "theirs." I understand that everything you did corrosponded with the NPC. What you're missing is, the PCs probably don't give two craps about that. They don't care that the NPC is just acting as it should. What they see is:

1) Enemy!
2) Oh god we can't even touch it, even with the city coming out and helping us!
3) Wait, what? Did you just treat me like a child?
4) Screw this. If I'm going down, I'm going down as a hero, not some four year old told to go to his room.

I'll ask again, since you chose not to answer: in order to remain consistent with your view of how things "should" have gone ...

Is the DM ever permitted to present an encounter the PCs are (nearly) certain to lose?

Yes

If so, must the DM conceal from the players that they're in a "nearly certain to lose" situation?

No

Is the DM ever permitted to have enemies behave with intelligence and efficiency matching that used by the PCs?

Yes

To judge from your responses, it certainly seems like you'd answer the first and third questions in the negative, and if so we'll have to agree to disagree.

(And FWIW, there is a difference between stating that I expected my group to learn a lesson and stating that I was trying to teach my group a lesson. Unsurprisingly, I said the former, and you somehow read the latter.)

You are, again, completely and purposefully ignoring my point. It has nothing to do with the PCs losing, and everything to do with the dragon sticking out it's fingers and tongue and going "Neener neener neener! I won, you lost, I won, you lost, you ca~an't beat me~" And then you, the DM, going "He's right, you know. You can't beat him."

You can defeat the party without insulting them.

Do you know why people hate DMPCs? Not because they exist outside of the rules, and not because they're annoying - lots of things exist outside of the rules, and are annoying. The hate for DMPCs is that they take the game away from the players. What you had your dragon do was essentially take the game away from the players. It's not that you presented them with a "you must lose" fight, it's that you presented them with a "You must lose, and I'm giving no signs that you'll ever be able to win or get your stuff back" fight. In the previous example of a player being captured by gnolls, they knew that the party was nearby, ready to come save them. You didn't give them that. You - and if it seems I'm hammering this hard, it's because I am - said "You lose, no matter what. Now give the dragon your items and go run away like a bunch of children. Feel bad. Hang your head."

 

[Jeff Wilder]

You're blatently ignoring my point.

No, I'm not.

The problem isn't that you defeated the PCs. The problem is that you humiliated them and then tried to take away everything that they saw as "theirs."

I'm pretty sure this is our disconnect. See, you're saying I defeated the PCs and made them feel humiliated. Whereas what actually happened is that the PCs encountered a situation that was all but hopeless, that ended up defeating them and (perhaps) making them feel humiliated.

You seem to see D&D as "DM vs. Player," which is why you talk about what "I" did and how the players feel about what "I" did, instead of about the situation in the game.

This may well be how my players feel about it, too. I'm trying to determine that from them. If it is, though, the situation is not going to be "this can never happen to your PCs," the situation is going to be "the players need to find a way to get over it and roleplay their characters."

It's interesting that you (and a few others) seem determined to frame the situation as "being beaten and humiliated," whereas I believe it to be, "being beaten yet given the chance to live." Again, I think this must go to what kind of game we experience and expect.

You can defeat the party without insulting them.

Again, I didn't insult them. The dragon did. Again, indicative of how we view roleplaying games, I guess.

And if your opinion is that the PCs should be immune to being insulted or even humiliated ... well, we have to agree to disagree, because I find that bizarre.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

So why did you start this thread in the first place? What I am getting out of this whole thread is that you don't seem interested in anyone's advice. You come across as having already made up your mind that you are right and your players are wrong.



Ken