Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 6362788" data-attributes="member: 2011">Which is good for the party.You do seem to have a player competitive or at least a player comparison mindset.Plus, the DM should actually control the game with regard to timeframe, not the players. The players controlling it should be a form of illusion where the players think that they are controlling the length of the adventuring day. But, the DM should always be firmly in control. If a DM allows the players to control it, that's his decision.There are many ways to enjoy the game. One such style is with a party leader. In the vast majority of the games that I have ever been a player, I have almost always played the laid back PC. He doesn't care which way the party goes, or what decisions are made. Occasionally, he will speak up and offer a suggestion, but most of the time, he just goes with the flow. My schtick is often to save resources and when needed, throw out the big guns and save the party's bacon.For this next campaign, I decided to play the party leader instead. Large and in charge. I'm hoping that my fellow players will be ok with me taking charge. Not so much a desire to tell others what to do, as it is (both in roleplaying and combat) a way to be the assertive PC that avoids pitfalls beforehand instead of fixing things after the fact (way outside my comfort zone as a player).So for this campaign, my PC will consider himself a first among equals. It's a style that I have never played before and I will be taking steps to make sure that I do not step on other player's toes. But I think that it is totally ok to have a first among equals, regardless of whether that is PC class or personality.With a good DM, they might. Good DMs play a game of illusion. Things are often not what they appear to be. Go rescue the captive in the tower and nova, fine. When the trap is sprung, the spellcasters are low on resources and the situation just became tougher.I do agree with you that there are exploration scenarios where the spellcasters can nova because the party is not expecting multiple encounters. Just like there are dungeon scenarios where the spellcasters cannot nova a lot or they will run out of spells, hence, they conserve and the non-spellcasters shine. But, this is moot. There are scenarios where spellcasters shine and there are scenarios where non-spellcasters shine. You seem to be focusing on the one and ignoring the other. That's a bit of a logical fallacy in that you are throwing on the floor all of the scenarios (many in my experience) where nova-ing will just mean not having the resources later on when really needed. Nova-ing on the first 6 rooms in a dungeon on the rank and file just mean that spellcasters have fewer resources when facing the real BBEG later on.And if the spellcasters are casting fireballs in room #1, then at least when I was a DM, half of the rest of the dungeon knew about it and (when appropriate) consolidated their forces. The concept of a dungeon with 20 rooms in it, all with tightly closed doors that sound did not penetrate is illogical. You want to nova, fine. You'd better be careful though.WotC really has a problem with this in their adventure design. At least with the Starter Set, it looks like they tried to address this issue a little (although the ruined village still had this problem in spades).As for the original TOH, it was a joke then and it's still a joke now. A one shot beer and pretzel adventure, not a campaign adventure (although I'm sure some people got through with some PCs and moved on). Using it as a reasonable example in a discussion is a bit misleading. It was the classic example of poor adventure design and nothing more. It's a classic because so many old timers went through it, not because it actually made sense. A single trap at the front door killing everyone would have sufficed. It was a showcase of how clever Gary could get with traps, not a good adventure and not an example of an adventure I, at least, would run players through today as part of a campaign.</blockquote>

Verification