I need feedback from experienced DM's

[Creamsteak]

Re: Re: Time to speak up...

(Heh. I missed this part the first time, LOL. )

Most people here are DMs; players are relatively uncommon. So don't worry - we understand you.

Myself, I DM 95%+ of the time.

- Darkness,
Vile EN World Moderator and even viler DM

I would say that the VAST majority here are DMs, but also players. Don't try and seperate the two. I am a character about 10% of the time, but I still consider myself a player. It would be wrong for me to assume that because I am the guy that doesn't have a character that I am not a player. I DM quite a bit, but I also make sure to be at the heart of the game and play every now and then.

No-matter how experienced you are with other systems, if you are new to 3e you probably don't know what balanced is in this game. It is not the same as balance in any other RPG, and shouldn't be. This game is for mid-high fantasy first of all, and The Temple was definitely written with that in mind. Don't ban a spell or such yet, wait till after you get done with some of this. I must say, let the player craft his headband of intellect. At most it will give him a +1 DC modifier and a bonus spell, at least that is all that is likely.

 

[thulsa]

Campaign website

For those of you who are interested, here is the campaign website:

http://www.xoth.net/temple

Or to go directly to the much-hyped-up Graveyard subsite:

http://www.xoth.net/temple/graveyard.html


takyris, from the descriptions given in the list above you should be able to categorize what deaths were due to instakills, massive damage, etc. Looking over it myself (and thinking back), I'd have to say that most kills are due to massive damage-dealing from trolls, giants, elementals, etc.

I'll be back later with some comments regarding the high number of PC deaths.


- thulsa



=============================================
Roleplaying in Robert E. Howard's Swords & Sorcery World of Conan
The Hyborian Age d20 Campaign Web Site - http://hyboria.xoth.net
Maps - Characters - Gods - Monsters - Spells - Items & Artifacts
=============================================

 

[Dark Dragon]

Hi Thulsa,

it's perfectly alright for a DM to ban a spell (or more), and it is quite simple and quickly done. But before doing it, perhaps you should consider possibilities to handle the spells to be banned in-game. E.g., if your players only use Harm and a quickened ILW, let the opponents use it as well, or use more undead as monsters. If they're overusing illusions, think of npcs with the blindsight ability, blind monsters, bad light conditions, a wiz with Dispel Magic at hand or monsters immune to illusions. Don't exaggerate, let the pcs be successful with their favorite tactic from time to time, but force them to be versatile (you've said that they are experienced players, so that shouldn't be a great problem). As a DM, you've to be familiar with ALL spells the group may use, and the ways how to counter abuse of certain spells (e.g. Wall of Force). This sounds hard, but it avoids unpleasant surprises. IIRC, Ormraxes said that you've banned Antimagic Field and Project Image. It would help when you explain your players (and the people here) the reasons. These spells are normally quite easy to handle (especially AF, which is often more dangerous for the caster than for the opponents).
The high death toll is astonishing. 22 deaths - whew! As it was already said earlier, for roleplaying, the PCs need time to be developed. When they keep dying, this won't happen or slow down the process (and frustrate the players). Takyris pointed out several reasons for PC deaths. If your players are not completely stupid (I believe they aren't), it seems that a) something is wrong with your ECL calculation or b) the players have problems to realise what lies ahead for their PCs (rare or no hints, an opponent is much tougher than believed - I'm thinking of a level 15 kobold sorcerer...). An under-equipped party may have the same problems with a moderate ECL as a normal (after the table in the DMG) equipped party with a challenging ECL. Although it is sometimes funny for the DM to get the PCs on the run (and show them that there is always someone more powerful), this shouldn't happen too often and result in nearly TPKs, IMO. RttToeE is a very tough module and needs a good equipped party, even an experienced group has to fight hard to get along. I have no problems to let a stupid PC face death, but combat death occurs only rare, and for insta-kills like a Symbol of Death the party gets hints to warn them in advance. If a party does not retreat from overwhelming odds, it is their problem, not that of the DM.
I'm player (and DM) in one group (running RttToeE with two level 14 and two level 15 PCs, believe me, the DM made it hard, but thanks to good planning and some luck, we had only 2 PC deaths til today) for now 11 years and DM in two other. I've never banned a magic item or spell, although I don't like some spells (especially those which are poorly worded). Mostly players and I agree how to handle these, if not, the DM has to decide. This decision lasts until a clear ruling is established (often with help from the boards here) or the DM changes. The players in my group say, that I'm quite merciless. This may be the case, because I'm playing the NPCs as smart and powerful as they should be. But I've killed only nine PCs (my own two times) in the last two years as a DM, four deaths resulted from player stupidity, one from suicide, three from very bad luck (failed save vs. massive damage) and one death was story-based (without permanent bad results for the PC).

Just some thoughts.

The Dark Dragon

 

[thulsa]

Hi again,

a couple of more comments:

I would say that the VAST majority here are DMs, but also players.

OK. I said I might be wrong about my initial assumption. No big deal.

If your players have trouble coming to grips with the fact that not all opponents they encounter are there to be killed and looted right now, well, then perhaps give them a hint or two rather than letting them run suicidal attacks over and over.

As I've said, the group is experienced, clever and resourceful. Ormraxes probably knows the rules better than any of us. I think it would be to underestimate the group's combined intelligence to assume that they need more hints as to whether the module is dangerous or not.

I believe in using the resources and intelligence of the NPCs, and making the dungeon a dynamic, living environment. If the dungeon consists of three rooms with two orcs in each, the orcs in room #2 aren't going to sit idly by while their friends in room #1 are slaughtered. If the PCs barge in and start throwing fireballs, they will put the entire dungeon on alert and the foes will coordinate their attacks. If the PCs withdraw, the opponents will follow and press their advantage if they feel they have the upper hand. If there are spellcasters among the foes, they will use animate dead and glyphs of warding to bolster their defense
for the next time the PCs come for a visit.

All this is just common-sense tactics. I believe it would detract from the players' sense of accomplishment if I play intelligent, resourceful opponents as if they were stupid and/or mindless. Might as well play a computer game.

I must say, let the player craft his headband of intellect. At most it will give him a +1 DC modifier and a bonus spell, at least that is all that is likely.

Ahem. I guess Ormraxes "failed" to mention that he already has Int 21 (which becomes Int 23 with the headband). His character is 17 years old... and already nearing demigod intelligence. That's just plain silly to me.

Also, regarding starting treasure: According to the poll, only 25% of DMs actually use the DMG PC wealth table. I also find it utterly silly that Ormraxes uses words like "we SHOULD have such-and-such items/wealth by now" or "we're SUPPOSED to have such-and-such by now". In the campaigns I DM, the players will have
whatever equipment and magical items they find/make/buy/commission during the game, they don't simply get it "because it says so in the DMG".

So explain the high body count. That module is tough, but not that tough - especially if your players are as experienced as you say they are. Besides, you mention they can have all the mundane equipment they need, but they need plenty of magic to get through that module.

It seems you are under the impression that the characters have NO magical items -- that's simply not true. (Such misinformation and half-truths are the trademarks of Ormraxes' stratagems; please don't make any assumptions based on his words alone.) The party has found many magical items, including magical swords, rings, wands, etc., not to mention potions, scrolls and spellbooks. It's true that they've lost some of these as a result of character deaths.

I'm with the Coln here. I've Dm over 20 sessions, ran two campaigns, AND I'm personally involved both as a player AND DM in on going campaigns. Yet I think in my time I've only killed off 5-10 characters in a 3 year span. 22 in just this ONE module?! Sorry but that's just unacceptable both as a player AND DM.

A lot of you wanted my thoughts on the number of character deaths. Let me explain: I've DMed several campaigns for the last 10 years. All of them, before RttToEE, have been 2nd Edition, long-lasting campaigns with emphasis on character development and setting (but also combat-heavy).

RttToEE is our group's (and me as a DM's) first campaign using 3rd Edition rules. I told the players pretty early on that I would use this adventure as a way to learn the new rules (the players also needed to learn the new rules) and as a testing ground for what works in the new rules, and what doesn't.

With its focus on combat, RttToEE does a good job to learn us different aspects of the new rules. We also learn what monsters are dangerous, what spells are broken, what spots the rules don't cover very well, and so on. My attitude is to "go with the book" and see how it turns out. However, since we've spent a year already and we're only half-way through, I've got to make an adjustment here and there to avoid wasting this amount of time only to find out that things have gotten out of control.

The number of character deaths serve one good purpose in this regard: The players get to try out many new classes and multiclass combinations, prestige classes, etc.

I've told my players that my next campaign will be quite different. After RttToEE, I will make adjustments for what I feel doesn't work very well or is broken in 3rd edition. If the players want character development, I'll relax things a bit and give them the chance to develop them. But if they give me fresh character sheets with no background history and tell me that (as Ormraxes usually does) "my entire family is dead, it doesn't matter where I come from", well... then we might as well roll-play like we do now.


- thulsa


=============================================
Roleplaying in Robert E. Howard's Swords & Sorcery World of Conan
The Hyborian Age d20 Campaign Web Site - http://hyboria.xoth.net
Maps - Characters - Gods - Monsters - Spells - Items & Artifacts
=============================================

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I like your Conan site. I'm a big fan of Vincent Darlage's site, and he linked to your site, as I recall.

Anyway, I still don't think you've addressed the issue of the high body count, except in a very vague way. It would help if you gave specifics as to what happened. Specifics about why you banned certain spells would help also - there are plenty of people here that would be willing to break down and analyze all of them for you in detail, to see if it's more of an implementation problem than a balance problem. The reason specifics are good is because it's difficult to reconcile your rather reasonable explanations and opinions about how the game is going with the extremely high body count.

 

[Arravis]

I agree... the two things just don't seem to mix.

Now... if this campaign was meant, from the beginning, to be a PC meat-grinder, that's ok. Everyone involved knows and it can be alot of fun... but if it was meant to be a real campaign, there seems to be something seriously wrong.

We're not trying to bash you Thulsa and I hope you don't take it that way... just trying to understand and perhaps help your campaign a bit. Specifics would be helpful, cause I get the feeling we're missing something here.

I also agree with the other posters that you shouldn't ban spells outright without having tried them in your campaign. Explain to the players that the spells might be taken out if you find them unbalanced, but I'd include them. There are several spells that I thought were over-powered, but weren't at all... just a matter of actually trying them out in game-play (only spell i find definately overpowered is Haste).

 

[S'mon]

Hi again Thulsa!

I believe in using the resources and intelligence of the NPCs, and making the dungeon a dynamic, living environment. If the dungeon consists of three rooms with two orcs in each, the orcs in room #2 aren't going to sit idly by while their friends in room #1 are slaughtered. If the PCs barge in and start throwing fireballs, they will put the entire dungeon on alert and the foes will coordinate their attacks. If the PCs withdraw, the opponents will follow and press their advantage if they feel they have the upper hand. If there are spellcasters among the foes, they will use animate dead and glyphs of warding to bolster their defense
for the next time the PCs come for a visit.

All this is just common-sense tactics. I believe it would detract from the players' sense of accomplishment if I play intelligent, resourceful opponents as if they were stupid and/or mindless. Might as well play a computer game.

No one's asking you too - we are all experienced DMs here y'know (18 or so years in my case, some people here have 25+) we know how to run a game.

Ahem. I guess Ormraxes "failed" to mention that he already has Int 21 (which becomes Int 23 with the headband). His character is 17 years old... and already nearing demigod intelligence. That's just plain silly to me.

You've made a mistake common to people new to 3e from prior editions - 23 Int is not 'demigod' level in 3e, it's well within the range of what a regular human being can attain through age or experience without ANY magical enhancement - the latter limit being in fact Int 23 at 20th level, with no age mods. A headband of Intellect +2 is a seriously minor magic item (4000 gp, I believe is the book price) - the kind of thing PCs in a standard game are getting around 5th-6th level, lower in some games, never mind 10th. If they have the prereqs and the time and money/components they should be able to make it. If it's a Greyhawk game they should probably be able to buy it, also, albeit for some decent multiplier of book value (x2, 8000 gp for Cloak of Charisma+2, bought by 9th level PC in my 'low magic' game last Sunday - if I was running something like RttToEE I'd be more generous).

Also, regarding starting treasure: According to the poll, only 25% of DMs actually use the DMG PC wealth table.

No, it's more like 2/3 of DMs - only the first three options (standard, NPC, or Other wealth) count, the other poll options are irrelevant as they are about GM control of item selection etc.

I also find it utterly silly that Ormraxes uses words like "we SHOULD have such-and-such items/wealth by now" or "we're SUPPOSED to have such-and-such by now". In the campaigns I DM, the players will have
whatever equipment and magical items they find/make/buy/commission during the game, they don't simply get it "because it says so in the DMG".

Except that you're banning them from making even something as minor as a +2 stat item? Normally I'd agree with you, the GM is entitled to fit the degree of magic the PC have to the amount in the campaign. But you're running an adventure that's a meatgrinder even at standard PC wealth level, if I was a player I'd feel aggrieved also. I remember the GM I played with who never let us have any magic or treasure, from 1st to 6th level we played, but eventually we just didn't want to play any more. Obviously you're a skilled GM and your players must see something they like, but I really think you'd all have a better time if you ran the module the way it was intended to be played.

 

[S'mon]

Hi again,
I've told my players that my next campaign will be quite different. After RttToEE, I will make adjustments for what I feel doesn't work very well or is broken in 3rd edition. If the players want character development, I'll relax things a bit and give them the chance to develop them. But if they give me fresh character sheets with no background history and tell me that (as Ormraxes usually does) "my entire family is dead, it doesn't matter where I come from", well... then we might as well roll-play like we do now.

Hum, I think if I'd seen 22 PCs sent to oblivion already, I'd go light on the character background also!

 

[thulsa]

Meatgrinder, etc.

ColonelHardisson: Thank you for visiting my Conan site, glad you enjoyed it.

For specifics on the character deaths, I direct you to the Graveyard site I posted previously.

We're not trying to bash you Thulsa and I hope you don't take it that way... just trying to understand and perhaps help your campaign a bit. Specifics would be helpful, cause I get the feeling we're missing something here.

I'm sure we could go on and on and beat this subject to death, but in the end it's all about whether the DM should be allowed to control his or her game. Now, when I say "control", I mean control within reason. If I was a dictator, nobody would want to play in my game.

Remember that this thread was started by Ormraxes, so that he could whine a little about not being able to get everything the way he wants it in my game, and using all you people out there to try to strengthen his own arguments.

Hum, I think if I'd seen 22 PCs sent to oblivion already, I'd go light on the character background also

That's true. But from Ormraxes, who started this thread, there has never been a single written line of character background (not in this campaign, and almost never in other campaigns). So understand that all he cares about are his stats, his level, his XP, and his magical items.

I don't intend to bash Ormraxes (he is still a good friend), but I should also like to mention that he has not suffered a single character death during RttToEE, and that's mainly due to him being extremely cautious and a coward, letting the other party members do the dirty work of actually facing the monsters -- even though Ormraxes usually has the best AC, the most HP, and is of the highest level.


Anyway, to get this thread into more constructive subjects, I'll be back tomorrow with some examples of PC play style. Then we can discuss whether I am too hard on the PCs or not. Stay tuned.



- thulsa

=============================================
Roleplaying in Robert E. Howard's Swords & Sorcery World of Conan
The Hyborian Age d20 Campaign Web Site - http://hyboria.xoth.net
Maps - Characters - Gods - Monsters - Spells - Items & Artifacts
=============================================

 

[S'mon]

Re: Meatgrinder, etc.

I don't intend to bash Ormraxes (he is still a good friend), but I should also like to mention that he has not suffered a single character death during RttToEE, and that's mainly due to him being extremely cautious and a coward, letting the other party members do the dirty work of actually facing the monsters -- even though Ormraxes usually has the best AC, the most HP, and is of the highest level.

Do you think there just might be a connection - that maybe his 'cautious, cowardly' behaviour is the ONLY WAY to not die in your game? I can certainly sympathise with his POV. I'm no great fan of uppity players but sometimes the Hackmaster 'kill em all, oh great infallible GM!" approach wears a little thin. I'd think the best way to change Orm's behaviour was to make it not the only viable survival strategy. Eg: one time only, you could let all the players who've had a deceased PC restart, with new PCs the same level as Orm's, with standard DMG wealth-by-level, and a reasonably free hand in what they buy (say, no 1 item more than 25% total wealth). You might actually get a reasonably well equipped group that can survive the scenario as written! If they _still_ get themselves killed, even by EL-similar encounters, well tough on them. But I'd think something like this has got to be worth a try.