Search results

Because, after 10 years, I have some notion of how my players react, and I know how I react. I can already hear the dialogue: Player: "X is down? What do his wounds look like? bleeding, or just knocked out? If the later, I keep attacking the enemies, he'll get up on his own." DM: "You can't...

That's not metagaming. It's a quite common reaction of many people to failing at a task, be it in sports, school or a fight - train more, learn more, get better tools, try another tactic. Entire movies and novels are centered on the hero(es) having to get better, to learn new combat skills etc...

Exactly. Problems can crop up though of the PCs are rude to begin with, and the NPC answers in kind.

Because I, as a player, would want to know how serious my character was wounded as well. I don't like to be left in limbo. There's a place for such "you don't know if you made the save", but it shouldn't be the norm. Is it so inconceivable that such mechanics are simply not liked by everyone? I...

Indeed. Sounds like the DM was unable to simply say "ok, since you cannot fly you were sent by bus, in advance, so you arrive on time with the rest". Like, you know, people do all the time when planning a trip.

Similar thing happened to me years ago, when my co-DM run an adventure that had the party trapped in some dungeon, and the only way out was some mage NPC - with a party who strongly disliked mages on general, considering them heretics. We killed the NPC after a few "Hot" words were exchanged...

Anyone got cliff notes of his interview?

I fully agree. Maybe change the adventures so you have less Dungeon Crawls, and more city adventures, whith more hooks and plots that run parallel. I run most of my adventures that way - I offer lots of plots and hooks, and run those the PCs get involved with. We have three players, so...

I usually tell my players how their character is faring though. "Oh, btw, that hit you took 5 rounds ago was actually lethal, since you just died. If you'd have gotten up it would have been just a grazing blow" sounds a bit stupid to me.

So, whatever happens, don't describe any hit as deadly, until the target is actually dead? So, a blow that knocks a character into the negative won't be described as serious, up and until the charater dies, since he could recover and be as good as new thanks to a healing surge before that?

Works for me and others though.

Unless of course he gets dipped into negatives. If he gets tended to and brought back, and uses a healing surge, he's back in shape. If he doesn't, he dies - somehow.

Oh, yes, all the "move powers". And I thought having a race with a short range teleport "at will" was going to be the biggest problem with movement 4E style.

Please do not try to speak for me, or try to tell me what I feel. My sense of immersion - which is highly subjective - is less bothered by hitpoints than by healing surges. That is a fact, no matter what you think I think or should think.

For you, not for me. Hit points strain my immersion less than healing surges do.

How he deals with the arrows has been the point of this thread's last 6 pages or so.

The bard "Knight" kit (don't recall exact name) from the 2E Complete Bard's Handbook had that support. If fighting for something your code supported, you fought even when reduced to negatives, then died after uttering final words.

That depends on what spells you have. Shadow evocations offer a wide range of options. Metamagic is also very useful for a sorcerer, since they can choose when to apply that "silent, still" option. The summon spells also offer a lot of options. And of course, the ability to cast as many dispel...

The leader in question reached him before he died though.

Nothing. Fluff hasn't impressed me yet.