Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Reprisal" data-source="post: 602746" data-attributes="member: 1161">At the same time, I don't think anything he suggested was in any way malevolent. I can actually see an overconfident fighter-type villain doing this... To put in crude terms, I don't think the DM is screwing over the Players as much as the Villain is screwing with the Characters.It seemed to me that Takyris took Zappo's suggestion to some theoretical extreme to make a point, much like I've seen others do in some of my classes. It can be effective, but only in the right circumstances. As far as I was concerned, Zappo's suggestion was actually clever, and a fair way of doing things.Assuming that the Martial Villain has a shield, and Dodge, and Expertise, and what-not, who's to say that he won't fight that way? I've always approached RPGs in such a way that the basic rules of the game supplant "common universal knowledge." As it's been stated above, forcing someone to hesitate and not use Power Attack could extend the Villain's life by a few rounds. What if characters know this in this universe? Player-characters often act "unrealistic" (by real world standardds) and its generally called heroic. It seems to me that the D&D system should be considered as that world's "natural laws" when it comes to roleplaying all characters. So then, it seems that NPCs --especially important villains -- should be allowed to act in such a way that maximizes their effectiveness when it works with the character concept...Of course, there's always the threat of a campaign devolving into a game of mathematics, but some people enjoy that sort of thing. Personally, I've never had this sort of problem, but I have had some problems getting the players to act in character, even if it means making the "sub-optimal" decision.Then again, I suppose that's a trust issue. They might be scared that I'll jump on them for making a mistake/bad choice on purpose. I try to reassure them that I wouldn't do that often -- if at all -- that's what the other players are for......I'm serious. Have you ever purposefully made a "sub-optimal" decision because you thought your character would go down that path? If you've answered yes, how many times have the other players jumped down your throat for doing it? I'm not talking about it happening in character, I'm talking out-of-character, when you're all sitting around the table.I hate that. It makes playing certain characters ... difficult (to say the least). Especially when you and your character's worth are judged on certain decisions being made in the "correct" direction. In another system, one of the players I'm running a campaign for had his character make a couple of foolhardy decisions, and it seems that there's resentment toward the player for it. I don't like that, I don't like it at all. Anything in character is fine, but out-of-character, these people should know better...I dunno, like I said, it seems that this is really a Player-DM trust issue. Some people really don't like the idea of one person holding that much artificial power. Some people let that power go to their heads.I just hope I'm neither the former or the latter, <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool    :cool:"  data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" /> - Rep.</blockquote>

Verification