D&D General "It's not fun when..."

[Reynard]

D&D 5e has chase mechanics which use speed as a gauge, but also offer opportunities to hide at the end of every round plus complications that may slow down pursuers. The PCs can also "pay off" any complications that arise with Inspiration to avoid them, which monsters don't have. These rules are in the DMG though which nobody reads.

Just me quoting for truth.

 

[payn]

It's not fun when a GM wont flex or give up on experimental rules. Crit hit/fumble decks, homebrewed ideas, adventure path stuff, etc.. Im not saying these things are auto unfun, but sometimes the implementation is bad. The GM could be, for some reason, invested in the new bolt on, and is unwilling to listen to their players for adjustment and/or removal. There is a point to tune, and a point to abandon, and often GMs don't want to hear it. I've been in both seats on this.

 

[nevin]

I was in a discussion on another board about legendary resistance and another user said "It's not fun when you use your best spell and the BBEG just shrugs it off with no effect." And while I can see their point, and even agree with their follow argument that all-or-nothing spells and abilities are kind of lame, I generally don't agree with the broader point. I don't think a player should feel entitled to mash the win button with one spell.

Anyway, this thread isn't really about legendary resistance. It's about when people make arguments for rule changes based not on balance or system issues, but just on the basis of what's fun.

Obviously, fun is subjective so I would really like it of folks would avoid badwrongfunning stuff. It's okay to say you don't think this or that would be fun, but don't attack posters over their preferences.

I am more interested in where conceptual ideas of "what's fun" intersect with design -- from the core system level to the individual adventure, spell and monster level.

Let's try and use examples, especially changes between editions or variant rules or house rules to talk about fun and design.

Theres a huge difference between feeling entitled to a one spell/hit win and feeling useless because your abilities are nullified completly.

Simple fix for that. Your best spell huts BBEGI screams in rage, Dm writes down damage which is 0 and combat continues. for most spells thus fixes the feeling useless. how is the wizard going to know the Lightning bolt only tickled and the BBEGI hates being ticked?

 

[Reynard]

Theres a huge difference between feeling entitled to a one spell/hit win and feeling useless because your abilities are nullified completly.

Simple fix for that. Your best spell huts BBEGI screams in rage, Dm writes down damage which is 0 and combat continues. for most spells thus fixes the feeling useless. how is the wizard going to know the Lightning bolt only tickled and the BBEGI hates being ticked?

So, lie?

EDIT: It came to my attention that was a little short. More precisely: is it being dishonest as GM to describe the attack as having had an effect even if it didn't? I think so, since that description can lead to the player making decisions they otherwise wouldn't.

 

[Cadence]

So, lie?

Is "so I would really like it of folks would avoid badwrongfunning stuff." applicable here? (Is using up a legendary resistance a reason for it to be angry?)

 

[Celebrim]

Define fun.

I'm playing Jedi: Fallen Order right now.

Is it fun to die? No, it's usually annoying.

But it would be even less fun to not die. Indeed, one of the most fun parts of the game is when I had to take like six tries to beat the 9th sister, and a lot of the time when I'm playing I'm thinking "I'm not playing well enough to be beating the game this easily."

Is it fun when you fail? No, it's usually annoying.

But it's even less fun when you can't fail. The complaint to me feels like, "I made my best attack, but I missed!" The possibility of "rolling a 1" is always there. Something can always negate your action. It's frustrating, but it would be even more frustrating if it couldn't.

 

[iserith]

Theres a huge difference between feeling entitled to a one spell/hit win and feeling useless because your abilities are nullified completly.

Simple fix for that. Your best spell huts BBEGI screams in rage, Dm writes down damage which is 0 and combat continues. for most spells thus fixes the feeling useless. how is the wizard going to know the Lightning bolt only tickled and the BBEGI hates being ticked?

I would say that the reason it feels bad is because it's a "gotcha." If the DM telegraphs this immunity before the players encounter the BBEG in some way, they have a chance to avoid this outcome and, if they don't, they can at least look back and identify the clue they ignored (or misinterpreted) and know it was on them.

 

[nevin]

Yup.

And this USUALLY only happens to non-casters too, because casters usually have some "fiat"-type spells that don't require a roll. It can happen to casters if their spells do involve rolls though.

It's almost unheard of outside of d20-based games, note, because virtually every other game has a tighter RNG system and most systems also give more fiat-based or at least not dice-dependent abilities out.

no Ive seen DMs get frustrated because they dont know the spell list, or just hate the magic system, take down mage at beginning of every combat, or just throw magic proof monsters at them.

Or only throw monsters that cant be critted at your crit fisher. it can be done to any character.

 

[Reynard]

Is "so I would really like it of folks would avoid badwrongfunning stuff." applicable here? (Is using up a legendary resistance a reason for it to be angry?)

I didn't mean that to sound like badwrongfun. I was more trying to tease out of the poster saw a distinction, which i do. i wasn't clear.

 

[nevin]

I would say that the reason it feels bad is because it's a "gotcha." If the DM telegraphs this immunity before the players encounter the BBEG in some way, they have a chance to avoid this outcome and, if they don't, they can at least look back and identify the clue they ignored (or misinterpreted) and know it was on them.

Perception is reality. in one version the character has been knee capped, In the other the creature just had a freakish amount of hitpoints. players shouldnt know everything or be warned about everything. that makes for booooring games

 

[iserith]

Perception is reality. in one version the character has been knee capped, In the other the creature just had a freakish amount of hitpoints. players shouldnt know everything or be warned about everything. that makes for booooring games

I disagree. Telegraphing makes for fair games and helps spur creativity. It has the added benefit of being honest. Your lightning powers are unlikely to be effective on the BBEG. How do you deal with that ahead of the final confrontation?

 

[Reynard]

no Ive seen DMs get frustrated because they dont know the spell list, or just hate the magic system, take down mage at beginning of every combat, or just throw magic proof monsters at them.

Or only throw monsters that cant be critted at your crit fisher. it can be done to any character.

I mean, intelligent monsters should be focusing fire on the mage as soon as they can ID them. Healer next.

 

[nevin]

I mean, intelligent monsters should be focusing fire on the mage as soon as they can ID them. Healer next.

thats a bit different than take magic user out at beginning if every combat.

 

[nevin]

I disagree. Telegraphing makes for fair games and helps spur creativity. It has the added benefit of being honest. Your lightning powers are unlikely to be effective on the BBEG. How do you deal with that ahead of the final confrontation?

Sometimrs players know what they are fighting sometimes they dont. i wouldnt olay in a game where i always knew what was coming. That would be boring

 

[Reynard]

Perception is reality. in one version the character has been knee capped, In the other the creature just had a freakish amount of hitpoints. players shouldnt know everything or be warned about everything. that makes for booooring games

My issue is telling the player something worked when it didn't is going to change their future decisions, impacting their agency.

 

[nevin]

In that scenario I told player nothing, what they assume is up to them.

 

[Umbran]

There is an expectation that important fights are dramatic and extended. This is a feature of adventure entertainment literally since Gilgamesh was put to clay. So, the wizard dropping the fireball on the guards is awesome. The wizard dropping the fireball on the BBEG and lackeys and killing them all is not awesome.

The party fighting a heroic, effective, but losing, battle until the wizard drops a fireball on them is awesome.

Dropping that fireball and killing them all in the first round... is an issue of encounter design. When the party wizard has Fireball, how did you make an encounter that could be defeated by a single use of the spell? They're all low hit points and bunched up to start? What was the GM thinking?

Or, to put it in this thread's idiom - It is not fun when the encounters are not well-designed for the party.

 

[Xamnam]

A single encounter where one party member can largely resolve it is great. It allows those strengths to shine, and will probably create a memory that is talked about for quite some time. Arguably, something this momentous can be almost as fun to watch and experience as it is to perform.

A slew of encounters, even non-contiguously, where one party member handles everything is a slog, and can likely lead to feelings of incompetence or a lack of importance for everyone else.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

For me, the height of unfun are things that result in you "not playing D&D while you're playing D&D." Getting stunned or paralyzed is the immediate example. But also table etiquette things, like when someone spends too long trying to decide what to do on their turn, or hogging the spotlight for an inordinate amount of time.

While it is important to be able to enjoy the game through the other people at the table, exalting in their moments and fearing when they're in danger, you also want to enjoy playing the game yourself.

Shutting down a PC for an extended period can definitely feel unfun.

 

[Vaalingrade]

When the DM gets mad at the players for their own lack of foresight. I've been using heat metal all campaign, so don't get mad at me to using it on the BBEG, you decked out in metal armor for the drip.

When the obviously shady obnoxious guy you've been very patiently not killing turns out to be a secret good guy or god and you can't touch him, let alone slap him anymore.

When someone at the table's weird obsessions become your problem.

When you're getting frustrated at not being good at what your character is meant to do, the guy that's supposed to be incompetent is so much better than you because they own Satan's Dice, and people act like you should be overjoyed.