Dragon Mountain defeated without even entering it!

[James McMurray]

Berandor: Everything you said is true, however, I think the easiest way to gain the trust of the players is to let them see everything up front, at least as far as dice rolls are concerned.

Of course, they'll never know how many hit points a creature has left, I'll only tell them "he looks unhurt, he's badly wounded, etc." Also, I do sometimes make rolls out in the open, but not mention what they're for (such as spot checks).

My players do trust me to have fun and give thema fun experience. However, if i ever tried to have someone mysteriously regenerate 50 hit points, they'd be all over me in a heartbeat, as I would never consider letting them regenerate for no reason. However, there have been times when things they didn't understand happened. Only one of those have they still not figured out, but it did have a solid, in-game, nonn-fudging reason.

 

[Moleculo]

This is my experience with fudging: About 2 months ago i started a game of 3e after a long dry spell without playing. I was still trying to find the perfect blend of what my characters needed, and in the first game i fudged some dice rolls. Afterwards they complained that it was a little bit too easy, (since i had dropped some criticals that might have killed characters) and that it didn't have that dangerousness that is around when your character could die. So then i stopped, and everyone had more fun. Thats my experience

jake

 

[reapersaurus]

ahhh... i was wondering what was going to come next with this party.

So.
James.

You're missing quite a bit of detail since last we left your party.

As I remember, your party was 11th level (maybe 1 at 12th) and had gone around, killing 2 or 3 dragons.
The last of the 3, as i remember, was because the dragon "didn't believe he would lose"

Then they went after the great green wyrm, who handled them no problem, and let them go without taking anything of value.
Oh, yeah - one of the players didn't listen to the great green's request, and attacked him and got killed for his upstart behavior.

The great green let them go, and they proceeded to go after a sapphire dragon.
I think the sapphire played with them, not apparently caring that they were scrying and Wind Walking all around.

Long story short, they killed the sapphire dragon basically cause he didn't think he'd ACTUALLY lose, and to a critical?

So that's where we leave off.

How does it go to the great green going into a contract with these guys that would make him beholden to them in any way, shape, or form?
The great green knows of this party, and knows what they are doing.

He also knows of their Holy Avenger that the paladin of 11th level had, and the Staff of the Magi the sorcerer had AND the artifact that allows them to kill dragons (the cleric had?)

So he can take them any time he wants, but instead he "goes legal" on them.
BTW: WHAT D&D world has lawyers in it, waiting around to be hired for contract negotiations with demons?

Awaiting more info on this fascinating turn of events in your game...

 

[James McMurray]

Reapersaurus: I was waiting for you to chime in with your usually caustic style.

Just so you know "we" aren't behind on anything, unles you speak for more than yourself, as I posted a follow-up thread here. There was another thread, but I went through them all and couldn't find it. Its the one that tells the part about the green dragon killing the sorceror.

To make a long story slightly shorter, the party killed the Sapphire dragon (because it didn't have time to enact its escape plan, not because he didn't think he'd lose). Then, they go to the local port towns and find out there's a reward. At the reward ceremony, the party is wondering where the sorceror is. Then he slams into the stage. Everyone looks up and sees the green dragon. The dragon says something to the effect of "for every dragon that dies from here out, so does a human city." Then she breathed on town hall, turning half of it to slag, and flew off, still clutching the sorceror's arms and staff of the magi.

The party manages to get the sorceror raised, and realizes they're in a bind, as they still have a dragon they want to kill, and its the only one they ever actually had a personal beef against.

That part is told in the above thread, so I won't repeat it here. Now to answer your specific points (in a new replay, as I'm not sure how long messages can be on this board.

 

[James McMurray]

I think the sapphire played with them, not apparently caring that they were scrying and Wind Walking all around.

They never scryed on the sapphire, and he did screw with them when they wind walked. That must be the thread that is gone now. In the end, the party ended up about even on treasure, since they had to raise people and lost their own gear to green slime. Also, as you'll note in the other thread if you read it, the contract involves raising the Sapphire again. One of the last posts in that thread is one of the players' plans to deal with the Sapphire as well, although they haven't tried that yet.

How does it go to the great green going into a contract with these guys that would make him beholden to them in any way, shape, or form?

A few things to point out here.

1) The dragon gets dragon Mountain, and a tenth of the treasure, for absolutely NO work on his part. In addition, the way the contract was worded, had the party actually killed the dragon inside the mountain, Shasalah (the green) would have been able to choose from their stuff as well.

2) Everyone is quick to point out that Dragons would pull together if a few of them were killed. Why doesn't anyone see that adventurers may do the same. Shasalah has no way of knowing exactly what kind of powerful allies the party may have that would come looking for her if they were killed. Why risk reprisal when you can have the group GIVE you everything you want, and make it bound into a contract that leaves no wiggle room.

3) The only thing the dragon actually agreed to in the contract was that she would not kill the party FOR KILLING THE DRAGON THEY WERE AFTER. The party and her both fully realize that she can kill them for any other reason, at any time. But again, there's the threat of reprisal (which the party doesn't even think about, so they're just glad she hasn't struck them down).

He also knows of their Holy Avenger that the paladin of 11th level had, and the Staff of the Magi the sorcerer had AND the artifact that allows them to kill dragons (the cleric had?)

Yes, but at this point, she has the Staff of the Magi. The party will not be allowed to leave carrying the amulet, and the Holy avenger is not a true threat to her. Since she doesn't care about what other evil things may get killed, so long as they're not dragons, she doesn't need to take that sword right now. Sure, she could, but she would rather try to walk a line that won't get the party coming after her (with posible reinforcements), and still lets her have the amulet (her true target).

WHAT D&D world has lawyers in it, waiting around to be hired for contract negotiations with demons?

My world. The party was in a metropolis, where I'm sure hundreds of lawyers can be found. The lawyer they hired never had to negotiate, he just read the proposed contracts, and gave a re-write that was more favorable to the party, and wouldn't result in them being a dragon's shower toy.

 

[Wolfspider]

Hey, I have no beef against evil, satanic lawyers, Mr. McMurray. I think it's a cool idea. After your description of the lawyer, I half expected him to be an archdevil. Nicely done.

On another dragon-related thread, I invited Reapersaurus to join my new organization, B.A.D.D.--Bothered About Disposable Dragons.

Expect to receive an official letter of complaint from this organization sometime in the future.

 

[James McMurray]

I think it's a cool idea

Thanks, so did my players.

 

[reapersaurus]

OK.
Thanks for getting me caught up.
And yes, I did word the "we" wrong - i was intending it to be kinda like a "since last we left the intrepid adventurers..."

I wasn't aware you'd be continuing to broadcast your party's exploits.
I assume you're still doing so on here AND on the other RPG site?
(Why do you put so much into having people hear about your party's deeds?)

OK....
Critique: it seems awfully heavy-handed of you to come in with the Green Wyrm and say "No More Killing Dragons!" for a DM who professes so much "let the players do as they wish" as you seem to.
It seems fairly schitzophrenic of the Great Green to feel comfortable giving dictates to the party, but at the other side be in fear of the party, and any possible friends they might have.

It seems you're playing fast and loose with the dragons' attitudes for your convenience.
All the dragons are overconfident, including this Great green after handing the party their heads.

Then the Great Green gets worried? and kills the sorcerer (why, exactly?) and is not overconfident now. In fact, the Great Green is in FEAR of possible reprisals would come if she killed the party.
This Great Green is the ONLY one that should NOT be afraid of them.

all the other dragons who died partly because you didn't use their full effectiveness WERE played as being cocky and overconfident.
The dragon I REALLY don't see why would have been overconfident is the last one, their nemesis.
This dragon was just a 9th or 10th level sorcerer or some such?
That doesn't seem like a very effective use of CR, but i really am guessing on that.
It seems if you kept the CR in increasing the dragon's age, it would have made for a more powerful dragon.
And it seems like HE, of ALL dragons, shouldn't have been overconfident, since wasn't he dominated and basically sold into slavery after being beaten early on?

And is there any way you can go into more detail on the part i quoted here next?

In chasing down his sword and shield, the paladin of the party notices the dragon, who tries to use a suggestion on him, but is prevented by protectiob from evil. The next round, the paladin moves to the dragon, who decides too teach this upstart a lesson.

To make a long story short, due to some good rolls on the part of the party, and a miscalculation on the part of the over-confident dragon (he felt his improved invisibilty would save him, but hadn't counted on the cleric's invisibility purge), the party managed to slay the beast.

Again, it seems like you're playing the dragon quite dumbly, but it's hard to tell from such a brief description.

If you really wanted your planning to come into play, and not have months of work blown up, WHY did you have the dragon steal their stuff with ethereal filchers, and then have the paladin TRACK him down?
I totally don't understand that part.

anyway, thanks in advance for any details.
I really enjoyed the description of the devil lawyer.

Woflspider - thanks for the membership card.
What thread did you give that on?
That's a great club, and i definately agree.

 

[Wolfspider]

A question....

Mr. McMurray: How do you react to the following quote (pulled from the D20 Shadowchaser's game in the latest Dungeon/Polyhedron):

Concerning the Charismatic Hero's special ability Favors: "Note that favors should help advance the plot of an adventure. A favor that would circumvent an adventure should always be unavailable to a character, regardless of the results of a favor check."

Paraphrased: Fudge! More precisely, fudge for the sake of the story.

While I don't believe in blind devotion to the way WotC intends the game to be run, I still think this quote is interesting. It certainly shows a certain slant with regards to the fudging issue. It is problematic, though, because the player is going to know something is up if he or she makes an absolutely phenomenal roll and still doesn't call in the favor. Of course, the DM could just say arbitrarily that the favor fails based on it circumventing plot, but that has the possibility of frustrating the player as well.

I try to be more subtle in my fudging....

 

[Henry]

You may not have seen enough of my posts to realize it, but I don't fudge the dice rolls. Ever. One of the most important aspects (IMO) in a gaming group is trust. The DM must trust the players not to cheat, and in turn, the players must trust the DM not to cheat. I'd much rather have a long-term foe die early than have to resort to violating the trust of my players.
...
I think our fun is far from over just because one enemy has died.

I have had discussions with Karinsdad on this point in the past, but I will voice a differing opinion here: Apparently, from the editions from 1st to 2nd the 3rd, something must have been lost in the transition.

If your group finds it important to operate on such trust, then great - it works for your group and likely nothing will work better in its place. However, DM fudging is not necessarily cheating. It can sometimes be a useful tool for suspense building and for making things a little more uncertain. Remember that in 2nd edition monsters did not have class levels - that was for many DM's a "fudge" of a sort from years ago to get more mileage out of creatures such as orcs that had outlived their usefulness.

Much enjoyment can be ruined for players if their characters for instance are killed within the first ten minutes of a session due to fickle dice rolls. Conversely, it is no fun if the characters have to end a session three hours early because one player uses severe metagaming tactics to defeat the opposition.

I do understand that the dragon was a juvenile, and made a severe mistake - that's the nature of juveniles, and it's why we don't see more dragons around. I thought however, that the dragon in that scenario was far more than a stripling juvenile - knowing what I do of Dragon Mountain, the kobolds in Dragon Mountain would have finished off that thing and eaten it for supper a long time ago!!!

As for your last statement, I heartily agree. There are more enemies in the sea, and the PC's have many more miles to go to prove their fame. However, I certainly hope that when it comes time for them to reckon with your Big Green Terror, that he does not roll over and die with the same rash decisions. I entreat you to play him with all the terror and intelligence that a powerful being of godlike mental attributes can muster.

I do share Wolfspider's distaste of hearing of Great Wyrm Dragons that land next to the PC's in the middle of a field and cast one spell or make one melee attack after another. In those cases, the PC's might as well find a suicide note hung from the dragon's wing.