Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AtomicPope" data-source="post: 4345380" data-attributes="member: 64790">As many astute posters pointed out the DM should Roleplay the monsters.&nbsp; When I play Brutes that can attack out of turn (Berserkers, Bloodragers, Boneshards, just to name a few 'B' rated monsters) I'll intentionally draw AoO because they're reckless.&nbsp; I also like to play undead as &quot;being out for blood.&quot;&nbsp; The fluff is their craving for life energy is strong, therefore they attack bloodied characters.&nbsp; Even if it's not the best thing tactically (and their Int is low) they attack bloodied characters.&nbsp; It gives the monsters a different feel.&nbsp; Now the players know if someone is injured Zombies will try and eat you <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":eek:" title="Eek!&nbsp; &nbsp; :eek:"&nbsp; data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":eek:" />&nbsp;&nbsp;The experiment of Shroedinger's Cat brings up an interesting point though.&nbsp; The only way to determine whether or not the DM is an &quot;Opponent&quot; is to play the game.&nbsp; For many gamers that is too late.&nbsp; This is a problem with any game, not just 4e.&nbsp;I am rarely impartial when I DM because I want to test the players.&nbsp; For example, in a recent game I gave the players a tough encounter (1 level higher in exp with two monsters that were 4 levels higher and two 2 level higher monsters).&nbsp; The &quot;scout&quot; classes were able to spot the monsters at full range (20 squares away) and remain undetected.&nbsp; I gave them explicit information that they could&nbsp; dart behind bushes to get close but if they failed their Stealth role they wouldn't act in the Surprise round.&nbsp; This set up was intentional.&nbsp; There are two scouts so I had two different trees to hide behind.&nbsp; But that's not all.&nbsp;When the monsters came out I set them up in position to be hit with daily powers (like Splitting the Tree and Acid Orb).&nbsp; I do that so new players can get a feeling for their characters.&nbsp; Unfortunately neither character used their Daily and the party was hurtin' bad.&nbsp;So my impartiality is feigned.&nbsp; If I see a player having a difficult time I'll give them some opportunities to shine.&nbsp; I won't tell them because that takes away all of their glory.&nbsp; For smart players I just let them do their thing and not step on their toes.&nbsp; Roleplayers like plot hooks so I plant Easter Eggs throughout the adventure (giving Quest rewards for following leads).&nbsp;I suppose the one thing I don't do is send in the Uber NPC to help everyone out and save the day.&nbsp; I hate that crap.&nbsp; Let the players play the game, not the NPC's.&nbsp;True.&nbsp; I try to limit &quot;rules discussions&quot; by making snap decisions and writing down questions for later.&nbsp; It's better to discuss them after the game.&nbsp; All elaborate descriptions I save for the effects and setting.&nbsp; When describing the surroundings I embelish.&nbsp; When a PC or Monster performs admirably it warrants a lengthy narration.&nbsp; I don't consider rules worth the game time unless it's serious to the outcome.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AtomicPope, post: 4345380, member: 64790"] As many astute posters pointed out the DM should Roleplay the monsters. When I play Brutes that can attack out of turn (Berserkers, Bloodragers, Boneshards, just to name a few 'B' rated monsters) I'll intentionally draw AoO because they're reckless. I also like to play undead as "being out for blood." The fluff is their craving for life energy is strong, therefore they attack bloodied characters. Even if it's not the best thing tactically (and their Int is low) they attack bloodied characters. It gives the monsters a different feel. Now the players know if someone is injured Zombies will try and eat you :eek: The experiment of Shroedinger's Cat brings up an interesting point though. The only way to determine whether or not the DM is an "Opponent" is to play the game. For many gamers that is too late. This is a problem with any game, not just 4e. I am rarely impartial when I DM because I want to test the players. For example, in a recent game I gave the players a tough encounter (1 level higher in exp with two monsters that were 4 levels higher and two 2 level higher monsters). The "scout" classes were able to spot the monsters at full range (20 squares away) and remain undetected. I gave them explicit information that they could dart behind bushes to get close but if they failed their Stealth role they wouldn't act in the Surprise round. This set up was intentional. There are two scouts so I had two different trees to hide behind. But that's not all. When the monsters came out I set them up in position to be hit with daily powers (like Splitting the Tree and Acid Orb). I do that so new players can get a feeling for their characters. Unfortunately neither character used their Daily and the party was hurtin' bad. So my impartiality is feigned. If I see a player having a difficult time I'll give them some opportunities to shine. I won't tell them because that takes away all of their glory. For smart players I just let them do their thing and not step on their toes. Roleplayers like plot hooks so I plant Easter Eggs throughout the adventure (giving Quest rewards for following leads). I suppose the one thing I don't do is send in the Uber NPC to help everyone out and save the day. I hate that crap. Let the players play the game, not the NPC's. True. I try to limit "rules discussions" by making snap decisions and writing down questions for later. It's better to discuss them after the game. All elaborate descriptions I save for the effects and setting. When describing the surroundings I embelish. When a PC or Monster performs admirably it warrants a lengthy narration. I don't consider rules worth the game time unless it's serious to the outcome. [/QUOTE]

Verification