Armour Dilemma: Am I Wrong Here?

[jdavis]

Yes, perhaps, but if they had that extra time to put on the armor, they would not have had to rush, get their hairs caught in the bindings and wound up splitting so many of them...

Is spitting Dr Pepper all over your keyboard bad for it?

 

[Mark]

Is spitting Dr Pepper all over your keyboard bad for it?

DP, Dew, New Coke... I hear it's good for the key-action...

 

[Creeping Death]

Would taking a round to get your bearings change anything anyway? The people with armor lost the same round as the people without the armor and the Duke could of taken a whole minute to get his bearings and still easily of gotten there before the ones putting on armor.

No it wouldn't matter, I was just giving a counter-point, that's all.

I totally agree with Fusengate in this situation. He did nothing wrong. It was the player's choice to sit out the encounter. I can think of one or two things that I would have done differently, but that is me and my style. The fact that he gave everyone xp for the encounter just shows that he is a generous DM and a reasonable person. If it were me, the ones that sat out would not have gotten any.

 

[jdavis]

I game a different style than fusangite does, it's just that I can see what he is saying here and it just seems that a lot of irrelevent stuff is getting blown out of proportion and the real point is getting missed. It doesn't matter if the fight was a suicide fight, they made a choice to skip it, if it was suicide without armor then it would of been suicide with the armor too (since when is Plate Mail good against Wizards throwing lightning bolts?). All the rest of this stuff is nitpicky stuff, they had a choice of getting to the fight in time to make a difference or putting on full Plate armor during a emergency. It wasn't suicide to not wear the armor, heck having the armor was really irrelevent for Clerics fighting undead. If they were three fighters and you expected them to wade into 21 waiting vampires in a direct clash then that would be different but it was a bunch of obviously busy enemies who were distracted and could of been picked off in small groups, it was clerics (who melee fighting is not their main strength anyway) not fighters and it was 40 rounds for them to get ready (not counting the time to get there.) The vampires were wizards (who had used up most of their high level spells) and most of the vampires were spawns, why would the vampires choose melee fighting in this scenerio to start with. They were reoccurring villians so the players should of had a good idea what they were up against from the start. They could of upped their AC with spells, they had the best defence of anyone against the vampires most feared attack, they were the best suited for this encounter even without their armor, it seems it was custom made for them to really shine and show just how powerful they actually were, two Clerics and a Paladin would of had a field day with 13 vampire spawn and there was no vampire there that could overwhelm them. They had a choice and they made a decision and they didn't get to the fight until the next game session, it's really that simple. Why does it matter if it took 12 rounds or 18 rounds to get the Duke? They wasted 40 rounds getting into armor that they could of done without and still won the day. The Duke is irrelevent he was just there to bail out the situation because the half of the party that would actually have problems with undead was hung out to dry by the half of the party which is powerful against undead. If the party of stuck together would the Duke even of showed up at all?

 

[Numion]

Numion
"Of course the PCs have to pay for their bad decisions. Nowhere I did I contradict that. In fusangites example, however, the players paid the consequences for wanting to dress their armors. they missed all the action and wasted the evening."

Forgive me if I missed it, but if the players that chose to don their armor rather than heading out at the first sign of trouble were allowed to fully participate in the combat, then in what way are the PCs paying for their bad decisions?

Um.. maybe donning the armor wasn't such a bad decision on the PCs part (they actually were saved by the decision), and there wouldn't be much sense in them paying for it? Actually, it's the sensible thing to do. Now if they had done something foolish.. However, it was foolish on the players part, who spent the night doing nothing. I maintain that nothing much was gained by having three players sitting there doing nothing.

And you're taking this out of context (context being fusas bombed climatic encounter) by now. I'm not for allowing players to screw over a campaign in general. I'm just giving advice on how the DM could've saved this one climatic encounter that he spent 10 hours preparing. Because I really thought that fusangite would've wanted to do it better, since he came this far to share it with ENWorld. Instead, he was content that 70% of ENWorld agreed with him. To me it would mean so much more if 100% of my group agreed with my game, because they're the ones that play it.

 

[Creeping Death]

jdavis

We are agreeing. The duke was not an important npc for the encounter nor was he pivital, he was just someone that the sorcerer ran to get for help. Whether that help was needed or not is irrelavent.

This is my take on this type of encounter. Something is happening and the PC's get a chance to react, interfere, help, ignore, or watch. All the players made their choices. 3 chose to don armor, while they were preparing for the battle, they could not participate, thus I would put them in the ignore stage. The sorcerer, I would place in the react stage, he went to go get help. the others, I don't remember what they did, but I think they tried to interfere with the vampire's plan.

I also agree that the clerics and the paladin did not need this armor. The vampire spawn would be no match to 2 12th level clerics and the wizard vampires that had depleted their best spells would not last long against them either.

 

[Creeping Death]

Um.. maybe donning the armor wasn't such a bad decision on the PCs part (they actually were saved by the decision), and there wouldn't be much sense in them paying for it? Actually, it's the sensible thing to do. Now if they had done something foolish.. However, it was foolish on the players part, who spent the night doing nothing. I maintain that nothing much was gained by having three players sitting there doing nothing.

And you're taking this out of context (context being fusas bombed climatic encounter) by now. I'm not for allowing players to screw over a campaign in general. I'm just giving advice on how the DM could've saved this one climatic encounter that he spent 10 hours preparing. Because I really thought that fusangite would've wanted to do it better, since he came this far to share it with ENWorld. Instead, he was content that 70% of ENWorld agreed with him. To me it would mean so much more if 100% of my group agreed with my game, because they're the ones that play it.

I have to know. How would you have done it? Long time rivals of the PC's just attacked and an explosion went off, waking up your PC's. You just asked them what do you want to do?

Players1 -4: go check it out.
DM: Ok, it will take you 3 rounds to get there.
Players5-7: Put on armor.
DM: that will take 40 rounds as per the rules.
Players5-7: that's ok.

What do you do now? How do you include the other 3?

 

[Numion]

I have to know. How would you have done it? Long time rivals of the PC's just attacked and an explosion went off, waking up your PC's. You just asked them what do you want to do?

Players1 -4: go check it out.
DM: Ok, it will take you 3 rounds to get there.
Players5-7: Put on armor.
DM: that will take 40 rounds as per the rules.
Players5-7: that's ok.

What do you do now? How do you include the other 3?

I'm not sure. In my group the PCs have learned not to split the group, since that gets PCs killed easily. Thats probably what would've happened - 4 PCs charge to take on the encounter planned for 7, and get their asses handed to them. At the same time a part of the vamps attack the PCs who are donning their armors. Penalties for fighting in a plate half-dressed.

More likely I would've made something delay the other PCs trip to the scene, so that it wouldn't seem unplausible that they all arrive at the same time to face the vampires. (If you need specs, maybe an NPC who was at the scene would happen to meet them by chance and give them a briefing lasting, say, 40 rounds ) Not by fudging the rules, as thats the rarely used last resort, but by improvising something as I go by.

In any case it wouldnt've been pretty for the PCs. I'm not a great DM, and this advice here is given with the benefit of a hindsight.

 

[fusangite]

Creeping Death writes,

I have to know. How would you have done it? Long time rivals of the PC's just attacked and an explosion went off, waking up your PC's. You just asked them what do you want to do?

Players1 -4: go check it out.
DM: Ok, it will take you 3 rounds to get there.
Players5-7: Put on armor.
DM: that will take 40 rounds as per the rules.
Players5-7: that's ok.

What do you do now? How do you include the other 3?

To be fair (actually, perhaps I'm being unfair here), Numion did already answer this question. He responded:

My solution: Have the Dukes coming to his senses take the same time as the donning of the armours. At the same time the explosion happened to damage the entrances to the tower so that the victims could be loaded as quick inside.
PCs arrive about the same time at the scene. If there were a couple of the PCs tackling the vamps before the others got there, they'd get whats coming. I'm all for punishing PCs, not players

to which I responded

So, the alternative is to have things go pretty well the same way except that
(a) a spellcaster of unknown origin would show up out of the blue and severely damage the entrances to the tower;
(b) the duke would refuse to come right away and would somehow detain the sorceror who had come to seek his aid as well;
(c) the vampires would become more focused on killing the heroic characters and assault them until they either died or were forced to retreat, largely abandoning their original project of turning the city guard.

Even if these things happened, all that would change is that there would four characters out of the action instead of three and the bard, mage and rogue would be more likely to die trying to save others' lives.

Numion writes,

And you're taking this out of context (context being fusas bombed climatic encounter) by now. I'm not for allowing players to screw over a campaign in general. I'm just giving advice on how the DM could've saved this one climatic encounter that he spent 10 hours preparing. Because I really thought that fusangite would've wanted to do it better, since he came this far to share it with ENWorld.

Well, only you and mmu1 have offered alternate plans. Yours doesn't actually solve the gap between the two player groups in terms of time while mmu1's seems to involve freezing people in time to penalize them for reacting too quickly. It is the dearth of actual alternatives for how to execute the combat that has helped to convince me I was in the right, a position I was not at all sure of at the start.

Numion now proposes a different alternative for fixing the problem:

More likely I would've made something delay the other PCs trip to the scene, so that it wouldn't seem unplausible that they all arrive at the same time to face the vampires. (If you need specs, maybe an NPC who was at the scene would happen to meet them by chance and give them a briefing lasting, say, 40 rounds ) Not by fudging the rules, as thats the rarely used last resort, but by improvising something as I go by.

If the PCs are so worried about what's happening that they cannot wait for their muscle to come along, what would make them stand and listen to an NPC for 4 minutes?

drnuncheon, welcome to the thread. It's a delight to have you join us. I'd say something more in response to your points but the reason I like them is that there's nothing I would add. A welcome, too, to jdavis. It's nice to be corresponding with you again.

 

[jdavis]

. Because I really thought that fusangite would've wanted to do it better, since he came this far to share it with ENWorld. Instead, he was content that 70% of ENWorld agreed with him. To me it would mean so much more if 100% of my group agreed with my game, because they're the ones that play it.

Or maybe he is just a stickler for percentages and ratio's. That being said apparently 100% of his group does agree with his game with the exception of this one encounter and only one of the players actually had a problem with his call ( and should I point out once again that this player's additude has been called into question in this thread several times already).

You can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time, if you think that 100% your players 100% agree with 100% of what you run 100% of the time then you are very lucky or they just don't make a fuss about small things. The thought of 100% of EN World posters ever 100% agreeing on anything is very farfetched.

As far as the character's being saved by donning the armor, well they got the experience didn't they, one of the players got to see the others get hung out on the front line for a change and the two clerics were not out any spells for the next part of the adventure. But really how did they save their characters by not showing up to a fight they could of carried the day in? Were they in danger? well characters are normally in danger when they are in combat, that's sort of the point, could they of lost? well you can always goof up and die during combat. The real question is was this a winnable encounter without the armor? Yes it was very winnable, heck the way it was set up it really would of been a easy win, the enemy was weakened from fighting guards and using up high level spells, they were preoccupied with what they were doing and they spread out in a awkward situation, it would of been a slaughter for them. Turning the vampire spawn would of caused chaos in their plans and vampire wizards without spells make for pretty poor hand to hand combatants, particularly when they are preoccupied. Where was this suicide mission that they saved themselves from by putting on armor?

As far as nothing being gained by three players sitting there it was stated that they could of stopped putting on armor at anytime and joined the fight, it's not like they said "I put on my armor" and fusangite said "ok I'll see you next session". They could of joined the combat at any time they choose to. WHat should he of done? Changed his adventure so they could get around the rule? The whole point of the whole adventure was for them to make a choice between saving people or putting on armor. Should he of just thrown that out the window and caved in to the guy whining that he should skip the donning armor rule? The choice was the adventure, to change the adventure completly nullified the point of the choice. They knew they would not make it, they knew people were dying, they knew there party mates were fighting for their lives but still they made 40 decisions in a row to continue putting on the armor no matter what. I understand what you are saying but for the DM to cave in and change something in this situation lessens the whole reason for the module. He said he planned for either them going without armor or for them to all wait on the armor but not for half to put their lives on the line and half to bullheadedly refuse to help. They chose to let their own party mates deaths over being a little low on AC. The fact that the party mates didn't die is irrelevent (particularly for the Paladin) they chose armor over the party's lives. How do you change the flow of time to let them off the hook when that ruins the whole point to the module? 40 rounds will always be 40 rounds, the vampires would not stop and wait, timing was obviously vital to the module, how could you change things to get them there on time without changing the 40+ rounds? Should he of told the other players "No you can't fight. You must just stand here and wait 40 rounds"? Should he of said "well for some reason time and space warps around your armor and you get done instantly"? Tell me how 40 rounds isn't 40 rounds? There is a fight going on, people are in combat, how can you change time for the three and not for the other 4?