Help please. Complaints by players!

[mmu1]

Er...hello? The sense motive roll is the mechanic to realize it's a feint. That's the whole point of a feint - you don't know it's a feint until it's too late and you're already out of line and the other guy's weapon is heading right for your squishy vital bits. If you fail the Sense Motive roll, you can't tell whether that was an honest miss, or a feint designed to open a hole in your defenses.

Now, if you want to argue that fighters shouldn't suck so badly against feints, and that maybe BAB (as a measure of fighting skill) ought to come into it...well, I might agree but this is the wrong forum.

J

"The idea that a trained fighter needs Sense Motive or Intelligence checks to realize he just got faked out after getting sneak attacked twice as a result of a Feint..."

Of course the Sense Motive is there to see if you fall victim to the feint - it's just the idea that you can get hit as a result of a feint and still need to make another Sense Motive check to realize what just happened to you that's laughable. (which was the issue in DocMorriarty's game) The bluff is revealed the moment your enemy stops pretending to be at a disadvantage and hits you where you didn't expect it. It's not as if you can confuse that with him simply besting you through superior but straightforward fighting ability...

I'm not saying he should be immune to further feints after falling for the first one.

 

[Gallo22]

Gallo22 later said it was a Balance check DC 20. I do find this to be unreasonable if the party MUST cross the bridge, and they have no other way to do it. A DC 20 is very high, especially for a skill such as Balance, which is low for many characters. A DC 15 is no certainty, either. Apparently this bridge was 7-12 inches wide, angled, and slippery. This would justify the DC 20 Balance check. Since these were all mundane reasons, it would be fair to share all of them with the players. If Gallo22 did, then it's the player's own fault for not knowing the rules. If Gallo22 didn't, then the fault lay with him. It is not unreasonable for a player to know the DCs of skills that he invests in. Without knowing the DCs, there is little way to judge the relative value of the different skill ranks. If a situation has a DC that is clearly not in line with those given in the PHB, then that could alert the PCs that arcane forces are involved. I think players should accurately be given the visible DC of physical tasks if they want to know.

This is exactly the type of feedback I was looking for and it makes alot of sense. I think your'e right, the player should know the DC (maybe not all the time). This way its kind of like him/her assessing the situation to determine if he/she wants to attempt it. Provided they have the right skill to do anyalize the situation. I'll probably start doing this more.

While I think my DC was fair. Maybe giving the actual number would help the situation for the player to prepare to cross the bridge.

Thanks. Every little bit helps.

Gallo22

 

[Gallo22]

I am on the side of the DM, it was a dangerous challange, it had to be overcome, the player did not take precautions.

Player: Mmmmm, the bridge looks slippery.
DM: Very slippery, wet and slime covered.
Player: I take a closer look at the bridge.
DM: The slime is normal mold, meldew, alge. Very hard to walk on as it produces a wet slippery slime/gel under foot. Nasty stuff.

Roll (insert needed) skill

DM: You know, it is going to be very hard to cross this bridge. Better take out your spike grips and use them. You could put sand on the bride too, maybe a safety rope.

The player(s) did not think about how to make it easier for them to cross the bridge. They saw a slime covered bridge and they were going to get to the other side, just like a chicken crossing the road, there are a lot of answers.

Oh God! Thank you for this reply! This is why I set the DC at 20. If i had set it at 15 or 10, or whatever. Then when they brought out the rope of climbing, the potion of climbing, the ring of jumping, the wings of flying, Tenser's floating disk (all of which the party has) the encounter would have been simple and unchallenging.

Some of you seem to think that the only way across the bridge was to walk with no cautions or no use of resources on the party's part. The purpose of adventure is challenge! Team work, etc.

Gallo22

 

[Bauglir]

I find a nice mechanic is if the players are stuck to give them idea rolls (INT checks, with misc class bonuses depending on the situation) and give them some possible solutions if they pass. After all the character (particularly the smarter ones like wizards and rogues) may come up with ideas that the player might not have thought of.

To take the bridge example; everyone is stuck trying to think of a way across safely. DM calls for idea rolls, the rogue and wizard both pass.

To the rogue: "That bridge might be a lot less slippery if you were to throw down some gravel from the road back there"

To the wizard: "Why not just pass your wings of flying to the fighter so he can carry people across?"

This mechanic also helps in situations where the image conjured up in the players' minds by the DM's description of a scene does not quite match that in the DM's mind, causing them to miss out on cues that their characters would be unlikely not to notice.

 

[Gallo22]

I find a nice mechanic is if the players are stuck to give them idea rolls (INT checks, with misc class bonuses depending on the situation) and give them some possible solutions if they pass. After all the character (particularly the smarter ones like wizards and rogues) may come up with ideas that the player might not have thought of.

To take the bridge example; everyone is stuck trying to think of a way across safely. DM calls for idea rolls, the rogue and wizard both pass.

To the rogue: "That bridge might be a lot less slippery if you were to throw down some gravel from the road back there"

To the wizard: "Why not just pass your wings of flying to the fighter so he can carry people across?"

This mechanic also helps in situations where the image conjured up in the players' minds by the DM's description of a scene does not quite match that in the DM's mind, causing them to miss out on cues that their characters would be unlikely not to notice.

Very good idea! Thanks

Gallo22

 

[drnuncheon]

Of course the Sense Motive is there to see if you fall victim to the feint - it's just the idea that you can get hit as a result of a feint and still need to make another Sense Motive check to realize what just happened to you that's laughable. (which was the issue in DocMorriarty's game) The bluff is revealed the moment your enemy stops pretending to be at a disadvantage and hits you where you didn't expect it.

Ahh, I see. Yeah, I've got to say that's pretty wacky. If a guy is able to breeze past your defenses and deal a massive blow without your finely trained reflexes being able to get you out of the way, you've got to know /something/ is up.

J

 

[arbados]

As DM I set DC's depending on what I feel the challenge should be. I may refer to the books for some reference, but that does not hold any weight above what I feel the DC should be for a certain skill.

As characters rise in level it could be reasonably assumed that the DC's for certain skills checks increase because they are dealing with more difficult situations. They are more skilled as characters and I am sure they are undertaking more treacherous adventures.

If that same player tried to Bluff an enemy guard at this level you could gather that the guard that he is opposing would have a higher chance at Sensing Motive than the one he did at 2nd level.

Same may hold true for DC's such as the one you described. This bridge is not the same slippery type bridge he crossed back when he was trying to get across to the goblin chieftan when he was 2nd level. This bridge is much more slippery and that is why the 2nd level adventuring group did not accept such a mission. The dangers were too great. I am in total support as to what you did and my players look forward to the different DC's I set. It helps add to the excitement and challenge of the mission! Keep up the good work fellow DM!

 

[mmu1]

If that same player tried to Bluff an enemy guard at this level you could gather that the guard that he is opposing would have a higher chance at Sensing Motive than the one he did at 2nd level.

This is the kind of philosophy that leads to city guards becoming 10th level fighters with magical equipment as players grow in power...

Unless there is a good plot-related reason for a "guard" to be a challenge for a 9th level character, he certainly shouldn't have a higher Sense Motive. If you want a greater challenge for higher level characters, you don't make the guards tougher... You design the adventure so that the players can ignore the guards because they pose no challenge, but need to deal with the high-level Guard Captain with a noble title and a stake in the city's politics.

 

[Felon]

Gallo, I do hope you and others reading this thread have enough sense to ignore some of this advice. When players give you input, don't dock them XP like an angry father docking his kid's allowance for talking back, and don't look them squarely in the eye and say "How dare you bring these trifling rules before me! I am the sun!" or something equally melodramatic, autocratic, and emotionally insecure. Bad advice for bad DM'ing. You did say your players were a good group, so don't fall into the trap of taking that for granted and ruining it just for the sake of showing them who's the boss. A good group is hard to find. Yes, your word is final, and in making that point be firm, but also be reasonable.

Now, as far as I can tell we're three pages deep into this thread and there hasn't been too much effort to address your original question, which was not about what the scope of the DM's authority or the supercedence of the rulebooks or how to slap down unruly players like they were your naughty children. You were asking if it was unreasonable to scale difficulty clases in order to provide ongoing challenges for the players to overcome.

Seems to me if a DM's just increasing the number the player has to roll on the dice, then that's going about it the wrong way. Gaining levels and putting skill points into balance doesn't mean much if every bridge they have to cross becomes progressively more slimy. Perhaps your player wasn't upset because you didn't follow the rules, perhaps he just thought it was lame to fail at what seemed to him to be a mundane task.

So next time, make the challenge itself bigger and better. Give the players a reason to hustle across the bridge more quickly, or have something actually attack that rogue when he scouts it out--heck, go ahead and coat it with a hungry ooze instead of plain old slime! Let the player have the satisfaction of overcoming the mundane task...then make his arse sweat (The Book of Challenges actually has an encounter very much like this one, involving a rope-bridge trap with a fairly clever twist).

Having said that, just making this one bridge particularly difficult to cross doesn't constitute any kind of huge transgression on your part (for that matter, 20 doesn't seem particularly difficult). Do realize though that by arbitrarily inflating a DC just to challenge the character(s) best-suited to deal with a given obstacle, you are likely dooming some other characters to nigh-certain failure. You might want to think in terms of scaling challenges based on the party on the whole, not just the ones who have the best chance of success.

 

[Tsyr]

As characters rise in level it could be reasonably assumed that the DC's for certain skills checks increase because they are dealing with more difficult situations. They are more skilled as characters and I am sure they are undertaking more treacherous adventures.

A bridge can only get so slimey. For that matter, why does it automaticly get more slimey as the players level up? Is it inconcievable that not every aspect of the world shapes itself around the players challenge level?

If that same player tried to Bluff an enemy guard at this level you could gather that the guard that he is opposing would have a higher chance at Sensing Motive than the one he did at 2nd level.

Actualy, no, it isn't. Just because you are now level 10 doesn't mean every city guard you encounter is now level 10, when 5 levels ago they were all level 5.

I am in total support as to what you did and my players look forward to the different DC's I set. It helps add to the excitement and challenge of the mission! Keep up the good work fellow DM!

Why not just say "Roll a D20, I'll decide based on that if you succeed or not?" That's basicly what you have boiled it down to... The skills a player invests ranks into becomming essentialy worthless. There *should* be times when things are a cakewalk for players... And not just in the non-critical down-time. If a character actualy invests in skills and feats, they should mean something... As opposed to, say, the DM who kept attacking my fighter with will-save traps and spells... Untill I wasted three feats on Iron Will, and I've never been attacked by a will-save monster again. *grumble*.