Dealing with an "oldschool" DM

[wayne62682]

I have a slight dilemma. I'm currently in a 4e campaign but until we started this campaign, my DM hadn't played since 1st edition in high school. He doesn't seem to grasp the fact that 4e is simplified and that the rules are more "set in stone" than previous editions to ensure balance; he still seems to think that every rule in the game is a guideline that he can change as he sees fit.

This causes a lot of issues in our games because he's not balancing things properly. Here's a few examples:

• He doesn't balance encounters; we only have 4 PCs but he uses encounters as-written in the published adventures. He says that the math WotC uses is flawed because we easily deal with encouners designed for 5 PCs but this is because half the time he forgets creature's powers, gets them flat out wrong, and/or plays monsters as mindless AI.
• Not only does he not scale down encounters, he also cheats us on XP as he divides the encounter by 5, not 4. He thinks that when a 4e adventure says it's for "14th - 17th level" it means like 1st edition where the PCs can be between those levels, when in fact it means it's supposed to take us FROM 14th level TO 17th level. We're playing through Demon Queen's Enclave right now but we're only level 13, about to hit level 14.
• He skimps on treasure; I'm not sure exactly what the ratio should be but we seem to have slightly less powerful items than we should have at 13th level.
• My girlfriend recently said she wanted to play, so I made her a character at the same level as us; until I convinced him otherwise the DM was wanting her to start a level or two behind, and STILL not scale the encounters or scale her XP accordingly to have her catch up; I can't seem to find an exact rule that says what XP amount new PCs are supposed to start with. He keeps saying that we blast through encounters with 4 PCs so "even if she was at 2nd level you would be better off than you are now, since you'd have 5 PCs".

I really don't know how to deal with it; I have the 4e DMG myself and the stuff he says makes no sense at all to me, and IMO it's not how the game is designed to work; I've played 1st, 2nd, 3rd and now 4th edition of D&D. Sure, he's the DM, but IMO 4e supposed to be a lot more "these are rules, not guidelines" than previous editions were, because the game is intended to be balanced on core assumptions, or require DM interaction to bring things into balance. Once you start changing the core rules or things like that, you're breaking that balance, more so if you don't compensate for it like my DM seems to do.

Any advice on this situation?

 

[FireLance]

Just the ususal. If the DM doesn't listen to your feedback, vote with your feet.

 

[Mark]

(. . .) he still seems to think that every rule in the game is a guideline that he can change as he sees fit.

(. . .)

Sure, he's the DM, but IMO 4e supposed to be a lot more "these are rules, not guidelines" than previous editions were, (. . .)

You're both right. Play the game being offered or, if you just can't enjoy it, get into a new game. Maybe you should run a second game in which he can play. Perhaps you can persuade him that your style is something to emulate.

 

[roguerouge]

If he's not balancing things properly, READ THE MODULE. Presto! Balance restored.

 

[FireLance]

Okay, my earlier post was probably a little grouchy. I'm feeling better now.

Try to look at it from his perspective: he isn't really playing the monsters to the best of their abilities, so (in his eyes) you are breezing through the encounters. Because of this, he probably doesn't think you "deserve" the full XP or treasure award, and he may also rationalize the cutting back as an attempt to keep the problem from getting worse - if you're finding the encounters easy now, what will they be like if you are higher level and have better equipment?

I really wonder if the real problem is his lack of familiarity with the system, compounded by the fact that he is running a Paragon-level adventure (did he have any experience running Heroic-tier games previously?) and so he is falling back on "old-school" methods to "rebalance" the game (again, I stress, from his point of view).

If he has not had much experience running lower-level games, perhaps he really ought to consider doing so for a while before he tries DMing at the Paragon tier again.

 

[ExploderWizard]

If all the players in the campaign agree that this DM's style is not to thier liking then a good open discussion about how the game is going and what is expected is in order. If everyone presents thier position honestly then perhaps some adjustments can be made. If the DM is completely inflexible then perhaps another player should run something.

 

[roguerouge]

More seriously, what you're describing is that the GM is on the learning curve when you want him to be at the plateau of mastery. Just relax, run away more frequently, and give him time to learn. If he's not better in six months, revive this thread and we'll figure out a better way.

 

[wayne62682]

He's DMed 4th edition for about a year now - he started with Keep on the Shadowfell and we've gone through the published aventures thus far.

Another thing i notice he does is that he expects us to be diplomatic in some encounters, but gives us no indication at all that we can be, and typically has the creature act hostile to us, causing an encounter to start, then he wonders why we didn't try to negotiate.

For instance, last night - we're in a drow city that's being attacked, and we enter a tower (which he says "I should change your alignments to evil because you're breaking and entering" - I'm like WTF we're in an encounter area?!) and there's a Drow standing there, who yells for its guards and he tells us to roll initiative. Then later he wonders why we didn't try to talk to the Drow... and I'm like "It's combat, do you normally try to talk with hostile things trying to kill you, unless it's to negotiate surrender??" During the middle of the combat he has the Drow shout something about us being allies (despite the fact we have two Eladrin in the party who would by rights never ally with a drow and kill them on sight).

 

[Jack99]

He's DMed 4th edition for about a year now - he started with Keep on the Shadowfell and we've gone through the published aventures thus far.

Another thing i notice he does is that he expects us to be diplomatic in some encounters, but gives us no indication at all that we can be, and typically has the creature act hostile to us, causing an encounter to start, then he wonders why we didn't try to negotiate.

For instance, last night - we're in a drow city that's being attacked, and we enter a tower (which he says "I should change your alignments to evil because you're breaking and entering" - I'm like WTF we're in an encounter area?!) and there's a Drow standing there, who yells for its guards and he tells us to roll initiative. Then later he wonders why we didn't try to talk to the Drow... and I'm like "It's combat, do you normally try to talk with hostile things trying to kill you, unless it's to negotiate surrender??" During the middle of the combat he has the Drow shout something about us being allies (despite the fact we have two Eladrin in the party who would by rights never ally with a drow and kill them on sight).

Sounds like your DM is butchering what is the best adventure written for 4e - my condolences.

 

[ggroy]

I played briefly in one game similar to this. The game ended up falling apart when most of the players and I revolted and walked away.