DM Schticks That Grind Your Gears

[Votan]

"Luke, you're the only one left ... oh wait, you're not ... Han and Chewie and the Millennium Falcon are here..."

That is a perfect way of using the same example and the actual way the story evolved.

If you play huge battles that take many sessions, it is likely that a supporting character can be promoted as well. Luke might be a player character carrying the weight of the adventure --suddenly Wedge is flying better and saving Luke's butt when he can't shake a TIE fighter.

 

[Agent Oracle]

That is a perfect way of using the same example and the actual way the story evolved.

If you play huge battles that take many sessions, it is likely that a supporting character can be promoted as well. Luke might be a player character carrying the weight of the adventure --suddenly Wedge is flying better and saving Luke's butt when he can't shake a TIE fighter.

QFT. If something genuinely takes several game sessions, like, say, a siege, it's possible to have Random Soldier NPC #8 be either taken over or adapted after PC-Hero has died (like Porkins! poor, poor Porkins).

 

[Hussar]

Heh, I used to run a naval based campaign using DnD. Crew promotions were fairly common.

 

[shilsen]

That is a perfect way of using the same example and the actual way the story evolved.

If you play huge battles that take many sessions, it is likely that a supporting character can be promoted as well. Luke might be a player character carrying the weight of the adventure --suddenly Wedge is flying better and saving Luke's butt when he can't shake a TIE fighter.

Precisely. Keifer113's point was a little simplistic, IMO, hence the illustration I provided.

 

[lukelightning]

Indeed. Some 20 years after he DMed it one of my player's is still living down the fact that the capital city of the county his character was from was named.....Capital City.

What's wrong with this? After all, the capital of China, Beijing, just means "Northern Capital" (Nanjing was the "Southern Capital" and Tokyo is the "Eastern Capital" even though it's in Japan). Kyoto is even worse: It's the "Capital Capital."

 

[Keifer113]

"Luke, you're the only one left ... oh wait, you're not ... Han and Chewie and the Millennium Falcon are here..."

Han didn't have proton torpedoes on the Falcon to destroy the Death Star. The point is, when you've reached an endgame point, just having a PC pop in to take the place of a dead PC is a bit silly. Its bad gaming and bad DMing. The player technically has nothing invested in the game by using a new PC with given magic items, and the other players have no incentive to truly welcome a new PC the day before they fight the BBEG.

So the player has to miss a few sessions. I've had running battles where the players simply would not have gotten a chance to rest and recruit....they were in it for the duration, win or die. Should every player then get to respawn until the heroes win? Nope. At the same time, would you as a player feel alright being excluded from a few sessions?

The DM owes players a good game. I played a game where the DM let the dice lay where they fell....my wizard pretty much, every session, got knocked out the first hour or had to use all my spells right away ( I think I was 10th level). So I'd spend the next three waiting to either be raised, or for the party to rest to get my spells back. It wasn't fun for me. I was savagely attacked verbally by one of the other players for not carrying my weight in a battle she initiated with chain devils. Devils that would hit me on a 2 up. And whose base damage would kill me. Why couldn't I carry my weight? Cause the DM didn't believe in altering his story to allow the players to rest, and he didn't cut any breaks so that characters like mine could contribute.

If thats your idea of fun, so be it. This is simply a case where one has to agree to disagee, because no one will be able to sway anyone else's opinion. I like a game where the players make the story and are all able to participate.

 

[Storm Raven]

Han didn't have proton torpedoes on the Falcon to destroy the Death Star.

No he didn't, but his help was instrumental in accomplishing the objective. No one has said the new PC has to be the golden child (and for the most part, golden child/chosen one type campaigns are so hard to make work that they are usually disasters, or railroaded bore-fests).

The point is, when you've reached an endgame point, just having a PC pop in to take the place of a dead PC is a bit silly. Its bad gaming and bad DMing.

Actually, it is good gaming and good GMing to make it work. The game is to have fun. Telling people "don't come, you are dead" is no fun. Usually it isn't any fun for any of the members of a group, unless, of course, they all hate the guy who isn't coming (in which case, the question is why are you gaming with them).

Let me put it this way: I've played D&D for more than 25 years. I have never gamed with anyone who would think that what you are describing is "good gaming" or "good GMing". You are on your own in this regard.

The player technically has nothing invested in the game by using a new PC with given magic items, and the other players have no incentive to truly welcome a new PC the day before they fight the BBEG.

No, the player likely has a lot invested, and by extension the character will too. A good player will come up with a reason for his character to be invested in the campaign, and a reason for other PCs to work with his new PC.

The DM owes players a good game. I played a game where the DM let the dice lay where they fell....my wizard pretty much, every session, got knocked out the first hour or had to use all my spells right away ( I think I was 10th level). So I'd spend the next three waiting to either be raised, or for the party to rest to get my spells back. It wasn't fun for me. I was savagely attacked verbally by one of the other players for not carrying my weight in a battle she initiated with chain devils. Devils that would hit me on a 2 up. And whose base damage would kill me. Why couldn't I carry my weight? Cause the DM didn't believe in altering his story to allow the players to rest, and he didn't cut any breaks so that characters like mine could contribute.

The problem with this example seems to be the other players, not the GM. If you are getting "savagely verbally attacked" perhaps the problem is the one doing the attacking, not the guy running the game. Then again, since the rest of the party didn't care enough to work with your character, the problem might not lie with them either.

And if your character requires cheating on the part of the GM to stay alive, then I'd say the problem could very well be your character. Not the GM.

If thats your idea of fun, so be it. This is simply a case where one has to agree to disagee, because no one will be able to sway anyone else's opinion. I like a game where the players make the story and are all able to participate.

Except that the players don't make the story. You do, because you are busy fudging the outcomes to get to the "right" one that you scripted in your head before the session started. Fudging the dice makes for a lousy game, no matter how you cut it.

 

[Rystil Arden]

( I think I was 10th level). So I'd spend the next three waiting to either be raised, or for the party to rest to get my spells back. It wasn't fun for me. I was savagely attacked verbally by one of the other players for not carrying my weight in a battle she initiated with chain devils. Devils that would hit me on a 2 up. And whose base damage would kill me.

Your 10th level Wizard had 12 AC and < 14 HP? (Chain Devils are +10 to hit with two attacks for 2d4+2 damage ) At that point, my group of players would have been complaining about your character too. Because they would think, perhaps mistakenly, that you could have only possibly made it that frail on purpose.

 

[Kerune]

thinking.....

If you don't like the way the DM drives, then you take the wheel if so many things DM's do annoy ya. :\

I was starting to feel as you do.

At first I was reading all this and laughing in agreement, then I realized all the complaints (while valid) can happen to any GOOD intentioned DM. It's hard to please everyone in the party and trust me, for every player who wants a TON of direction, there are those who want NO direction.

The same with rules, you change something to be fair and 1/2 the players like and the others hate. All these posts are valid and true, but a DM could put 100s of hours into a campaign and some of these issues might be come up.

Personally, this might be better as a thread designed to help DMs improve their games and watch for these issues.....rather than a "rag" festival.

 

[Agent Oracle]

Han didn't have proton torpedoes on the Falcon to destroy the Death Star.

And Luke's X-wing couldn't take another pass form Vader's Tie fighter. If Han & Chewie hadn't been there, the Deathstar wouldn't have been destroyed.

The point is, when you've reached an endgame point, just having a PC pop in to take the place of a dead PC is a bit silly.

Depends on your definition of "endgame". Having "random adventurer" wander in on the elemental plane of fire, far from the brass city, prepared to deal with the BBEG... is a bit difficult, but not impossible. He could be the victim of a prismatic spray plane-shift. Or a native of that plane (if he can take the level adjustment for that dwarf-like race on the fire plane), or another option which I have yet to think of. Point is, it can be done without destroying the suspention of disbelief.

Its bad gaming and bad DMing. The player technically has nothing invested in the game by using a new PC with given magic items, and the other players have no incentive to truly welcome a new PC the day before they fight the BBEG.

Does the phrase "We can use all the help we can get" mean nothing to you?

So the player has to miss a few sessions. I've had running battles where the players simply would not have gotten a chance to rest and recruit....they were in it for the duration, win or die. Should every player then get to respawn until the heroes win? Nope. At the same time, would you as a player feel alright being excluded from a few sessions?

Respawning in mid-pitched battle: I can understand being against that. You can take the duration of the battle to roll up a new character. Pick out his gear, and shift around his skills.

But what kind of battle takes the entire duration of a game night? I mean, typical gamers meet for, what, four hours a week? give or take. I know there are lots out there with more frequent or less frequent games. A normal sized adventuring party can run through even an especially difficult large-setpiece combat in about an hour... what kind of combat takes several sessions to complete?

The DM owes players a good game.

I believe that the DM owes the players nothing more than his best effort to run the game fairly and make sure everyone has a chance to have fun. Good games make themselves. I've seen players rant and rave about a campaign set in a militaristic totalitarian regime wherein the players started out as fugitives who were running for their lives from the secret police. I've Played in a game where there were two TPK's in the span of three weeks It was just a module run, but i'll be danged if we didn't have fun!

I played a game where the DM let the dice lay where they fell....my wizard pretty much, every session, got knocked out the first hour or had to use all my spells right away ( I think I was 10th level). So I'd spend the next three waiting to either be raised, or for the party to rest to get my spells back. It wasn't fun for me. I was savagely attacked verbally by one of the other players for not carrying my weight in a battle she initiated with chain devils. Devils that would hit me on a 2 up. And whose base damage would kill me. Why couldn't I carry my weight? Cause the DM didn't believe in altering his story to allow the players to rest, and he didn't cut any breaks so that characters like mine could contribute.

(shrug) sounds to me like that GM wasn't... what's the word i'm looking for... very good? If you had to be raised, because he wouldn't let you bring in a new character into the game, that was his fault. If you really couldn't rest, because of... i don't know, all time in the universe stopping? Also his fault.

If you were so attached to the defective character (14 hp? seriously, that's a lousy con score), well, that's not a good thing either.

...

Actually, he sounds kinda familiar. He wasn't partial to randomly applying templates to characters after their character creation, was he? Did he have a mutation table?

If thats your idea of fun, so be it. This is simply a case where one has to agree to disagee, because no one will be able to sway anyone else's opinion. I like a game where the players make the story and are all able to participate.

But, you're making your own point, against yourself. You are arguing in favor of not introducing new characters. You then provide us with an example of one weak character you were playing, who apparently had very low hp and, instead of letting him stay dead, you waited for resurection and took the negative level (several times from my impression of your article), and how much YOU disliked it. How is telling a player "go home, you're dead" conductive towards letting the players make their own story?