I have a very detailed world, but that's not why my game is popular...

[Lanefan]

My game is popular because my players get to do awesome stuff, and I don't get in their way, I allow it to happen.

All too often, I see DMs on Facebook whining that their players are getting away with too much awesome stuff and asking for advice on how to put a stop to it.

If that's your attitude, that players need to be stopped from doing awesome stuff, then I'm sorry, you missed the whole point of being a DM.

Depends on one's definition of awesome, I suppose.

I love it as DM when players have their PCs do - or try to do - awesome swashbuckling unexpected gonzo stuff in pursuit of entertainment or amusement or heroics; and as a player I'll be guilty of this for as long as I keep playing.

I don't love it at all - from either side of the screen - when these same things are done in an attempt to break the game or give themselves an undeserved (i.e. unfair) advantage.

Lanefan

 

[Tony Vargas]

If that's your attitude, that players need to be stopped from doing awesome stuff, then I'm sorry, you missed the whole point of being a DM.

That's fairly traditional DMing.

But how will your players ever know the joys of being thrown in the dungeon by a king for sass-mouthing an NPC, or of finding the perfect magic item that turns out to be horribly cursed, or of making their third character in as many sessions?

Exactly.

 

[Calithorne]

I read a DM whining because every member of the party was a paladin with shields, and they would march together in the dungeon, protecting each other with their shields and protecting each other with their charisma bonuses to saving throws, which he allowed to stack so that every member of the party had a really crazy bonus on saving throws.

The situation was really upsetting this DM, and he was asking people to help him figure out how to stop his players from helping each other in this way.

My answer to this DM would be, "That sounds awesome! But if you don't like it, throw at them an army of wizards casting magic missle spells because AC and saving throws don't help you against magic missle."

The point, however, is that these players were having fun, so why stop them?

 

[MNblockhead]

I read a DM whining because every member of the party was a paladin with shields, and they would march together in the dungeon, protecting each other with their shields and protecting each other with their charisma bonuses to saving throws, which he allowed to stack so that every member of the party had a really crazy bonus on saving throws.

The situation was really upsetting this DM, and he was asking people to help him figure out how to stop his players from helping each other in this way.

My answer to this DM would be, "That sounds awesome! But if you don't like it, throw at them an army of wizards casting magic missle spells because AC and saving throws don't help you against magic missle."

The point, however, is that these players were having fun, so why stop them?

Not only is that awesome, that's good tactics. Something people in sword-and-shield times would have done.

Now, enemies of the party should learn from this or have encountered this tactic in the past. So at some time, the party will find that an opponent has found ways to more effectively counter this tactic. If the DM was simply asking for ideas on how to counter this tactic, I don't think that is bad. Many or maybe most times, it should be effective, but now and then the DM should challenge them the party.

Thought, re-reading your example, I think the DM made a mistake allowing them to stack the bonuses. I think the solution in this situation is to let prior results stand but explain that he misread the rules and that going forward, the bonuses are not going to stack.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

As a DM, I feel like clever plans and tactics should be rewarded, otherwise the PCs will stop trying to use them, and then the game gets much less exciting.

That being said, sometimes you do also have to throw a monkeywrench at them, to keep them on their toes. It can be hard to know when is the right time to do so. I find myself falling back on Robin Laws’ ideas on up- and down-beats in Hamlet’s Hit Points. If they’re coming off of a big win, maybe it’s time to take things down a notch to make the next peril all that much more...perilous. Have they just had a near-death, hard-fought battle? Maybe the plan goes off without a hitch. Heck, maybe it’s such a good plan that they get to have two up-beat moments in a row.

But yeah, I don’t think those multiple paladin auras would’ve stacked.

Not only is that awesome, that's good tactics. Something people in sword-and-shield times would have done.

Thought, re-reading your example, I think the DM made a mistake allowing them to stack the bonuses. I think the solution in this situation is to let prior results stand but explain that he misread the rules and that going forward, the bonuses are not going to stack.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I read a DM whining because every member of the party was a paladin with shields, and they would march together in the dungeon, protecting each other with their shields and protecting each other with their charisma bonuses to saving throws, which he allowed to stack so that every member of the party had a really crazy bonus on saving throws.

The situation was really upsetting this DM, and he was asking people to help him figure out how to stop his players from helping each other in this way.

My answer to this DM would be, "That sounds awesome! But if you don't like it, throw at them an army of wizards casting magic missle spells because AC and saving throws don't help you against magic missle."

The point, however, is that these players were having fun, so why stop them?

Stacking issue aside, I wouldn't not call it "good DMing" (itself a loaded term) to prevent them, in a fit of pique, from doing this.

On the other hand, I also wouldn't call it "good DMing" to never challenge them. Let them have their fun, maybe as an ongoing thing, but also throw challenges at them that force them to think & adapt.

 

[Nevvur]

If your game is so popular, why is this the first time I've heard of it?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Lanefan]

Because they were playing Paladins.

One Paladin is a tragedy. A party of Paladins is a Pestilence.

A Pestilence, it seems, with stacking saving throws; making them nigh-indestructible...

 

[TwoSix]

I have a very loosely defined world, but that's not why my game is popular. My game is popular because I'm extremely attractive.