DrunkonDuty
he/him
Thanks, Cadfan.
DM versus Players
- Thread starter pawsplay
- Start date
thecasualoblivion
First Post
I call it Fake Difficulty because things like Rust Monsters and level draining creatures generally aren't worth fighting. The risk outweighs the rewards, and the only reason you would end up fighting these is if you're forced to.
Lets say you're a Fighter, you have any or all of magic shield/armor/weapon and you meet a Rust Monster. The only solution this Fighter has to the dilemma of the Rust Monster is to not fight the Rust Monster. Its just not worth the risk. Your gear is more valuable than any likely reward gained from tangling with the Rust Monster. If that is the point, then you have something, but if the DM places the Rust Monster with the intention that this Fighter will have to deal with it up close, thats another thing. You're forcing someone to do something that they wouldn't otherwise do. Sure, you could run a way and fire arrows, but theres the chance it could catch up and eat your armor. Probably best to avoid it altogether.
Its a similar story with level draining creatures, particularly in AD&D when there was little you could do about it after the fact, and levels to longer to achieve and losing them was more of a loss. You meet level draining creatures, what should you do? Run away? Triple Fireball and go home and rest? In 99% of cases, there is no reward worth the risk of tangling with one of these, and outside of DM railroading no reason to tangle with these creatures.
If the only sensible response to meeting a creature is to go home or to nuke from orbit, is this a good creature to use? Its like taking a million dollars doused in gasoline to a wrestling match against a guy who is on fire. It sounds interesting in theory, but its not a situation you would ever put yourself in, or choose not to walk away from if you had any other choice. This issue is a matter of scale. These creatures are so much more dangerous to what a player has worked hard to attain compared to other creatures that they can't be compared on the same scale.
Sure you could have Rust Monsters and Vampires endangering children, but if I have to put my levels and magic items on the line, screw those children. I'll find other children to save.
I'm ok with danger, but I prefer danger that can be managed in accordance with the reward involved. Level draining and Rust Monsters are too much danger for too little risk, and aren't things you fight by making a choice based on calculated risk/reward.
Never mind the fact that these monsters hose characters unevenly, as they don't endanger stand off ranged characters to the same degree that they threaten PCs who do their business up close.
Lets say you're a Fighter, you have any or all of magic shield/armor/weapon and you meet a Rust Monster. The only solution this Fighter has to the dilemma of the Rust Monster is to not fight the Rust Monster. Its just not worth the risk. Your gear is more valuable than any likely reward gained from tangling with the Rust Monster. If that is the point, then you have something, but if the DM places the Rust Monster with the intention that this Fighter will have to deal with it up close, thats another thing. You're forcing someone to do something that they wouldn't otherwise do. Sure, you could run a way and fire arrows, but theres the chance it could catch up and eat your armor. Probably best to avoid it altogether.
Its a similar story with level draining creatures, particularly in AD&D when there was little you could do about it after the fact, and levels to longer to achieve and losing them was more of a loss. You meet level draining creatures, what should you do? Run away? Triple Fireball and go home and rest? In 99% of cases, there is no reward worth the risk of tangling with one of these, and outside of DM railroading no reason to tangle with these creatures.
If the only sensible response to meeting a creature is to go home or to nuke from orbit, is this a good creature to use? Its like taking a million dollars doused in gasoline to a wrestling match against a guy who is on fire. It sounds interesting in theory, but its not a situation you would ever put yourself in, or choose not to walk away from if you had any other choice. This issue is a matter of scale. These creatures are so much more dangerous to what a player has worked hard to attain compared to other creatures that they can't be compared on the same scale.
Sure you could have Rust Monsters and Vampires endangering children, but if I have to put my levels and magic items on the line, screw those children. I'll find other children to save.
I'm ok with danger, but I prefer danger that can be managed in accordance with the reward involved. Level draining and Rust Monsters are too much danger for too little risk, and aren't things you fight by making a choice based on calculated risk/reward.
Never mind the fact that these monsters hose characters unevenly, as they don't endanger stand off ranged characters to the same degree that they threaten PCs who do their business up close.
Last edited:
Hussar
Legend
On Level Draining -
This was something I had houseruled even back in early 2e days. Level draining in my world was something you could heal, same as hit points. IIRC, I said a week of bedrest per level (might have been a day, it's been a while). Which meant that if you got level drained, it would hurt you for that adventure or scenario, but, it wouldn't cripple you.
When 3e came out and I saw the rules for level drain - negative level but you get saving throws and restoration is available very early, I saw that my ideas were pretty much in line with the new edition.
Was one of the main reasons I switched editions - their ideas and mine just lined up nicely.
Aha gotcha monsters are one thing I absolutely loathed as a player AND as a DM almost from the time I started gaming. I almost never use them, other than maybe the infrequent medusa (just cos medusa are cool). So, yeah, I'm definitely in the camp that Bang Bang You're Dead style monsters are bad.
This was something I had houseruled even back in early 2e days. Level draining in my world was something you could heal, same as hit points. IIRC, I said a week of bedrest per level (might have been a day, it's been a while). Which meant that if you got level drained, it would hurt you for that adventure or scenario, but, it wouldn't cripple you.
When 3e came out and I saw the rules for level drain - negative level but you get saving throws and restoration is available very early, I saw that my ideas were pretty much in line with the new edition.
Was one of the main reasons I switched editions - their ideas and mine just lined up nicely.
Aha gotcha monsters are one thing I absolutely loathed as a player AND as a DM almost from the time I started gaming. I almost never use them, other than maybe the infrequent medusa (just cos medusa are cool). So, yeah, I'm definitely in the camp that Bang Bang You're Dead style monsters are bad.
thecasualoblivion
First Post
Negative Levels in 3E as written could still be painful. Its not as bad as you do get that save, but if you fail the save and lose the level and later gain it back through magic, you still have your xp total reset to what is likely a lower total. Its not as bad as AD&D where you were generally screwed, but its still a pain.
I don't mind the Medusa as much. Being Petrified can be corrected, and doesn't involve any long term damage.
thecasualoblivion said:
Yes! It's called a "wandering monster".
That is, in the old D&D game that also has level drains and deadly poisons, slow recovery of hit points and of spells ... and XP for treasure.
If you think there's no point to a monster unless players are "supposed" to rush in without a second thought and hack it to death ... then you're apparently on the same page as the designers of the Latest Big Thing.
Different games for different goals.
Last edited:
fanboy2000
Adventurer
Ah, gotcha monsters!
Personally, I love gotcha monsters. They're like root beer floats. I don't want to have a root beer float every day, or even every week or month. But I love them when I do have them.
This is how it works for me: I, as the DM, provide a wide variety of challenges for the PCs to overcome. They very in level, quality, and complexity. No one needs to know how I get there. No one. But, one could reasonably infer that gotcha monsters and their ilk are in the toolbox.
Of course, that inference would treasonous. And I know that you aren't a communist mutant traitor.
Personally, I love gotcha monsters. They're like root beer floats. I don't want to have a root beer float every day, or even every week or month. But I love them when I do have them.
This is how it works for me: I, as the DM, provide a wide variety of challenges for the PCs to overcome. They very in level, quality, and complexity. No one needs to know how I get there. No one. But, one could reasonably infer that gotcha monsters and their ilk are in the toolbox.
Of course, that inference would treasonous. And I know that you aren't a communist mutant traitor.
pawsplay
Hero
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?"
Is it really such a stange concept that monsters would exist in the world for some other purpose than to be vanquished?
Good thinking. And if it's in your way, then you want to figure out a way to get around it. If you are successful, you get XP for that and you get to keep your stuff.
I did notice back in the day that level drainers showed up at too low a level and in excessive numbers. But there is nothing inherently wrong with a level draining beastie. If you end up dead, what level you died at is quibbling.
Ask the designers of Call of Cthulhu.
Both sensible and interesting.
Some of my favorite characters died with their boots on... fighting dragons, avatars of the Lord of Chaos, and blood sucking roses.
The cool thing about losing all your stuff is that a masterwork shortsword suddenly becomes treasure again.
Price of a longsword... 15 gp
Price of a steel breastplate.... 200 gp
Defeating a rust monster by beating it to death with a wooden shield... priceless.
Sometimes you just have to take the action figures out of the packages if you really want to play with them. A PC without lost gear, dead lackeys, and scars is like a couch with a plastic cover on it.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
A more general observation here, feel free to agree or disagree:
It seems there is more and more of a "Bad Things Should Never Happen To PCs" vibe creeping into the game, even down to the design level. Level drain is gone, gear destruction is gone (or almost gone)...will the next thing gone be PC death?
Needless to say, both as player and DM I stand in opposition to this. The game by its very nature needs at times to be cruel to its characters, and by extension its players; otherwise what's the point? It's no fun if you know you're always going to win without cost...and no fun for the DM if she knows she's always going to lose to no lasting effect at all.
Or in other words, if the party is analagous to a sports team in a long season, it's inevitable that you're gonna lose some games along the way; so suck it up, get back out there, and try to win the next one!
Lanefan
It seems there is more and more of a "Bad Things Should Never Happen To PCs" vibe creeping into the game, even down to the design level. Level drain is gone, gear destruction is gone (or almost gone)...will the next thing gone be PC death?
Needless to say, both as player and DM I stand in opposition to this. The game by its very nature needs at times to be cruel to its characters, and by extension its players; otherwise what's the point? It's no fun if you know you're always going to win without cost...and no fun for the DM if she knows she's always going to lose to no lasting effect at all.
Or in other words, if the party is analagous to a sports team in a long season, it's inevitable that you're gonna lose some games along the way; so suck it up, get back out there, and try to win the next one!
Lanefan
wedgeski
Adventurer
Every time this topic comes up (i.e. regularly) I reiterate my own stance on this, which is that the game is inevitably DM vs. player. There's no other way to look at it. I want to challenge my players. When running monsters, I run them to the fullest... the monsters want to kill, incapacitate, or capture the PC's as quickly as possible, and therefore so do I. But the *starting point* always has to be that I will only act within the confines of the game, and I will only set challenges that I honestly believe the party can overcome, with varying degrees of thought and application depending on the curcumstances. I even wrote down this promise in my blog last year soon after our 4E campaign started.
Encounters that I truly believe have a strong chance of killing one or more PC's, or resulting in a TPK, unless the party is extremely careful and/or lucky, are usually telegraphed in advance somehow. I want them to know that they should be considering saving their Dailies because however bloodied they're getting in *this* encounter, the one around the corner is going to be even worse. I really don't like dropping players into a life or death struggle without any warning.
However fair you play with your guys though, you just can't predict some of the whacky things their PC's will get up to. Just last week the group were teleported to a climactic encounter in a room whose ceiling was a surface of roiling black smoke, crackling with energy. What does the Rogue do? Climbs up the wall and sticks his head in "because I had to know what it would do". /facepalm
Encounters that I truly believe have a strong chance of killing one or more PC's, or resulting in a TPK, unless the party is extremely careful and/or lucky, are usually telegraphed in advance somehow. I want them to know that they should be considering saving their Dailies because however bloodied they're getting in *this* encounter, the one around the corner is going to be even worse. I really don't like dropping players into a life or death struggle without any warning.
However fair you play with your guys though, you just can't predict some of the whacky things their PC's will get up to. Just last week the group were teleported to a climactic encounter in a room whose ceiling was a surface of roiling black smoke, crackling with energy. What does the Rogue do? Climbs up the wall and sticks his head in "because I had to know what it would do". /facepalm
