Armour Dilemma: Am I Wrong Here?
- Thread starter fusangite
- Start date
Drezden327
First Post
Well, I have read through all the posts here too and have the following observations:
1) The player was definitely out of line - there is no place for a player to be abusive toward a DM like he did. It also appears that the player has a history of being somewhat of a problem. Clearly, he needs to be warned or just thrown out of the group alltogether.
2) The players did seem to have history of cheesing the rules for donning armor, ie. wearing armor in unrealistic situations. So, I can see trying to force them to deal with the aspect of the rules - i.e. There is no time to put armor on. - deal with it. I think fusangite even said he put the players on notice.
3) The players - especially the heavy armor wearers - should have expected a night attack - from Vampires!! - and should have planned accordingly.
However, ....
4) I think the timetable you laid out is just flat unrealistic. There is no way all of those things could have happened in such a short span. To get past the Duke's servants in 2 rounds (12 seconds)? It probabaly takes that long to open the door. And I don't care what privileged the PC had, a servant is going to need an explanation - probably at least 30 seconds - then the Duke is going to need to get aclimated and get an explanation - another 30 secs, etc. etc. The specific actions aren't important - the entire sequence you laid out would take a lot longer than the time you alloted for it. Non-combat time should not be marked off round by round like combat time.
5) Since you planned this epic battle for 10 hours, one would presume that you wanted to see the battle with the entire party. Therefore, I think you could have played a more pro-active role to change the situation, by a) telling the PCs flat out - "There is no time to put on heavy armor. If you don't come IMMEDIATELY all will be lossed." or b) Adapting, and penalizing the PCs by making the battle harder - since they didn't come immediately - but letting the battle go forward anyway. Since you delayed, the vampires have re-grouped, etc etc.
6) In short, the players were wrong, but I think you could have adopted better on to save the situation -for everyone's benefit.
Daren
1) The player was definitely out of line - there is no place for a player to be abusive toward a DM like he did. It also appears that the player has a history of being somewhat of a problem. Clearly, he needs to be warned or just thrown out of the group alltogether.
2) The players did seem to have history of cheesing the rules for donning armor, ie. wearing armor in unrealistic situations. So, I can see trying to force them to deal with the aspect of the rules - i.e. There is no time to put armor on. - deal with it. I think fusangite even said he put the players on notice.
3) The players - especially the heavy armor wearers - should have expected a night attack - from Vampires!! - and should have planned accordingly.
However, ....
4) I think the timetable you laid out is just flat unrealistic. There is no way all of those things could have happened in such a short span. To get past the Duke's servants in 2 rounds (12 seconds)? It probabaly takes that long to open the door. And I don't care what privileged the PC had, a servant is going to need an explanation - probably at least 30 seconds - then the Duke is going to need to get aclimated and get an explanation - another 30 secs, etc. etc. The specific actions aren't important - the entire sequence you laid out would take a lot longer than the time you alloted for it. Non-combat time should not be marked off round by round like combat time.
5) Since you planned this epic battle for 10 hours, one would presume that you wanted to see the battle with the entire party. Therefore, I think you could have played a more pro-active role to change the situation, by a) telling the PCs flat out - "There is no time to put on heavy armor. If you don't come IMMEDIATELY all will be lossed." or b) Adapting, and penalizing the PCs by making the battle harder - since they didn't come immediately - but letting the battle go forward anyway. Since you delayed, the vampires have re-grouped, etc etc.
6) In short, the players were wrong, but I think you could have adopted better on to save the situation -for everyone's benefit.
Daren
Mark
CreativeMountainGames.com
I thought it was rather kind allowing the Duke to get there and help out the abusive player's buddies since the abusive player clearly wasn't going to get there. Kinda seemed to me like fung was making sure the other players didn't suffer for one player's stubbornness. Did I read all of that incorrectly?
*Edit* I don't blame fung for not being in a mood to give an abusive player any breaks. Kindness begets kindness, and if he hadn't had a history of being a problem-player, he might have warranted an, "OK. We'll speed through the armor thing but next time you have to understand it takes such and such time to don armor and that's the way we're playing it."
Oh, yeah, and welcome to the boards, Drezden327!
*Edit* I don't blame fung for not being in a mood to give an abusive player any breaks. Kindness begets kindness, and if he hadn't had a history of being a problem-player, he might have warranted an, "OK. We'll speed through the armor thing but next time you have to understand it takes such and such time to don armor and that's the way we're playing it."
Oh, yeah, and welcome to the boards, Drezden327!
Last edited:
Numion
First Post
Re: armour question
I do see. If the general consensus was that the encounter was all good and dandy this thread would've died a long ago.
You also said that following the rules to the letter keeps the game fair for all. Apparently not, since the NPC Duke made it to the scene at superman speed and PCs didn't. All "by the book".
Darth Shoju said:
I do see. If the general consensus was that the encounter was all good and dandy this thread would've died a long ago.
You also said that following the rules to the letter keeps the game fair for all. Apparently not, since the NPC Duke made it to the scene at superman speed and PCs didn't. All "by the book".
Drezden327
First Post
Thanks, for the welcome guys - although I have been reading these boards for over a year - I just never felt compelled or motivated to post before.
MMU - I've been playing Living Greyhawk at Neutral Ground in Manhattan. I would be interested in playing a 3E game - although I don't have a huge amount of spare time with work and family commitments. I would be interested to hear about your group, ages, when you meet ,etc.
Daren
MMU - I've been playing Living Greyhawk at Neutral Ground in Manhattan. I would be interested in playing a 3E game - although I don't have a huge amount of spare time with work and family commitments. I would be interested to hear about your group, ages, when you meet ,etc.
Daren
Marshall said:
*shrug* As I said, you can't deal with it so you think it's useless.
I've played Heavy Armor characters and Light Armor characters.
Lighter armor is only better if you are playing a high dex character with unlimited funds. (The only light armor with a +5 AC is Mithril Chain or Mithril Breastplate. Not every character has access to a mithril armor factory.)
If your character has a normal dex (i.e. 10-14) then Heavy armor is the cheapest, most effective way to get a high AC until you are high enough level to have "unlimited funds". And once you do, Heavy Armor still has an edge.
Three points of AC can make a huge difference when it comes to an optimized AC, especially at higher levels. More than once, the difference between needing a 20 to hit my PC and needing an 18 to hit him as saved him from taking large amounts of damage. It prevents being Rended, and makes it nearly impossible to confirm a crit even if he does get hit.
And yours amazes me.
If you actually think I was being verbally abusive, then you have led a very sheltered life.
Last edited:
Arnwyn
First Post
Re: Re: ?
In any case, following the rules to the letter as much as possible will prevent a whole host of future problems. Playing fast and loose with rules whenever one feels like it (regardless of the reason) can set some very dangerous precedents when those rules come up in the future. Players can have long memories when it comes to such things...
Of course, it will boil down to a group play-style thing. Some players don't care about consistency. Others demand it with no exceptions. Really, "following rules to the letter all the time" has nothing to do with being/not being "a trademark of a great DM" as you seem to be trying to assert...
fusangite was being consistent with the rules. He was correct in doing so (only one player, with a history of having strange reactions, was upset).
It can be, of course.Numion said:
In any case, following the rules to the letter as much as possible will prevent a whole host of future problems. Playing fast and loose with rules whenever one feels like it (regardless of the reason) can set some very dangerous precedents when those rules come up in the future. Players can have long memories when it comes to such things...
Of course, it will boil down to a group play-style thing. Some players don't care about consistency. Others demand it with no exceptions. Really, "following rules to the letter all the time" has nothing to do with being/not being "a trademark of a great DM" as you seem to be trying to assert...
fusangite was being consistent with the rules. He was correct in doing so (only one player, with a history of having strange reactions, was upset).
Similar Threads
