Dealing with an "oldschool" DM

[ArghMark]

Things seem a little tense. Let us all become one with the force and all that. What someone on the other side of the world says is interesting, but shouldn't be inflammatory. Also, deliberately telling people they should not game anymore is something that would make me slightly upset, even if you are on the other side of the world; we're all fellow geeks here, right? Why try to stop someone else from having fun in their own way?

Anyway, OP's post on the GM - I really think the OP might be assuming a little much. I mean.. level fourteen and no deaths? I'm far from a PC killer and I don't giggle (much) when I kill the players PCs, but it seems to me that things are going very well, equipment or no. How many experience points does it take to get to 14? Quite a lot! It also seems that you tend to triumph through respectable odds. Nothing wrong with that, either. What do you actually want... to make the game easier?

Whatever for? The game is better when you succeed through dire straits! I could complain if the GM was always throwing hideously boring encounters, but tough ones are fair enough. Perhaps the GM has a reason for docking xp also - you might like to ask what it is.

I guess my only suggestion is to sit back, worry less about the rules, and pay more attention to the story.

Rule 1. All rules bend to story as necessary. None of my players have ever complained, though I don't abuse that - just like if the GM says 'The bad guy climbs the ladder and gets away' I don't use my action point to get another action to kill him. I let him get away because he's a good villain.

As a player, why not try to help the story and your character instead of just seeing him as a collection of numbers that increase? That way you get to go 'Woohoo! Level up!' when it happens and just play the game otherwise. It's not a race to 30 .

 

[ST]

I think a lot of the discussion, and both the OP and the DM in question, is missing what to me is the primary problem: the DM is not running the encounters well. He's not using the monsters' abilities to their utmost, he is not using good tactics, taking advantage of terrain, etc. And so he's not pushing the party.

That's really the core problem. Instead of addressing that problem, he's trying to address it by not scaling encounters down in order to make them tougher. And then since that would result in faster level gain leading to even less challenge, he scales back XP and loot. Then the OP, though he recognizes the issue with the way the DM is running encounters, sounds like his main frustration with the scaled back progress and whether the DM is following the rules for XP and so forth.

But the linchpin here is the encounters not being tough enough; everything else is simply downstream from that.

I really feel like you nailed it. The GM seems to have not figured out how to play encounters to provide a challenge. Holding the players back some with the stated reason of "It's too easy" totally supports that.

You're right that it's not easy to fix, because a poorly-played encounter of level X+1 isn't necessarily any more dangerous than the level X version, because most of the reasons it's tougher might well get wastd. Instead, it's just going to take longer to hack through the extra HP.

 

[wayne62682]

The main issue I have isn't so much that he doesn't follow the encounters, is that he uses it as basis to say that 4e isn't balanced on what everyone else knows it's balanced at. He's not running a low magic game, but he doesn't change the published adventures or tailor the treasure or anything of that sort, so we sometimes don't end up with any usable treasure because we don't use what the adventure just drops in. Hell, it took him two adventures to scale up our armor to a manageable level; I had only a +1 suit of armor at 9th level (that I found at 2nd level during Keep on the Shadowfell) and then it got "upgraded" to +3 because I guess he realized our defenses were horrible.

I am the only one with an issue, but everyone else is still new to D&D and have only ever played 4th edition, and have only been playing for about 10 or so months. Meanwhile I've been playing since 1990 and have played OD&D (not the old old version - the one I got came in a black box with a red dragon in the games section of Toys 'R' Us) 1st, 2nd, 3rd and now 4th edition.

The bigger issue I have with him is that he'll say we should negotiate with a creature, but he won't give us the opportunity to do it and then get upset with us later because we didn't. I already mentioned the situation with the drow last game; there was another in Pyramid of Shadows - an area with ice Eladrin, and we were wandering through an area, and we opened a door; a group of eladrin saw us and were like "Intruders, kill them!" and then we go to combat, and later he's like "You could have talked to them, you know." - he didn't give us the option to talk, and he has the gall (IMO of course) to say that we're wrong for exploring every room in the "dungeon" that we're in - he keeps saying "this isn't a videogame, you don't have to explore everything" but he runs it like a videogame because everything we encounter is hostile immediately upon seeing us.

Maybe I'm missing something, but if a creature is hostile towards us and clearly doesn't even want to question us, but draw its weapon, then as far as I'm concerned it's a fight, and negotiations of any kind are no longer an option on the table.

 

[Ariosto]

Wayne, does your group go in without weapons at the ready? In my experience, that's pretty darned unusual for people in the dungeons; so maybe you've got a double standard (I don't know).

I'm not saying the DM isn't full of baloney on that "you could negotiate" count. I guess you could just point at him and laugh ... but here's what I think is a better idea: Ask him how he would have handled the situation, eh?

As for exploring every room, I would not get into careful searches of everything at the first pass. Get a good bit of reconnaissance in, a broad picture of the lay of the land, and identify promising targets for further investigation. Maybe your DM means something else; again, talking about it, in as non-confrontational a manner as possible, is key to any mutual understanding.

[edit] Maybe he means to suggest that if you want more XP and richer treasure, then it's time to move on to a deeper level? As others have observed, your lack of KIA so very far could indicate stellar play on your part -- but maybe you have not dared risks commensurate with the level of reward you desire?

 

[ryryguy]

The main issue I have isn't so much that he doesn't follow the encounters, is that he uses it as basis to say that 4e isn't balanced on what everyone else knows it's balanced at. He's not running a low magic game, but he doesn't change the published adventures or tailor the treasure or anything of that sort.

That certainly sounds silly... but do you really feel that you have to defend the honor of 4e against his misconceptions? So what if he says 4e isn't really balanced, when you think it's really because of the way he's running encounters. If it's still fun, who cares what he says about 4e. (But again, is it still fun, or as fun as it could be? Tougher encounters might well make it more fun for everyone.)

The negotiation issue seems separate. Have you talked to him outside of play about it? Suggest that if he wants to see more talk, he needs to give you a chance before rolling initiative. If for some reason he doesn't like that idea, ask him what he would expect you to do. Maybe you can still shout, "Wait! Let's talk!" after initiative is rolled. It's not the way most groups do it, but if that's the way he wants to run it, I don't see why it couldn't work out.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Maybe I'm missing something, but if a creature is hostile towards us and clearly doesn't even want to question us, but draw its weapon, then as far as I'm concerned it's a fight, and negotiations of any kind are no longer an option on the table.

If you come into my house in the middle of the night, I am fully justified in confronting you with my shotgun. I'm not sure how that takes diplomacy off the table. How about: "Wait! Don't shoot, we're here to fix the phone line!" That might make me click the safety back on. Or it might not, but the option for diplomacy remains.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

If you come into my house in the middle of the night, I am fully justified in confronting you with my shotgun. I'm not sure how that takes diplomacy off the table. How about: "Wait! Don't shoot, we're here to fix the phone line!" That might make me click the safety back on. Or it might not, but the option for diplomacy remains.

Bingo.

Initiative is purely mechanic. It's not fluff for "OK EVERYONE HAS TO FIGHT NOW! TWO MEN ENTER, ONE MAN LEAVES! TWO MEN ENTER, ONE MAN LEAVES!"

In the end, I'm going to say both DM AND player are at fault, for hilariously opposite reasons. The DM is smudging rules too much and doesn't entirely understand them, but is trying to get a certain feel across - he's purely playing by the spirit. The player seems to be a rules lawyer of the highest degree and approches everything from a purely mechanics view - he's purely playing by the rules.

 

[Ariosto]

I don't see why the DM would say that negotiation was possible when it was not, so I would be inclined to take him at his word.

What I really wonder is why the DM is making the suggestion in the first place?

It could be that he misses getting in a bit of role-playing once in a while. Maybe you could encounter some NPCs who more clearly indicate their desire to parley. Then again, maybe you are not giving them a fair chance. Who strikes the first blow?

 

[Ariosto]

A thought on thought, communication and conventions:

What I have seen in RPGA sessions is players "trained" to take their cue from the DM as to whether something is supposed to be a "combat encounter" or a "skill challenge" -- and the assumption that that's all there is. Pure role-playing seems right off the menu.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

The main issue I have isn't so much that he doesn't follow the encounters, is that he uses it as basis to say that 4e isn't balanced on what everyone else knows it's balanced at. He's not running a low magic game, but he doesn't change the published adventures or tailor the treasure or anything of that sort, so we sometimes don't end up with any usable treasure because we don't use what the adventure just drops in. Hell, it took him two adventures to scale up our armor to a manageable level; I had only a +1 suit of armor at 9th level (that I found at 2nd level during Keep on the Shadowfell) and then it got "upgraded" to +3 because I guess he realized our defenses were horrible.

Okay, I sympathize with your bling issue; 4e has pretty specific guidelines about bling that the game is balanced around. If he's running premades as-is without monitoring the PCs' bling level, it sounds like he really is somewhat clueless about game balance. Yet you still haven't answered our question [that I know of]: Are you not having fun? If you're not, it's time to have a chat with your DM. If this guy is such a horrible DM and you're so miserable, run a fraking game yourself.

The bigger issue I have with him is that he'll say we should negotiate with a creature, but he won't give us the opportunity to do it and then get upset with us later because we didn't. I already mentioned the situation with the drow last game; there was another in Pyramid of Shadows - an area with ice Eladrin, and we were wandering through an area, and we opened a door; a group of eladrin saw us and were like "Intruders, kill them!" and then we go to combat, and later he's like "You could have talked to them, you know." - he didn't give us the option to talk, and he has the gall (IMO of course) to say that we're wrong for exploring every room in the "dungeon" that we're in - he keeps saying "this isn't a videogame, you don't have to explore everything" but he runs it like a videogame because everything we encounter is hostile immediately upon seeing us.

Maybe I'm missing something, but if a creature is hostile towards us and clearly doesn't even want to question us, but draw its weapon, then as far as I'm concerned it's a fight, and negotiations of any kind are no longer an option on the table.

You plainly are missing something; it is arguably unreasonable, but your DM clearly does expect you to say "Wait, we're not the enemy!" after initiative is rolled. At least he expects you to do that if you don't want to fight. So every time you neglect to do so, he assumes that you want to fight.