D&D General DM Says No Powergaming?

[Mad_Jack]

I had an old car I spoke to all the time. Mostly "Please start" or "&$^ what's wrong now!" Doesn't mean it was sentient.

Well, if you keep speaking to it like that, no wonder it won't start for you...

 

[Mad_Jack]

Bah, that's amateur night! Those of us who really cracked it had the light cast on non-functional braces. Want no light because you're sneaking? No problem, shut your mouth. Need light? Smiles everyone, smiles! No object interaction needed.

I had a thief with a CL diamond set into one of his teeth, and another character who was blind in one eye so we had the cleric cast CL on his eye and he wore an eyepatch most of the time...

 

[pemerton]

Bard also spoke to a random thrush. Lots of things have sentience in Middle Earth.

Why is it random?

And in the context of D&D, isn't this what it is like when a ranger pursues their favoured enemy?

 

[pemerton]

When it comes to anti-dragon weapons, I assume people are inventive. I've had towns that also shot special ballista that kind of acted like harpoons on whales, barbed arrows with weights attached. In addition, they can fire nets etc. It won't kill the dragon, it's all about slowing it down and hopefully bringing it to ground. Biggest threat of course is simply well trained archers.

All of this of course is just backdrop and story. People have been figuring out how to kill every animal we've ever discovered, along with overcoming enemy equipment and tactics for that matter. I don't see why dragons would be different.

I've never read a fantasy story of the sort that inspired D&D, and FRPGing in general, in which specialised anti-dragon weaponry is invented and used. Dragons are defeated by valiant warriors, not by superior human technology. To me, this is consistent with the themes of fantasy (as opposed to sci-fi).

 

[Oofta]

I've never read a fantasy story of the sort that inspired D&D, and FRPGing in general, in which specialised anti-dragon weaponry is invented and used. Dragons are defeated by valiant warriors, not by superior human technology. To me, this is consistent with the themes of fantasy (as opposed to sci-fi).

Which I think is a failure of imagination on the part of the authors. People don't hunt whales by going mano e mano, they have a ship, crew and harpoons. I suppose that having the valiant warriors fight the dragon is better for story telling, and there are times when the PCs will fight one, I just don't think it's logical that it would work that way in a world where dragons (and other flying threats) are reasonably common.

If dragons are creatures of legend it makes sense there would be no specialized tactics or weaponry. But the "lone warrior marching into the dragon's lair" or even the "two dozen men-at-arms", typically armed only with swords, always seemed silly to me unless there's a logical reason for it. Our tribal ancestors used to hunt mammoths with stone spears and maybe a dozen men, I find it difficult to believe that a kingdom couldn't figure out tactics and numbers to take out a single dragon.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I've never read a fantasy story of the sort that inspired D&D, and FRPGing in general, in which specialised anti-dragon weaponry is invented and used. Dragons are defeated by valiant warriors, not by superior human technology. To me, this is consistent with the themes of fantasy (as opposed to sci-fi).

But its not entirely consistent with the rules of D&D. I think that's what people are getting at.

 

[pemerton]

But its not entirely consistent with the rules of D&D. I think that's what people are getting at.

In AD&D there is an Arrow of Dragon Slaying.

In 4e D&D there is a skill challenge to turn the dragon into a minion (ie in the fiction, to set up the fatal shot).

Given that 5e claims to be a game of unlimited imagination like its predecessors, I assume that it too has a way of handling this. Not too far upthread, @AbdulAlhazred suggested that that would be getting the GM to agree. I don't know the system well enough to know what other ways there might be.

 

[pemerton]

Which I think is a failure of imagination on the part of the authors. People don't hunt whales by going mano e mano, they have a ship, crew and harpoons. I suppose that having the valiant warriors fight the dragon is better for story telling, and there are times when the PCs will fight one, I just don't think it's logical that it would work that way in a world where dragons (and other flying threats) are reasonably common.

If dragons are creatures of legend it makes sense there would be no specialized tactics or weaponry. But the "lone warrior marching into the dragon's lair" or even the "two dozen men-at-arms", typically armed only with swords, always seemed silly to me unless there's a logical reason for it.

The point of fantasy stories about valiant warriors defeating dragons isn't to speculate on how, in the real world, human beings might meet the challenge posed by the existence of flying, fire-breathing T-Rexes.

Those stories are about courage, power, sometimes humility (Bard and St George, but maybe not so much Beowulf). As I said, this is a difference between sci-fi and fantasy.

 

[James Gasik]

Why is it random?

And in the context of D&D, isn't this what it is like when a ranger pursues their favoured enemy?

I mean unless there's some backstory between Bard and that bird, I assume it's some bird he never met before.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The point of fantasy stories about valiant warriors defeating dragons isn't to speculate on how, in the real world, human beings might meet the challenge posed by the existence of flying, fire-breathing T-Rexes.

Those stories are about courage, power, sometimes humility (Bard and St George, but maybe not so much Beowulf). As I said, this is a difference between sci-fi and fantasy.

That's true, but it illustrates a key issue with RPGs like D&D, where players are often expected to solve problems rationally, in a universe full of bizarre fantasy elements that only make sense in more "magic realism" or "metaphorical" context.

Sometimes that conflict is a lot of fun in the way you saw in some novels (particularly in the '80s), where someone just comes along and "sorts out" a fantasy world (you also get this a bit in Terry Pratchett) with Facts and Logic.

Ironically enough, lot of modern fantasy RPGs (and some older ones, like Pendragon and Heroquest, but they're in the minority) do manage to handle this gracefully, but D&D has always had some peculiar issues here. It doesn't help at all that D&D stole its magic system and general approach to magic from a series of what are basically sci-fi novels/short stories (something I'd say with a lot of confidence having read them a while back), which have a very science-y kind of magic in them, and totally failed to import the mysticism and weirdness of even Tolkien.

 

[James Gasik]

I've never read a fantasy story of the sort that inspired D&D, and FRPGing in general, in which specialised anti-dragon weaponry is invented and used. Dragons are defeated by valiant warriors, not by superior human technology. To me, this is consistent with the themes of fantasy (as opposed to sci-fi).

How about movies?

 

[pemerton]

That's true, but it illustrates a key issue with RPGs like D&D, where players are often expected to solve problems rationally, in a universe full of bizarre fantasy elements that only make sense in more "magic realism" or "metaphorical" context.

Sometimes that conflict is a lot of fun in the way you saw in some novels (particularly in the '80s), where someone just comes along and "sorts out" a fantasy world (you also get this a bit in Terry Pratchett) with Facts and Logic.

Ironically enough, lot of modern fantasy RPGs (and some older ones, like Pendragon and Heroquest, but they're in the minority) do manage to handle this gracefully, but D&D has always had some peculiar issues here. It doesn't help at all that D&D stole its magic system and general approach to magic from a series of what are basically sci-fi novels/short stories (something I'd say with a lot of confidence having read them a while back), which have a very science-y kind of magic in them, and totally failed to import the mysticism and weirdness of even Tolkien.

On your reference to novels - is A Connecticut Yankee the first in that genre?

I haven't read enough of The Dying Earth to have the same confidence you do in talking about it. I do agree that it is not in the same genre as Bard, St George or Beowulf. I'm not sure I feel it's quite as sci-fi-ish either. There does seem to be a fairy-tale element to some of it.

I agree with you that D&D can struggle, to an extent, with fairy-tale or fantasy logic - this is one reason why 4e D&D, which is an exception in this respect and doesn't struggle at all, is my favourite version. For RPGs that manage to combine classic D&D's grittiness with fantasy, I look to Burning Wheel and Torchbearer. (Of the older systems, I'd nominate RQ but these days I don't really see what it offers that BW doesn't do better.) For non-gritty I favour Prince Valiant over Pendragon, but for whatever reason I'm in the minority in that respect.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The point of fantasy stories about valiant warriors defeating dragons isn't to speculate on how, in the real world, human beings might meet the challenge posed by the existence of flying, fire-breathing T-Rexes.

Those stories are about courage, power, sometimes humility (Bard and St George, but maybe not so much Beowulf). As I said, this is a difference between sci-fi and fantasy.

That is your point to fantasy stories. No game is required to follow the narrative tropes you want.

 

[pemerton]

That is your point to fantasy stories. No game is required to follow the narrative tropes you want.

Nor is it required to follow the narrative tropes that you want.

But to my mind, speculating about how many villagers it takes to shoot down a dragon is silly. Doubly so when the speculation is based on rules that manifestly are not intended to resolve that sort of combat (as opposed to the small scale skirmishes they are designed for).

 

[Mort]

In AD&D there is an Arrow of Dragon Slaying.

In 4e D&D there is a skill challenge to turn the dragon into a minion (ie in the fiction, to set up the fatal shot).

Given that 5e claims to be a game of unlimited imagination like its predecessors, I assume that it too has a way of handling this. Not too far upthread, @AbdulAlhazred suggested that that would be getting the GM to agree. I don't know the system well enough to know what other ways there might be.

Unfortunately, minion rules didn't make it into 5e.

Though it's extremely easy to port them in, and I've done so to decent effect.

IMO, the concept of a skill challenge to minionize a dragon is brilliant! I'll have to incorporate that in somewhere.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

The reason I am not going to have a town kill a dragon (when my turn to dm) is not a rule specific issue.

If men see ash where a battalion once stood they may well get a little nervous. How often in history has an army been routed when they lose their nerve?

So many assumptions here! The dragon has zero minions or spies? Some dragons can change their appearance and spy! Surely others can intimidate and get information about an army being raised!

Etc etc etc

But a small group of adventurers? With magic? Might that be harder to forsee and counter?

In my mind that would be more than likely true…

In another campaign it could be different!

 

[Oofta]

The point of fantasy stories about valiant warriors defeating dragons isn't to speculate on how, in the real world, human beings might meet the challenge posed by the existence of flying, fire-breathing T-Rexes.

Those stories are about courage, power, sometimes humility (Bard and St George, but maybe not so much Beowulf). As I said, this is a difference between sci-fi and fantasy.

I see it as the difference between constructing a believable world and telling a story. I don't construct my campaign as a story, I try to extrapolate what it could be like if magic and dragons were real. Then we have events in that world and a story emerges.

Some fiction cares, some does not and I don't think there is a clear cut line between genres.

In any case, I just have a different approach and goals than many authors do.

 

[Redwizard007]

When it comes to anti-dragon weapons, I assume people are inventive. I've had towns that also shot special ballista that kind of acted like harpoons on whales, barbed arrows with weights attached. In addition, they can fire nets etc. It won't kill the dragon, it's all about slowing it down and hopefully bringing it to ground. Biggest threat of course is simply well trained archers.

All of this of course is just backdrop and story. People have been figuring out how to kill every animal we've ever discovered, along with overcoming enemy equipment and tactics for that matter. I don't see why dragons would be different.

This.

The number of species we have driven to (near)extinction in the real world is either impressive or depressing, depending on viewpoint. If it is bigger than a bread box, a threat, and not easily domesticated then chances are quite good that we obliterated it.

Dragons, being undeniably intelligent and highly mobile, have the ability to dictate the terms of their contact with humanity, and that is really their best option. Those with a proclivity to raid anything bigger than a hamlet are incredibly unlikely to live long enough to reproduce. Secluded lairs have always been the norm for dragons in fiction. That is defense #1. The ability to eat small elephants is #2. Planning a raid intelligently is #3. Magic (depending on edition and optional rules) is a great planning tool. So are plain old spies and scouts. Interrogation of food before consumption would be common. From there, you direct your fanatical and/or terrified servants in some basic scouting until you find a suitable target.

That doesn't mean that 4am village strafing isn't a viable option for them, but it does mean that predictable attacks made without supporting minions are unlikely. Minions, in this case, could be saboteurs within the village, a rampaging orc horde, corrupt officials who sold off all the bows reserved for dragon attacks, cultists, kobolds attacking from the sewers, or any number of other allies. A dragon doesn't even need to coordinate with others. Simply waiting for the seasonal orc horde to weaken defenses, or delaying an attack until the local noble is summoned away to war are well within the reasoning abilities of a few hundred year old wyrm. Flying in without using the cover of night, hanging around for the militia to muster, and then remaining within short bow range... might as well bring a pattern for dragonscale armor with you.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I've never read a fantasy story of the sort that inspired D&D, and FRPGing in general, in which specialised anti-dragon weaponry is invented and used. Dragons are defeated by valiant warriors, not by superior human technology. To me, this is consistent with the themes of fantasy (as opposed to sci-fi).

Well, who’s to say the Black Arrow had any powers at all? Maybe it’s like my lucky mountaineering hat. I’ve never once died winter mountaineering while wearing that hat. Not even once! How lucky is that?

 

[Clint_L]

Which I think is a failure of imagination on the part of the authors.

Isn't the whole point of fantasy not having to think too hard?

I kid. A bit. But it is true that fantasy doesn't tend to ask tough questions the way sci-fi does. You certainly don't want to think too hard about D&D settings because none of them make any sense.