Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Twowolves" data-source="post: 3415195" data-attributes="member: 18093">So, a DM who sets up a dramatic situation that doesn't square 100% with the RAW is a bad DM who doesn't deserve to have players at his table, is that it? And since when is it "cheating" to try to run a tense, dramatic situation, as opposed to another routine hackfest? It's "adverserial" to have an NPC villian do villianous things, that despite the RAW are logical and places zero strain on believability? I guess if the DM didn't allocate all the BBEG's skill points exactly right, (maybe missing a synergy bonus or an armor check penalty) you'd call that cheating too?Rule zero is not a privilege, at least not any moreso than having any game at all, it's a fact. It's the DM's game, and if the players try to dictate anything to the DM other than their PC's actions, the DM has lost control of his own game and they might as well be playing Xbox. Sure if you don't like it you can vote with your feet, and if the DM has been screwing players and gloating in an adversarial manner, he's betrayed the trust implicit in his position and he deserves to have his players abandon him. But if he's running a fair and balanced game, trying to set up an interesting story with a non-standard encounter (especially one that CAN be justified rules-wise rather easily) and the players start in saying "nuh-uh, he can't ready an action outside of combat, I get to zap him first", then IMO he's well within his rights to slaughter the NPC and let the PCs deal with the consequences of their rash actions. D&D isn't a "DM vs the party" game, and neither side should act like it is.</blockquote>

Verification