D&D 5E Is my DM being fair?

[Sotik]

Ok, there are situations like this where Alert doesn't make sense, you react to something before it happens.

I think the problem is that this DM feels that alert let's him react before anything happens. When I'm reality it is about being able notice something quickly enough that you can react before it is carried out.

Like, he doesn't know the arrow is being shot before it's shot, but he hears the twang of the string and the arrow flying through the air so he can react before he gets hit. Or he hears the sounds of foot steps rushing up behind him and thus isn't surprised because he hears the attacker coming.

I think the idea isn't that you have a magical sense that let's you know what's going to happen before, but that you are paying attention to everything so every small smell, sound, or movment lets you know you're about to gett attacked.

 

[Seramus]

If anything, Alert gives the bad guy super powers!

• You have Alertness. You see the guy ready his bow and prepare to shoot you.
• You are not surprised, win initiative, and duck behind cover.
• Realistically, the other guy would fire his arrow and probably miss.
• But he now has the super power of choosing a different action!

A nice DM might have the bad guy shoot his arrow anyway, but he's under no obligation to do that.

 

[billd91]

I think your DM needs to loosen up. He's what? 2 for 2 on thinking feats are too powerful? That screams he's not ready to DM a campaign using feats and he should consider just giving out the stat boosts instead.

It's also clear he doesn't understand initiative, much less surprise. First action resolution doesn't go to the first player at the table saying they're doing something - it goes to the PC who reacts quickest. To riff off the western example above, consider Irving the 142nd fastest gun... in the West (Irving! Irving!). Irving makes a mistake in his quest to find the 143rd fastest gun (someone he feels he can beat) but encounters 141 instead. Out on the street, high noon, Irving starts to go for his gun (the player declares he's gonna draw and so the GM calls for the initiative roll). And, as expected, 141 rolls better on his initiative. That doesn't mean he's a Jedi, mind reader, or time traveler. It means he correctly interpreted Irving's hand twitch and got the drop on him before Irving could finish his attempt to draw his gun.

(Fortunately, we know Irving didn't get slain by 141 after all. Rather, he was twirling his gun around and butterfingers Irving gunned himself down.)
My apologies to Dr. Demento for the example.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The games should be fun for the DM too.

In my games, those things made it a lot harder to make the game interesting:

Alert feat
Find familiar
Leomunds tiny hut

Those things make surprising players hard to impossible and take away a lot of tension.

So if the DM feels that working around those abilities makes the game worse, take a different feat. Work with him, which feat may be interesting and ok for your dm.

 

[MechaPilot]

I recently joined a beginning 5e campaign where I am playing a human charisma rogue(charlatan background.) I was unable to take the "lucky" feat since the DM deemed it broken, so I took "Alert."

We are all now third level and I have been informed by the DM that I can no longer use the Alert feat. He feels, now, that this feat is broken as well because I can't be surprised, and that I have had crazy high initiative rolls due to the +5 added to initiative rolls, and he finds it hard to come up with a reason to explain why I'm not surprised, so he pulled it from my character.

For those DM's out there, is this fair? As a player do I try to fight it, or just suck it up and take the nerf? I'm assuming I get to pick another feat to replace it, any suggestions?

I'd love to hear your comments!

Is the DM's decision "fair?" There're a few level on which you can answer this question.

1) As long as you get to pick a replacement for the banned feat, the DM isn't outright depriving you of anything you're allowed to have under the rules. Therefore, under this perspective one could say the decision is "fair."

2) The DM gets to decide which options will be allowed and which will be banned at her table (for example, I ban +X magic items, and long-range teleport magic). It's considered good form to let players know what's allowed and what's banned before characters are made. Imagine the irritation and wasted time when a player is told she has to make a new character because dwarfs can't be wizards at your table.

However, there are occasions where actual play shakes out a bug the DM hadn't foreseen when initially evaluating player options (especially the result of two or more options interacting). In these cases, I consider it my obligation as a DM to lay out a logical path of my reasoning to disallow something, and to work out a compromise with the player. I'm also not afraid of reasonable feedback from my players, and I will reconsider if they can point to a flaw in my reasoning.

That said, neither Lucky nor Alert are game-breaking. Lucky is certainly a very good feat, but three re-rolls a day is hardly an overwhelming advantage. Likewise, Alert is a great defensive feat. Never surprised, very nice. How to describe that? Well, it's in the name: the character is alert and spots danger before being surprised. The +5 to Initiative is significant, especially if it synergizes with subclass features, but it can be a curse as well, especially if the alert character acts first, then the monsters do, then the rest of the party does. In such a situation the alert character can find herself overwhelmed by the retribution of an entire enemy group before any of her allies get a chance to help.



On the subject of what you should do, unless not being able to take those feats would make the game un-fun for you, I would suggest not fighting it. Instead, I would suggest, as Quickleaf has, that you calmly and politely inform your DM that having to adjust your character is impairing your enjoyment of the game, and that you would like to know what she's going to allow and disallow from this point on. Ideally, ask for a list of what options are disallowed (the DM really should have one of these anyway, to provide to anyone who might wish to enter her game).


Edit: Glad you were able to work things out with your DM, and that you got to keep your feat.

 

[Glomb175]

This sounds unfair. My monk has alert and my cleric has luck. They're in the game for a reason. Unfortunately, everything is at the DMs discretion but I would still argue that.

Sent from my HTC 10 using EN World mobile app

 

[Shasarak]

The games should be fun for the DM too.

In my games, those things made it a lot harder to make the game interesting:

Alert feat
Find familiar
Leomunds tiny hut

Those things make surprising players hard to impossible and take away a lot of tension.

I would imagine that if players take those things then they are really telling the DM that they dont want thatt type of tension in their game.

So if the DM feels that working around those abilities makes the game worse, take a different feat. Work with him, which feat may be interesting and ok for your dm.

There was a Bard Attack in 4th edition (whose name escapes me) that involved the Bard essentially taunting the Monster and doing psychic damage that drove me crazy trying to explain what was happening. My solution was to just dump it back in the players lap and let him explain what his attack was doing. I found that being able to say "Look I am trying to run these six monsters here so why dont you tell me what you are doing to the Gelatinous Cube" freed so much mental processing capacity.

 

[discosoc]

It's generally a bad idea to remove or alter a feat mid-campaign. That said, I sometimes think that players tend to forget that the DM's job isn't just to make sure everyone else is having fun. They also need to enjoy the game, and there's an awful lot of 5e rules that make that hard to do. For example, it sounds like your DM is getting frustrated that he can't surprise the group on occasion, or that he rarely ever gets to go first in combat, etc.. Those are valid concerns and I can personally vouch for the irritation it can cause. In fact, it can be a real pain to successfully implement certain adventuring cliche's with 5e, such as night ambushes, unexpected encounters like bandits blocking a bridge, or really most anything involving the "journey" phase of an adventure.

Anyway, I mention this because my guess is things are going to get much worse for him here soon, as these realities start to kick in. It's something that you guys might all want to address, and specifically find out what he enjoys out of DMing. Some DM's are totally fine with just hanging back and letting the rest of the group steamroll all the encounters, but others find the enjoyment in setting up fun challenges (as in, balanced and risky, to various degrees) and stories for the group to play through. For the later DM, 5e can be frustrating without a lot of house rules to address things.

 

[discosoc]

I would imagine that if players take those things then they are really telling the DM that they dont want thatt type of tension in their game.

My experience is that players are a dime a dozen, and it's generally smarter to cater to the DM when possible. Most groups are totally fine with any given DM style, provided they know up front what to expect -- and can plan accordingly. Problems really only arise when there are communication issues (or no communication) and people like the OP find the rules are in constant flux at the DM's whim. Odds are good that he simply didn't realize 5e doesn't support the games he's used to playing, and will know more about what needs to change with the next campaign. I see this happen most with DM's who are just now coming back to the fold after an absence from 4e (and possibly 3/3.5).

 

[Arial Black]

The most common mistake originates from the fact that the most common way to see if a PC is surprised is to roll Perception. Therefore, if you are not surprised it is because you have perceived something: body language, verbal/somatic components, heard them breathing, seen their shadow, whatever explains the established fact that you have perceived them via a successful Perception check.

However, immunity to surprise does not equal a successful Perception check! Just because you are not surprised, this does not mean that you have perceived...anything!

It just means that you don't suffer the game mechanics of surprise: cannot move or act on your first turn, cannot use reactions until after your first turn.

The situation: an evil caster wants to cast a spell from hiding.

First: establish surprise. Everyone rolls Perception (because the DM feels that this is the appropriate method to establish who is surprised in this situation).

The PCs who's Perception rolls exceed the villain's Stealth perceive the caster; make up the exact reason why on the spot. Maybe they heard the verbal component, whatever.

Those PCs who rolled too low on Perception did not perceive, therefore they are surprised.

How does immunity to surprise come into it?

If the Alert PC succeeded on their Perception check then they heard the verbal components and realise there is an enemy caster round the corner. His roll means that he wouldn't have been surprised even without the feat, but his Perception check tells him: caster, around that corner.

If the Alert PC rolled too low, then they did not perceive the enemy, even though they are not surprised! The alert PC did not hear the verbal components, therefore does not know there is a caster or that there is an enemy around the corner! However, he may still be first in the initiative order and can still move/act on his first turn and may take reactions even before his first turn.

So, Perception checks are rolled and the Alert PC fails. Initiative is rolled and the Alert PC goes first.

DM: So, Alert guy, you're up. What do you do?
Alert PC: I go around the corner and attack the caster.
DM: No, you do not know there is anyone there.
Alert PC: Okay, I have a bad feeling about this, so I move behind the paladin and take the Dodge action.
DM: Cool. It turns out that the Alert feat hasn't destroyed my game after all.