Is 4th edition getting soft? - edited for friendly content :)

[Remathilis]

I have no problem with that. Not every effect needs to be counterable. Moreover, I submit that ultimately there should be some permanent (and/or near permanent) effects in the game.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

Which is more than fair.

 

[Cadfan]

I have no problem with that. Not every effect needs to be counterable. Moreover, I submit that ultimately there should be some permanent (and/or near permanent) effects in the game.

I'm curious. Exactly what effects do you think should be permanent, and/or near permanent? And what should cause those effects, based on what mechanic?

If you were designing a system for handling in game events like, say, a character becoming permanently blinded, would you choose to handle it by a single up/down roll of a d20, initiated by any divine spellcaster above a certain level, plus certain monsters?

 

[Lanefan]

Because Heaven FORBID the PLAYERS have fun. Its just not D&D unless the DM can gloat over the piles of cheaply killed player characters and show HE, not the players, and all important.

Hmmm...let's see...what's the ratio of kills by PCs to kills by the opposition. 10-1? 100-1? Probably more like 1000-1, or higher. So if the players want to gloat about the 27 dragons they killed, at least let the DM gloat that it cost 'em a couple of PCs to do it...

That's always struck me as one of the odd things about DMing...it's about the only situation in any game on the planet where you're playing badly if you win.

That, and save-or-die works both ways...the PCs can just as easily use it to kill off the opposition...

Lane-"save-or-die has failed its save and died"-fan

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Hmmm...let's see...what's the ratio of kills by PCs to kills by the opposition. 10-1? 100-1? Probably more like 1000-1, or higher. So if the players want to gloat about the 27 dragons they killed, at least let the DM gloat that it cost 'em a couple of PCs to do it...

That's always struck me as one of the odd things about DMing...it's about the only situation in any game on the planet where you're playing badly if you win.

I think that's a fundamental flaw in understanding the game. The DM is not playing against the PCs. He is on their side. That's why the villains always leave enough clues to stop their kingdom-conquering, princess-kidnapping or world-destroying plans.

There is no point in the DM winning by killing or capturing the PCs. He is in a position where he could always create a situation in which the PCs are beaten. (even if he was totally following the rules - rule zero).

The DM wins when he is providing a game session that is entertaining to the whole group (including him). He does to (among other things) by providing challenging encounters that the PCs will beat if the players are smart enough. A good DM learns to enjoy the players coming up with great tactics that wreck his NPCs plans (and possibly even his plot), and he can gain further enjoyment by bringing things back on track (even if it is a different one than he had planned for and he just had to create it on the spot). The DM also takes enjoyment from the fact that he first gets to see the players sweating about how they do get out of their awkward situation - and then once more when they find a way to get out and congratulate themselves for their luck and/or cleverness.

I think that's one of the things I like most about Roleplaying Games- there are no losers, everybody is on the same side. And still, they have a great time and feel challenged. (It's also why I prefer cooperative multiplayer games or single-player games.)

 

[Geron Raveneye]

I think the Bodak is an example for the "no fluff to regulate crunch" philosophy that 3E took biting it in the ass something painful. Reading the entry in the 1E MM2, you'll notice that the Bodak is usually only found in the Abyss, except if summoned by an evil or stupid (one doesn't exclude the other, though ) spellcaster to do some service. It doesn't appear on the Random Monster Tables I - X in the appendix, and is only listed as a "Very Rare" monster for Dungeon Levels VII+.

As such, a group wasn't supposed to meet a bodak as a silly random encounter around the corner. It also wasn't supposed to be lairing in a dungeon for the kicks of it. If placed in a dungeon, it had a purpose and somebody who put it there. As such, if you go down into the "Dungeon of Shrieking Doom" and you start collecting some info around it, there should be a chance to hear about the horrible monster than the wizard who is entombed there, and whose sceptre you are after, conjured to guard his sarcophagus, and that it can kill you just by looking at you. Even a newbie group of players would be wary to simply stroll into the tomb without at least SOME precautions (mirrors, wards against gaze attacks, blind fighting, etc).

Looking at the 3E entry, there is nothing of that left to the Bodak, so it's no surprise it is "misused" and in turn overpowering to some groups. It's one of the features of 4E that I hope will counter that, namely the institution of "roles" that monsters can take. I really hope there will be a "Guardian" monster role, meaning a monster that guards a place/treasure/whatever, doesn't move away from its duty much, and has a good chance of being known in rumors and stories. That would be a pretty good use of this whole new concept of monster roles, in my opinion...making it clear to new DMs what role a monster fulfills, and why it has the abilities it has.

 

[DM-Rocco]

Because Heaven FORBID the PLAYERS have fun. Its just not D&D unless the DM can gloat over the piles of cheaply killed player characters and show HE, not the players, and all important.

Anyone who thinks that, do yourself a favor: buy a candy-apple red sports car like normal people do.

Hmm, thanks for the assumtion that I am compensating for the lack of something, but my wife would disagree

I, personally, don't throw Bodaks infront of players in a random encounter, even if Gary Gygax has made a wandering table that says, here he is.

I know of a few DMs that try to maim and kill PCs at every turn but that is not me and I usually don't play with those DMs in the future. However, I do play in a game that once, when we were all about 6th level, a Seeker (like a psion I guess) used a Wail of the Banshee like effect on us. I rolled a 23 on my SoD saving throw and still failed. Was it fair, not really, but the DM wasn't a complete jackass because we all had been given rings (which melted after one use) from an acient race. The rings were basically a one shot protection from a SoD effect and we had no idea what they did.

That put the fear of God in us and we new that from now on, we had to be on our toes and that eventually we would have to deal with this creature in the future. It set a mood of fear and dread and we had a very healthy respect for that individual that we would eventually, towards the end of the game hopefully, have to deal with. By then, we should have a good idea how to handle him.

I do simular things in my games and I would never put a Bodak hidden in a chest or around a corner or have a room of 50 of them so the party would be garenteed to die. Your assumption is childish. Just because I don't want see it go doesn't mean I abuse it or that I enjoy player kills. In fact, out of all the DMs that I know, I have fewer PC deaths then all of them.

How about this since you make baseless claims against me, how about we keep my beloved game the same and you go and play a nice safe game where you won't die, like Shoots and Ladders. My 3 year old loves it, I'm sure you will too.

 

[Cadfan]

DM-Rocco:

I find it interesting that your defenses of save-or-die effects invariably describe encounters and DM design decisions which protect the players from actually having to save-or-die.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Then we agree that the problem is caused by a steep power curve, the CR system, a lengthly character generation process, and inadequate DMing guidelines?

We're grasping at everything but SoD's eh?

The CR system actually is a good thing in theory. It didnt pan out (particularly in regards to classed enemies), but its not much different than "level" monsters in the 1st edition MM, and its certainly better thought out. Its sure as hell better than non system of 2nd edition, where the best guage you had was exp.

 

[DM-Rocco]

So the DM is a jackass for using an appropriately CR-ed creature straight out of the Monster Manual? Doesn't that raise a big warning flag that there's a problem with the system?

No, not really. The Dm is a jackass for ambushing the party and trying to kill them in the way described.

So the solution is for the DM to metagame and make enemies with save-or-die attacks less effective? Because there's no in-game reason that the Bodak wouldn't use its save-or-die attack as soon as it possibly could. Not only does it represent the creature's best chance to kill a PC, it also represents the creature's best chance of surviving the encounter - if it holds back, the PCs will kill it in a hurry.

Again, if you have to suggest DM metagaming as a solution, doesn't that raise a big warning flag that there's a problem with the system?

There is a problem with the system, but that is not the focus of this thread. Again with the what if game, okay, what if the Bodak was under orders from the big bad undead boss to try and capture them alive, if you can't, then blast them with death?

??? I'm not sure what this has to do with anything.

It is part of the waht if game. You guys keep throwing absurd senerios at me, there is one for you. What, you don't think that is fair. COmplain to your DM