Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jdavis" data-source="post: 933271" data-attributes="member: 8704">Well actually the Vampires had a plan and stuck to it and apparently came real close to pulling it off. They should of abbandoned everythi9ng of a plan they were 3/4 into pulling off succesfully just because it looked like there may be a problem?  It's not that anybody is saying that it is ok to have players sitting around, it's that in this one situation, in this one game in this one persons campaign this wasn't his fault. You are taking a broad overview look of people saying it's ok for players to sit, the point that I believe everybody is trying to make here is that in this one situation it was the guys fault to sit it out not the DMs. The point isn't that it's ok for players to sit all the time, the point is that it was the guys fault. The big point here is that it's not ok for a player to demand a rules change to cover for his character's actions. He sat once, it happens, I don't know about everybody elses games but in many games I have played in it has happened (particularly in games with a high amount of role playing). It was a rare event not a common event, and if it bothered the guy so much to sit he could of done without the armor and joined in.   It was pointed out already that the Vampires were fighting with the higher level guards there and that they were taking damage, for that matter maybe it was something the guards did to cause the explosion. We don't know who or what caused the explosion. We do know they were fighting there, we also know that they didn't plan on a perfect sneak attack they planned on gaining 4 minutes while the PCs piddled.  There is a huge difference in metagaming and allowing player conversations. Apparently they have sessions that are nothing but in depth role playing. You are assuming that because he said that he allows in game conversation that they are completly metagaming every single aspect of their game. Players talking among themselves is pretty common in the game, even where they are not supposed to use that information incharacter they do. Are you saying that your players are only allowed to talk incharacter during the game? That's why I said the lever example in the book wasn't the same thing, they are discussing things (for all we know incharacter) when their characters are not in the same room. That doesn't mean that they were not trying to play incharacter. A big thing here too is that even from a meta standpoint the Paladin should of been there, they have a code to live by, we don't who the clerics gods were but it's quite probable that they blew that too.  Who was unprepared? THe clerics had all their spells laid out for a encounter with undead, they had weapons and magic items and shields and everything they needed except Plate Mail. Armor really isn't all that important here because they are clerics not fighters, they can make adjustments and use spells, they don't have to rush in hand to hand. They had every single thing they needed to fight this fight except for one thing. Yes they should of been better prepared, heck they should of been awake waiting at the tower, but once again how was this the DMs fault and if he changed the adventure to cover for their choices then why have them make choices in the first place? Do you think that a Paladin or a holy Cleric with a 17 Int would of not realized that he was risking 170 lives including those of his fellow adventurers by not getting there as quick as possible?Or is it the Vampires who were supposed to be unprepared? They almost pulled it off, heck they actually won a victory here, they killed off a large portion of the city guard, and it was stated that these were not all the vampires, the leaders of this group were still out there. Don't vampires follow the orders of those who created them?</blockquote>

Verification