Are players who are tactically effective difficult to run?

[Celtavian]

Do players who use unexpected and effective tactics to defeat enemies drive a DM nuts?

For some reason, sometimes it seems like my DM goes out of his way to hammer me just because of the way I play the game. Often times, I am able to come up with a way to crush the enemy by minimizing their threat, and this seems to drive my DM crazy at times.

Do other DM's often feel the same way about a player who uses all the powers at their command and the environment to come up with effective tactics to defeat the enemy?

Do many DM's have a particular player that seems to always do something unexpected that really sways battles so that it turns in favor the PC's or turns an epic battle into a cakewalk?

If so, do you ever inadvertently target the player with attacks not because the player has done something in the current battle, but because you know what that player will do?

I am just wondering if other DM's get annoyed with players who seem to have a knack for D&D tactics. And if so, do you consciously or subconciously target those players to try to prevent them from getting the upper hand?

 

[arwink]

I'm struggling to remember a PC who was tactically effective.

Somehow, I don't think it's a problem for at least a quarter of DM's, if not more.

 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

In my group it's the oppisite problem. We're good with tactics and it gets really annoying that our DM isn't. There are a lot of instances where the fight would have been a real chalage if he was better at that sort of thing, or if we weren't as good.

 

[twobadcats]

I've never had this problem. It comes down more to organization than tactics. Poor tactics on the DM's part usually amount to things like forgetting a dragon can fly and running encounters off the cuff.

I keep a "combat playbook" with my DM notes when running D&D (I also use a battlemat and counters or minis to keep track). So my NPCs generally have a plan (or a note indicating they're disorganized and how they're disorganized) when going into combat.

 

[Silver Moon]

Well, the old cliche "Always expect the unexpected" comes to mind. I gave up on trying to out think the players long ago. This only becomes a problem with linear modules. My modules are generally a basic plot and detailed NPC actions based upon what the players have done. Personally, I think creativity is terrific, and award extra experience for it.

As a player I have sometimes found the opposite. Several DM's can be threatened by creative thinking. We had one DM several years back (who has thankfully left) who wrote the modules specifically for his girlfriend's character, and got annoyed whenever another character did something that he planned for her - often just declaring that something would not work "because I said so" rather than giving a real reason. We once had another DM who we found that we could not brainstorm in front of, as he would then make significant changes to the module based upon the player's plans.

 

[Mark]

For some reason, sometimes it seems like my DM goes out of his way to hammer me just because of the way I play the game. Often times, I am able to come up with a way to crush the enemy by minimizing their threat, and this seems to drive my DM crazy at times.

I think your DM could do himself a favor by layering his threats, learning to coax you in to one of your standard threat-reduction techniques only to surprise you with a threat you had not expected and have no time to massage in your usual manner.

Personally, I like when players get the jump on the bad guys. It's not going to happen every time, and when they don't they will usually pay a stiff penalty. If it happens the majority of the time I am very pleased. If merely sometimes, I am content.

I tend to have many plot layers available to add into a game session. If the players seem to be breezing through one, I make sure a second comes into play. If the players are struggling with two, I save the additional ones for other sessions.

Your DM sounds like he needs to up the ante to keep you challenged.

 

[Zerovoid]

One thing I've noticed is that players who "think creatively" often want to go beyond the rules as written, and gain great benefit by doing so. Often they want to describe exactly what their character is doing in combat, and expect that this will have greater effect because of this.

"I want to pull the arrow out of my body and stick it in his eye." Umm, ok, that sounds like an attack with an improvised weapon so -4 penalty, and it probably only does 1d4 damage. And you can't target his eye.

"Now that I've snuck up behind him, I want to grab his head and twist it to snap his neck."
Ok, grapple attempt.

"I want to swing down on my rope and knock him off the bridge."
Sure thing, but that's basically just a normal Bull Rush, and the other NPC's will get attacks of opportunity on you.

After a while, this starts to get kind of old. I don't want to stifle players creativity, but the combat rules were balanced assuming that players will be doing things like moving and attacking and casting spells. I know my monsters couldn't get away with any of this stuff, so why should the players?

 

[Umbran]

There are a lot of instances where the fight would have been a real chalage if he was better at that sort of thing, or if we weren't as good.

Part of this is unavoidable. The players have many minds, the DM has only one. In general, then, the players should be able to out-think the DM. The basic tool the DM has to counter this is preparation - he has time beforehand, and full knowledge of the abilities of the PCs. He has control of how much time the PCs have to think. But even then, the many will occasionally outweigh the well prepared one.

 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

The basic tool the DM has to counter this is preparation

I think part of the problem our DM has is he does do much prep work and doesn't really have a good grasp of how to effectivly run a lot of the creatures/NPC's.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

As a tactical player and DM....

OK, let me propose both sides:
As a DM, I run appropriate tactics. Yes, that includes Special Forces kobolds (appropriate tactics that have let these weak creatures survive in a hostile wilderness) and intelligent and quick thinking dragons. My players expect it, and like it. They have a saying: "Never take on a goblin in it's caves, or Kobolds in thier woods."
I use tactics, and so do my players. These aren't bending the rules, either.
"OK, I'm behind the enemy mage: Grapple for a pin."-OK, not a problem. He keeps the mage grappled while the fighter rips and tears through the enemy forces to reach him. Meanwhile, the monk has managed to work his way to help defend the grappler.
"I swing across the rope to hit the enemy warlord and kick him off."-Not a problem.
My monsters use tactics, and I let them know what game mechanics are used, that way when they do it, the same mechanics apply.
I do not believe that the rules were designed merely for "cast spell, move, attack" that many claim. We've pushed the rules to the limit, and for the most part, found them to work just fine.
Friday Night: "Draco will use Advanced Bullrush to push the Derabeleth (an Epic Monster) into the Hellfire (Abysmal fire brought up by a spell), locking his shield and matching his strenght for strength."-OK, easy.
"Roz will keep counterspelling the Mage-Lord, watching for any laced spells or stealth spells." Not a problem, Roz went first, kept stable to the rules of counterspelling, and still had 3 Epic Spell slots open.
"Ash will backflip out of the shadows and try to kick Azreal in the back of the head, hopefully knocking him into the Hellfire."-OK, tumble check, Knockdown check, knockback check.
"Nahagewen will stick her thumb in Dar-Kapax's eye and try to gouge it out, if he breaks her arm, that's fine." OK, contested strength check on a pin held for the third round. Nahagewen failed by 10, SNAP, -4 to all checks with that arm, -4 to STR checks. She makes a called shot (-6 due to small size) and scores a crit. Normally, one eye would cause a -2 to many checks (check Table 3-9 for effects of damaging specific areas in the DMG, it CAN be done), but she got a critical, and thumbed the eye out. Dar-Kapax makes a fortitude check to keep the hold on (+2 circumstance bonus because he HATES Nahagewen) and still holds on.
"Jarvis will put his bow against his feet and draws back an arrow, aiming for the priest's of Drox's hand that he has his holy symbol in."-No problem there, either. Jarvis has a broken left hand, so needs to use his feet to hold the bow. An epic level ranger can do this.

OK, my players use tactics, and your missing a lot, but you get the idea. Fights in my game are a whirling mass of magic, blood, steel and death. Tactics enhance it, not make it tough, and No, I don't pick on them. Although bad guys will nail someone not doing more than "cast, move, or attack" because they will assume that the person is either stupid or up to something.

As a player:
Why SHOULDN'T I use tactics that that class, and character (according to background) would know. If I'm playing a veteran swordman, veteran of the 9th Humaniod War, former member of the False Legion, and now a 8th level Fighter, why shouldn't I use tactics. That's rediculous. Use terrain to my advantage, use my weaponry and skills to my advantage. Use my opponent to my advantage.
No fight is ever fair. There is always some fool who shows up at a sword fight with a Nerf baseball bat, and he deserves what he gets.
My DM has a saying: "It's not the character, it's Ralts' playing style." I'll play just about any type of class or race, and it doesn't bother me to 30 point buy, or 3d6 straight down the line.
But I'll be dipped in chocolate and have a hole blown thrown me so I'm a donut before I stop using my brain!
Sure, I've left a couple of games because people couldn't handle the fact that my PC's stayed mobile, used tactics, and used thier brains, WITHIN the limits of attributes and PC history, but it nevered bothered me.
While playing Rifts, playing a Ex-CS SAMAS pilot, why should I drop to the ground and engage the wizard at point blank range? That's stupid! His spells have VERY low range, while my railgun reaches out to about 1000m. 3/5ths of a mile. I'm moving at max range and shooting him to pieces, and he can just scream and die.
If the DM throws a fit about this, maybe he needs to think. Or maybe he needs to adapt and overcome. Yes, it's a game, but still, play to have fun, and having fun never involved me letting someone win because otherwise I'd hurt thier feelings.
Fight smarter not harder and you'll win the day!-Ralts' gaming group.