MarkB
Legend
Wow, the start-up costs on those places must be insane. How long does it take them to pull back into the black, half a century?
D&D General D&D memes thread discussion…
- Thread starter overgeeked
- Start date
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
That's why the truly evil BBEGs create Power Word Agonizing Death.Vicious mockery - words that hurt.
I do like the ghost saying didn't hurt with a smug smile though.
I don't see getting a magical flaming sword (without magical oil) that makes no sense* or a special blinding attack as being "creative". Why wouldn't everyone have flaming swords or attempt to blind every enemy?
Pushing the bookcase over? Now that's creative and would be a strength check. I'd probably allow athletics because I think knowing how to apply strength makes sense.
*sorry whichever movie had that. It may have looked cool but it was just dumb for so, so many reasons. On the other hand if a flaming sword showed up in the next treasure horde? Just coincidence.
Eurohobbes
Villager
Yeah, I don't get this meme either.
Three creative things, three creative rewards...I don't see the problem.
- Flametongue is in the DMG (pg. 263). Let them do a history check/arcana check to see if their character knows that they exist.
- The bookcase: absolutely a strength check. And I'd make a dex saving throw for the NPC behind it to see how this resolves
- Attacking the eye: either up the AC to see if it still hits, or make a general hit and if it's over +something on the hit I'd say they succesfully hit the eye. And if they hit they eye that becomes a part of the encounter: maybe it's a monster that goes into a rage and makes reckless decisions, or maybe they get a -2 penalty on their to hit amount.
Three creative things, three creative rewards...I don't see the problem.
MarkB
Legend
I think the idea is that sometimes the DM who tells players to "get creative" with their martial characters will then also be the DM who shuts them down every time they try to suggest anything creative that has the slightest mechanical benefit.
There's a difference between being creative and attempting an exploit. The shove the bookcase over is a good example of creative play and one I could see happening in my game. Saying that you attempt to chop someone's head off, as another example, thereby killing them instantly is not creative. It's attempting to bypass the rules of the game.
Striking someone in the eye? Why wouldn't every fight start with combatants trying to blind each other with every attack? If it worked, it would be the go-to combat tactic. I just see a line between bypassing the rules to get significant advantage and doing something unexpected.
But this is really a separate thread.
overgeeked
Open-World Sandbox
That’s exactly the problem with “get creative” summed up in a few posts.
No coz it’s dumb. No coz it’s an exploit. Only if you roll a check to see if fire exists.
If you want players be be creative, you have to engage that “yes, and” collaboration part of your brain.
Encourage the behavior you want more of. Discourage the behavior you want to stop.
As per the meme, this is exactly why players stop trying and just boringly repeat “I attack.” You repeatedly shoot down someone’s attempts to be creative and they stop trying.
By the way, this is also why Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG kicks ass. All this stuff is baked into the Warrior’s Mighty Deeds.
No coz it’s dumb. No coz it’s an exploit. Only if you roll a check to see if fire exists.
If you want players be be creative, you have to engage that “yes, and” collaboration part of your brain.
Encourage the behavior you want more of. Discourage the behavior you want to stop.
As per the meme, this is exactly why players stop trying and just boringly repeat “I attack.” You repeatedly shoot down someone’s attempts to be creative and they stop trying.
By the way, this is also why Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG kicks ass. All this stuff is baked into the Warrior’s Mighty Deeds.
Last edited:
Autumnal
Bruce Baugh, Writer of Fortune
Yup. GMs get what they reward (within limits). If players find that acting boldly without half an hour of arguing strategic details works, with favorable difficulties and good outcomes, they’ll probably do more of it. And this can be real work even for a GM who wants to do it, thanks to counter-programming from so many sources.
Paul Farquhar
Legend
That happened in my game. Along with "pulling a tapestry down on their heads" and "Goliath charges into the room and picks up and swings the table the pirates are seated around" (that one was me). Being creative with things established as being part of the shared fiction is good play. Trying to add things that are not part of the shared fiction (such as a flaming sword) is cheating.
overgeeked
Open-World Sandbox
Here’s how you say yes and encourage player creativity instead of squashing it.
Fire sword. Some options. 1. It takes a round to do and works for one attack before going out. The attack does extra fire damage. Not an exploit because you’re taxing them a round and giving them less damage than two normal attacks would deal. Also single use. 2. It takes a round but works for a few attacks. Whatever you wrapped your sword in to keep it flaming is blunting the attack but adding fire damage. Normal attack damage but half is fire.
Bookcase. Strength (Athletics) check to pin them under a heavy bookcase. Cool. It takes your action to do and uses up their action to get out of. Throw in a little damage to make the player not feel like their turn is wasted. Say half their normal damage.
Eye shot. Normal attack roll. If they score a nat 19-20, they hit the eye. Otherwise they still hit their target on a normal hit. Either simply describe the NPC as blinded in one eye and stumbling a bit with no mechanical effect or give them blinded for a round as they deal with the arrow in their eye. At most this is an improvised weapon mastery. Not a game wrecking exploit.
You can give the players cool things without it wrecking the game. You can let the players do cool things without it wrecking the game. They control the input, you control the output. Adjust the output to reward the player’s creativity without making it exploitative.
If you as the referee make something creative so good the players would be dumb not to do it every single time, that’s 100% a you problem.
Fire sword. Some options. 1. It takes a round to do and works for one attack before going out. The attack does extra fire damage. Not an exploit because you’re taxing them a round and giving them less damage than two normal attacks would deal. Also single use. 2. It takes a round but works for a few attacks. Whatever you wrapped your sword in to keep it flaming is blunting the attack but adding fire damage. Normal attack damage but half is fire.
Bookcase. Strength (Athletics) check to pin them under a heavy bookcase. Cool. It takes your action to do and uses up their action to get out of. Throw in a little damage to make the player not feel like their turn is wasted. Say half their normal damage.
Eye shot. Normal attack roll. If they score a nat 19-20, they hit the eye. Otherwise they still hit their target on a normal hit. Either simply describe the NPC as blinded in one eye and stumbling a bit with no mechanical effect or give them blinded for a round as they deal with the arrow in their eye. At most this is an improvised weapon mastery. Not a game wrecking exploit.
You can give the players cool things without it wrecking the game. You can let the players do cool things without it wrecking the game. They control the input, you control the output. Adjust the output to reward the player’s creativity without making it exploitative.
If you as the referee make something creative so good the players would be dumb not to do it every single time, that’s 100% a you problem.
