Is picking spells to counter the DM's tactics undermining the fun of the game?

[Ace]

I just (as in 3 weeks ago) quit a campaign over the same type of crud --

If i was you I would tell the DM that I expect him to follow the rules unless I am given a house rules sheet up front and I agree to it --

The DM is being a jerk and pretty soon if it isn't fixed it will be "roll 5d20 on the random damage table" every time you are winning

I would get him to fix it or drop out myself YMMV

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

The guys who are quitting the game over the body part rule are being WAY excessive in my opinion.

The DM just got a little harried and you carved up his encounter without breaking a sweat. It happens. DMs are people too. The DM is probably a friend of yours I expect. Right?

Lighten up guys.

Quitting a game, any game, when someone decided to not play fair is a totally rational & cool headed response. I am not saying burn the books, curse your friend quitting, but you are not implying a player is obliged to game either, aren't you?

ThoughtBubble's post is not really the "gee whiz my campaign rocks" type, I'm detecting frustration and a full on declaration of (hopefully brief) hostilities.

Why trouble yourself to play an un-fun game? There are plenty of better ways to spend the spare time. That would be a good way for all concerned to reflect upon & "lighten up."

 

[Bront]

The paranoia is wholly justified and appropriate. IT is not metagaming inspired.

Friends + Good Game = FUN That is the point. Remember?

First, the Paranoia is not metagaming inspired, but it can grate on the player as well as the character. I don't know exactly how long this has been going on, but if every session is like this, it can realy get on a players never. It realy does depend on the individual players.

Good game and fun is in question here. If you as a player feel that the game is getting advisarial (And I see signs that it could be, but I will not rush to judgement), then perhps you should sit down with the GM and find out what's going on. If you're having fun, tell him that, but make sure he knows where your limits are. If you're not, tell him why.

It's one thing to have a disagreement of the RAW, and have the GM make a ruling you disagree with. You simply move on, and discuss it afterwards. Players that can't/won't drop it can become a distraction. But with new house rules, that's rough. And it's not a minor one, or one that works to the players favor either at the time either (Those are always nicer to find out about).

My feeling is that you're worried that if you tear appart his well planned encounters with better planning of your own, he'll get upset about it, and that leads me to believe you feel this is becoming an advisarial game. Otherwise you wouldn't be worried about undermining his fun by planning for his tactics. I hope that your tactics work well with the rest of your party too, so they feel included (The tenticle, entangle, fighter bash sounded like good battlefield control tactics to me).

 

[Varianor Abroad]

I suggest pointing your DM to this thread, actually. There's two sides to every story, and everyone makes mistakes. It takes years to master the intricacies of DMing. When you help him understand his mistakes (and he in turn may be able to discuss issues that bother him) understanding increases all around. This isn't "becoming" an adversarial game, it is one. Both sides need detente. Good luck!

 

[Shallown]

Sounds like there are two issues here.

One, and the most important one, is wether there is a problem between you or your group and the DM. This happens and most often is only solved with open dialoge. Talk with the DM and tell him how you see things not an accustation but a statement of fact. Hopefully they will not take offense. Do your best to talk it out first.

Second, Your characters reactions to the world he lives in. Hey if everyone is out to get you its not a case of paranioa you have but a case of reality. If everyone you meet attacks you then everyone is outto get you and every one needs to die. Learning from your mistakes is vital. I have put a skill point in to a knowledge skill just becuase I wanted to make a roll the previous session. I hated not knowing or having a chance to know something. This was my characters reaction to being ignorant. Your characters reaction to being attacked all the time should be to be very defensive and even hide if you have to. If the world gets to dangerous just dissappear. Its interesting to see a Dm;s face when your character just up and quits becuase adventuring has become disportionately dangerous when you never get a moments rest or ever feel safe.

Later

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Disclaimer: I have not read the whole thread, so I might say nothing new.


Here's what I'd do:

Tell your DM that in your perception, the game has devolved into a arms race between players and DM. Tell him that you prefer a more lighthearted tone.

If he doesn't agree and keeps doing stuff like this, I think that this won't end well. If you share that view, let it go down with a big crash: Counter the tactics (be sure not to use meta-game knowledge, but the characters' perception should indicate that the world has somehow become an unfriendly place) and get more crass when he does. It shouldn't take long before the campaign ends.

Then, calmly tell him that you thought this would happen right away (but not in a "told you so" tone) and suggest a more lighthearted tone in the next game.

 

[jgsugden]

Don't think in terms of 'what is fair to match the DM'. Think of 'what makes the game the most fun?'

A DM's job is to put a challenging environment in front of the players/PCs that is fun and exciting for everyone. A player's job is to explore that environment and stay in character.

To that end:

If the DM is throwing the kitchen sink at you constantly, it is perfectly fine to be paranoid, put up all your defensive spells on a regular basis and treat every bunny in the forest as a possible threat. Paranoia isn't paranoia if everyone is tryin to get you.

As for the bodypart damage rules, they're trouble, if you ask me. I'd suggest telling your DM not to use them. D&D is not designed to allow high level characters to cripple each other with a little melee damage. I toss in broken limbs and other crippling wounds only for RPG usefulness - as a part of the story - but never as a part of regular tactical combat. Once you cross that line, you open the door for a wall of abuse.

 

[S'mon]

I toss in broken limbs and other crippling wounds only for RPG usefulness - as a part of the story - but never as a part of regular tactical combat. Once you cross that line, you open the door for a wall of abuse.

I agree 100%. Inflicting broken limbs on PCs as part of a narrativist game* is fine if there's GM-player trust, but appealing to some made-up house rule in the middle of combat isn't.

*Eg the session is premised on "What does the great warrior do when he can't fight and has to rely on the weakling rogue?" or somesuch.

 

[cmanos]

sounds like your DM is not too experienced or doesn't think when he crafts encounters. Sounds like he is trying to railroad the fights. Coming up with a house rule out of the blue is BS. If he wants to institute the HR, he should have informed everyone about it at the beginning of the game or the end of the last game so they could talk about it, not in the middle of combat when he's already called it into effect. "Oh by the way..." Just out of curiosity, are you as Players allowed to pull house rules out of your butt whenever you like? No. Yeah, he's the DM and he can do what he wan'ts but when the players aren't having fun, it's time to change or get a new DM.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

For the record, there's no problem with bringing bags of holding into a rope trick, as far as the rules are concerned.