DM Encounter Advice

[Vorput]

Players persepctive

I'm a member of the group- to be fair, we only really attacked because we found out that session- seemingly out of the blue, that one of the character's father had been kidnapped and was going to be turned into an abberation very soon.

Was it a smart move? Hell no, but I didn't want to explain to the character (or the player- who's new to D&D) that her wonderful backstory is a moot point, since her dad just got turned into a freak of nature who are characters are sort of obligated to go kill now :\

Also, we may have been misled by the fact that we thought this was an obvious adventure hook. My character was brought in by being told (by a dryad) to find the rest of the party, and get their help tackling the cave (this was my first encounter with the party, and it turns out one of their fathers was about to be killed). Perhaps the assumption that the cave would indeed be tackalable was a bad one.

So, normally- we'd see something like this and not fight- the problem was all the clues (characters father was captured out of nowhere, it was an introduction of a new character, an NPC told us the party would be suitable help) led us to believe we could take it (granted, by and large- these clues were metagame).

Also, the beguiler couldn't see in the dark (all the creatures had darkvision), couldn't speak undercommon, is a new player to D&D, and while a changeling- couldn't turn into an abberation, or one of the small races (kobolds or goblins) or one of the Ogres. Moreover, I just don't think a non-abberation can act like an abberation- especially creations of the Daelkyr, they're very much the antithesis of human logic (granted there were other non-abberation creatures, we just didn't know that at the time- and it seemed logical the abberations would be in charge). So, we didn't think beguiling was all that much of an option, and by the time we realized how drastically outnumbered we were- we were already pretty committed to this- and certainly didn't want to take another day for the character's father to be abberifed (fun new word!)- and for the creatures to improve their defenses.

I think the entire party probably should have died... and it was really the DM being lenient (and us forgetting some rules) that spared us from that- it just seemed at the outset to be a very straightforward adventure

Vorp

 

[Vorput]

That's the best quote I've read in some time. I do believe I'm stealing it.

I am too

 

[Odysseus]

I was wondering... if it seems like the party is just generally more interested in running in and killing things, how much should the DM be expected to cater to that? I prefer a mixed bag - combat, stealth, and social interaction. Though, I have to admit, our individual sessions usually do end up being more focused on one, maybe two, but rarely all three. But if the players are largely not interested in a stealth-based adventure, should I just leave those out altogether?

A couple of points here. Make sure that when the party does indulge in stealth or social interaction. You encourage them, so that they see the benefits of alternative courses of actions. Also make sure your monsters engage in stealth and social interaction. That way your demonstrating the advantages of those actions.

As to encounter design . I prefer to think of the encounter without any characters. Then once I have the encounter, consider how the party is likely to react/act. And how this will influence the encounter. And then modify the encounter slightly. With this in mind, with your encounter giving them the information that they would be outnumbered, should of become part of the encounter at some point

 

[shilsen]

Players persepctive

BTW, let me just say that's it really refreshing to have a thread about a gaming debacle (though it was hardly a disastrous one in this case) with both DM and player posting from different perspectives and doing so in a civil and intelligent manner.

Kudos, you guys! From the posts on this thread, it sounds like you shouldn't have a problem achieving a balance that works for all concerned.

 

[Warren Okuma]

Yup. A pretty interesting situation.

For me, I just make it really obvious. "A CR 22 ancient red dragon flies overhead. It looks you over, but ignores you." Why let them guess which creatures can kill them or not? If I let them guess, ten percent of the time they will choose a TPK, so I make it obvious.

If you make them guess, they will never guess perfect. Sometimes the players are tired, or bored or pissed off at work (or wife or etc...,), you being misunderstood, and character goals and roleplaying (as you have just seen), and you cannot guess that. So make the unkillables obvious and just have them do cameos.

 

[jdrakeh]

As others have said, when setting up a challenge that can't be overcome by straight up application of brute force, you need to drop plenty of hints that this is the case. This is what separates a "Good DM" from a "Killer DM", IMO. Let your players know in an obvious manner that running into that dark hole is not a good idea.

I had a DM that would, without warning, drop things like CR 22 dragons in what were ostensibly 1st Level dungeons. We'd be moving along through a dungeon when *BAM* there would suddenly be a great Red Dragon in the next room. . . no foreshadowing, no warning, no. . . anything. Except a bitter TPK and a bunch of rightfully pissed off players.

Now, that said, the other thing to watch out for is dropping hints that running into aforementioned dark hole is a good idea. If there's a large likelihood that running into a place with weapons drawn will end up in a TPK, you shouldn't steer PCs toward that end if you want to be a "Good DM". That is. . .

If the Big Dark Hole is inhabited by a Thing That the PCs Cannot Possibly Hope to Defeat, don't develop plot threads, introduce NPCs, etc that imply a trip into said Big Dark Hole is the appropriate course of action. When you do this as a DM, you're saying "Go into the Big Dark Hole!" -- and when the players do so, they're doing so because you told them to.

Unbalanced and potentially lethal encounters are fine. Dropping them on your players without any warning or deliberately steering them toward such encounters is pretty uncool (though I can see how the latter thing might happen unknowingly, as that kind of player/DM paradigm isn't immediately obvious to everybody).

 

[Piratecat]

I'm curious (although I suspect the answer is yes): do you also put encounters in the game that are extremely easy and a cakewalk, to remind the PCs that they're more powerful than many people?

 

[jdrakeh]

I'm curious (although I suspect the answer is yes): do you also put encounters in the game that are extremely easy and a cakewalk, to remind the PCs that they're more powerful than many people?

Are you asking me or the OP? If you're asking me, the answer is a resounding "No". I use CR as a rule of thumb but, generally, if it makes sense for a certain to creature to be in a certain place, CR be damned. That said, I apply the above advice liberally (i.e., I won't drop plot hooks that steer PCs toward a Big Hole of Death if they aren't ready for it and I set up plenty of in-game warnings about "the bad place" to clue in players).

 

[Piratecat]

The OP.

 

[shilsen]

I'm curious (although I suspect the answer is yes): do you also put encounters in the game that are extremely easy and a cakewalk, to remind the PCs that they're more powerful than many people?

That's something I suggested to the OP above. It's funny how many people who do the "status quo" route only have encounters that challenge or totally overshadow the PCs, but don't do the additional angle of having encounters the PCs can absolutely outclass without an effort. I try to remember and have those once in a while, just to underline that how amazing the PCs are. And since I'm running an Eberron game with now 13th level PCs, they really are gods among men as far as the vast majority of the populace is concerned.

Are you asking me or the OP? If you're asking me, the answer is a resounding "No". I use CR as a rule of thumb but, generally, if it makes sense for a certain to creature to be in a certain place, CR be damned. That said, I apply the above advice liberally (i.e., I won't drop plot hooks that steer PCs toward a Big Hole of Death if they aren't ready for it and I set up plenty of in-game warnings about "the bad place" to clue in players).

This is precisely what I referred to above. I find it contradictory that on one hand you say that if it makes sense for a certain creature to be in a certain place then CR be damned, but then also give a resounding "No" to the idea of encounters that are a cakewalk for the PCs. Wouldn't it make sense in some places to have people who are significantly weaker than the PCs (esp. once the PCs have a few levels under their belts)? In that case, if the PCs choose to fight them, wouldn't those fights be a cakewalk?