D&D General Playing to "Win" - The DM's Dilemma

[Thomas Shey]

Because if the DM regularly does even basic things like focus fire PCs. Not pull punches. Etc. These are things the PCs have no or very limited defense against. Some of them will die and since they have no in game recourse to prevent it then the loss will feel and be unfair.

The problem is "focus fire" is actually a particular standout in terms tactics without much answer. Most others involve positioning, and PCs in almost any game absolutely have some options there.

(As an aside, while there's always some benefits to focus fire in the "put down one opponent then move on to the next" sense, its only really strong in games where any takedown is dependent on accumulated damage (and yes, I do note where this thread is, just bear with me), but in games where there's strong thresholding effects (i.e. where getting a good roll can kill or disable an opponent even if they haven't be previously hurt) its less clear that's the ideal tactic.)

 

[payn]

Well, honestly, my solution is not to use a game system that makes that particularly easy. There's a reason I bailed out on D&D3e about the time we hit 14th level; I didn't find alpha striking an at all interesting game play cycle.

Well my point is one of preferences. I actually didnt mind the "rocket tag" of 3E becasue it made combats very decisive and quick. 4E took way too much time to resolve. So, system can facilitate that preference, however, I think its been pointed out in this thread that system is irrelevant becasue you can always make rocks fall and PCs die. So, the matter is more of philosophical interest than system logistical mechanics.

 

[Charlaquin]

Maybe we can talk about an example and folks can use it to illustrate how they prefer to do things. I will use a real world actual play one.

In a dungeon, two PCs wandered off on their own to scout while the others short rested (I know, I know, but they wanted to). They ended up encountering a hungry grick, which attacked. By some luck, the thing dropped one PC to 0. I decided to have the grick grab the PC and retreat to its lair to eat the PC, becuase it was a hungry predator. The other player ran and the captured PC was devoured.

Would you have done it differently?

Sounds like exactly what I would have done.

 

[KYRON45]

The player was quite cross.

The players are the real monsters!!!

 

[Thomas Shey]

They could move behind cover? Maybe shoot back?

Sometimes cover is limited, and there's always simply the question of initiative if numbers are too large. I see this running 13th Age, where a really large number of ranged attacks mooks can put down a PC potentially before they have an ability to, well, do anything.

To use an OD&D example, if you were dealing with third level characters you'd likely have PC hit point totals ranging from 7 to maybe 15 (outliers may be a bit beyond in either direction, but probably not much). You've got six PCs travelling outdoors. They come around the curve of a hill, and there's a dozen goblins (not theoretically an unreasonable encounter given the numbers). A couple of the PCs act first, and since there's some distance, pull out bows or the like and let fly. They put down one goblin. Now the goblins act and the remaining 11 fire at one opponent.

It just doesn't take much bad luck for those D6 arrows to put them down Even that 15 hit point fighting-man probably goes down if he collects five of those arrows. And he may not have had time to do much of anything.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yes, I absolutely play the monsters to win.

Think about it. It's at least 3 to 1 in terms of people thinking about strategy, and the DM needs to think for multiple monsters, whereas the players (typically) only run one.

And mechanically, the odds in favor of the players to begin with..

Yeah, but the GM also often has more information about the situation than the PCs; unless he's good at firewalling, he knows the PCs capabilities better than they (automatically) know the monsters.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Well my point is one of preferences. I actually didnt mind the "rocket tag" of 3E becasue it made combats very decisive and quick. 4E took way too much time to resolve. So, system can facilitate that preference, however, I think its been pointed out in this thread that system is irrelevant becasue you can always make rocks fall and PCs die. So, the matter is more of philosophical interest than system logistical mechanics.

I think, however, there's a big difference between "I've baked a cake to kill the PCs" and "I've put out what seems a reasonable encounter and just using the tools at hand I'll likely kill some PCs if I get to use tactics at all." That's why I never appreciated the rocket-tag all-or-nothing; there's no time to adjust to the situation.

 

[TwoSix]

Because if the DM regularly does even basic things like focus fire PCs. Not pull punches. Etc. These are things the PCs have no or very limited defense against. Some of them will die and since they have no in game recourse to prevent it then the loss will feel and be unfair.

By focus fire, do you mean multiple enemies all picking a single target and attacking only that target until the target is out of death saves?

 

[payn]

I think, however, there's a big difference between "I've baked a cake to kill the PCs" and "I've put out what seems a reasonable encounter and just using the tools at hand I'll likely kill some PCs if I get to use tactics at all." That's why I never appreciated the rocket-tag all-or-nothing; there's no time to adjust to the situation.

Thats because the adjustment time happened before the the rockets were lit.

 

[DragonLancer]

I will use monsters and combative NPC's according to their personalities and goals. However, in the middle of a fight I am unlikely to have an opponent strike down a unconscious PC without reason. Better to do that once the combat is over. It's intelligent and fairer for the player.

An encounter like the Grick described earlier, would probably end the same way if the KO'ed character was left and abandoned by their party. A certain amount of realistic actions has to be expected in that situation.