Is Discovering the Abilities of New Monsters Part of the “FUN?”

[Scribble]

Not telling people stuff like Reach and Combat Superiority is bad DM'ing if you're doing it on purpose. I don't think anyone is saying they do that on purpose though.

Neither do I, but you have to remember the DM's Guide advice is (mostly) written for new DMs. It really does take a while to get to know your players, and get a sense of when it's fair or not to disclose info. The more you DM, the easier it becomes to do this stuff by "instinct" but when you're just starting out?

 

[Samuel Leming]

As the article says the issue here is monsters that punish players for following what appear to be good tactics. If the DM does his job of communication, whichever of the two methods he uses (I think the latter is more interesting), then there won't be a gotcha moment because the players will know they need to change tactics.

I really don't see it as punishment when a player picks the wrong tactics due to incomplete or erroneous information. It's just a mistake. Learning from your mistakes used to be part of the fun.

That said, even if the DM doesn't communicate the monster's abilities, perhaps because there is no way for the PCs to detect them until they are used, that can work too, provided the ability doesn't instantly kill a PC, which is very unlikely in 4e.

Yeah.

Imo the unacceptable face of 'gotcha-ism' is Gygaxian nonsense such as nilbogs and earseekers.

I remember the first time I encountered an ear seeker. Our thief got in the habit of always listening at doors. Even the really rotted scummy ones. Next thing he knew, he had a dead bug falling out of his ear. The eggs hatched before our cleric finished resting to relearn Cure Disease. Our magic-user had a scroll to shrink us all down, so the rest of us climbed in the thief's ear to fight all the larvae before they could eat his brain.

That was fun. That was D&D. That was D&D with flumph!

Never ran into a nilbog. Never used one.

Sam

 

[Samuel Leming]

Charles, you disagreed with his example, but I can completely see an argument aroudn the table starting with:

"What??? Dude, I could totally see if something had claws long enough to attack from five feet away!"

All of the above can almost at times foster the feeling of DM vrs Players.

Nah. For my preferred style of D&D I'd describe this critter as having 'five foot long arms ending in three foot long claws coiled back ready to strike!' That should be sufficient. Unlike Mr. Wyatt, I see no need to go meta with this one.

Sam

 

[Samuel Leming]

Not telling people stuff like Reach and Combat Superiority is bad DM'ing if you're doing it on purpose. I don't think anyone is saying they do that on purpose though.

It's bad DMing if your players are into a mostly tactical style, but if they're into old school gonzo sandbox style D&D then learning the hard way is all part of the fun.

Sam

 

[sukael]

Anyone who's played Nethack knows that the answer is obviously "yes".

(And knows to keep a new character ready in the background, just in case.)

 

[hong]

Let me tell you about the kung fu dragon.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Personally, I like a bit of mystery in my foes.

Even if the DM is being a jerk.

 

[Ruslanchik]

The stories that we all seek to recreate (see the new gaming catch word "cinematic") are filled with moments like this. The hero encounters a new enemy and uses tried-and-true tactics but, surprise, the don't work! Time to pull our that wand you forgot about or try out a new ability that has never worked or remember the advice given by the oracle. These moments allow for storytelling and combat to occur in the same space and are integral to the game.

 

[CountPopeula]

Imo the unacceptable face of 'gotcha-ism' is Gygaxian nonsense such as nilbogs and earseekers.

Yeah "Oops, he has a longer reach, you take 5 damage" is one thing.

"Oops, you looked in the wrong hole, your head is gone, give me your character sheet and start rolling" is something completely different.

 

[med stud]

"Yes, if the DM is not a jerk".

The players can learn the hard way that a boneclaw has threatening reach. It will be described as having claws that extend and withdraws and so on. It's another thing if something is out of the blue. A perfectly normal looking chihuahua with a save-or-die effect would be bad mannered, for example.