• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Lair Assault: Kill the Wizard

The pixie music box is equipment; it is not, for example, a leveled magical item with clearly defined attack and/or effect lines. It works by animals "heeding the pixies’ beautiful song and staying away out of respect for those magical creatures". It's most useful for securing a campsite against wolves and similar.

Any DM who wants can rule that a particular natural beast does not care. Or have them roll saves each round to throw it off. Or have it throw off the instant someone attacks them. Certainly, I wouldn't expect the ooze in this scenario to care, and the owlbear is already immune by dint of being a fey; though if a DM wanted to let him pause to appreciate the music that'd be fine too.

And that's all the rules anyone has: DM fiat.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

No, that's one of the most important aspects of Lair Assault. You can tell me why you think the pixie music box would work. I'll tell you when and how it won't. It's not like I'd miss anyone that would walk over something like that. "I'm taking my ball and going home," doesn't impress anyone even when you're the only one with a ball.

Actually Zuche, my game time is precious. I have learned when DMs are making my play experience "un-fun" I can vote with my feet. Every time I have compromised this, I have had a miserable experience. Thus, taking away my ball is not to impress you, it is to protect my own play experience.

As for the Pixie Musicbox, the rules are clear, when its playing natural creatures will not approach the zone it creates.

Now, when we played the players and the DM negotiated in advance on a few stipulations. We had to have the musicbox in our possession (or a monster could destroy it). We had to have it out (it could not be in a backpack for instance). We also ruled that if a player was helpless it could be taken away by a foe. That was it.

Everyone agreed. You will notice that the DM did not change the effect of the gear, but clarified how we could use and maintain the use.

I actually suggested during play that if the creature held at bay was attacked by the party that the effect would be broken, we all agreed upon this.

This I can live with.

What you suggest, that as the DM you have the power to arbitrarily change the effect of a power, item or something else at your whim is what I object to. That will cause me to walk away.

I am sorry that offends you. But really that is not my problem.
 
Last edited:

I start by saying I have never done Lair Assaults, but the following is based on what I have read of the manner of play and the objective of them:

I think the point Saracenus is making is that Lair Assaults are written to be hard, to the point of broken in favour of the DM, so for a DM to add complications that the LA doesn't include to combat an idea the players came up with is against the spirit of the entire exercise.

I believe LA's are a challenge saying "This module is too hard, AS WRITTEN, to be beat with 99% of groups. So see if you can put together a squad that can beat it using any cheesy combo, gimmicky trick or sneaky strategy you can think up - as long as it uses the rules as written for D&D4!"

This would mean that to then go "But that item can take the sting out of the encounter, I'm going to fudge it" is cheating the players. LA specifically challenges them to take the sting out of the encounters, or they get stung TO DEATH every time.

As far as I can tell LA's are about seeing if the players can use sneaky combos to unbreak the pre-broken. So if a trick works, it was to the players credit to have found it.

LA's don't sound my sort of thing, but even I see the fun in an open and honest challenge of "Munchkin your worst - this dungeon can take it" and seeing who comes out on top. When the objective is "Live and die by the rules as written", as LA's appear to be, then it is perfectly appropriate to be looking to use the cheese and the DM should be complimenting you on finding the right flavour of cheese to keep his killer rodents at bay.

I don't think it's that hard. A group that knows how to work well together should be able to beat it. However, a group of strangers bringing their own builds into the local gaming store will have a more difficult time of it - heck, you could end up with a party of leaders, or a group of strikers & defenders. A group that had played the characters up to 8th level from the beginning and knew how to work off of each other's powers would probably beat it.

I'm pretty sure the pixie box would not work in Lair Assault - the 5 brutes encounters is demons, a construct, the fey owlbear and the ooze or pudding or whatever it was. None are "natural" methinks. The first encounter was the hellhounds and the elf wizard lady. Again, no "natural" creatures.
 

Bungus,

And you would be wrong. Look up the various statblocks. You will find that one is indeed a natural beast. As I have have said before, the owlbear is a fey beast and is immune.
 
Last edited:

Actually Zuche, my game time is precious. I have learned when DMs are making my play experience "un-fun" I can vote with my feet.

My time as an organizer and DM is no less precious, Saracenus. I have weathered temper tantrums, off nights, lengthy post mortems, and more than a little thoughtlessness. What I won't tolerate is people who walk out because they're told an item won't work as they think it should. It's bad enough that I had to waste time on them, but they've also wasted the rest of the table's time. Word of that conduct gets around.

As for the Pixie Musicbox, the rules are clear, when its playing natural creatures will not approach the zone it creates.

They're clear all right. They even tell you why natural creatures won't approach the zone. That leads straight into the reasons they'll ignore said restriction as well.

If you attack them or their handlers, it's hard to argue that the item should still provide any benefit. If animals were trained to work as a unit with others, the DM is within rights to allow a handler to spend actions on attempts to breach the zone. If your DM decides that the power of an artifact on site should overwhelm the power of a fey trinket, all the better. It's not like you were counting on something so trivial as your best hope of success, were you?

We had to have the musicbox in our possession (or a monster could destroy it). We had to have it out (it could not be in a backpack for instance). We also ruled that if a player was helpless it could be taken away by a foe. That was it.

So, your DM thought this was fair because a monster that could never reach the item could possibly destroy it--if it could reach it. And you had to agree that it could not be tucked away, as is standard for any piece of gear in use. And you further conceded that it could be removed from a helpless PC, as could be done with, say, a weapon or implement. And then you suggested during play that the effect should only be broken against a creature if it, specifically, was attacked.

DM doesn't stand for door mat. I realize that there were still orcs that might be able to reach the device, but how long would it take them to realize and notice the effect? If it happened right away, without the requirement for an Arcana check, were you cheated? It if was destroyed by a burst effect, rather than having to be first removed from your helpless person, were you cheated? Are such considerations really worth it for the trivial price and "concessions" you paid?

What you suggest, that as the DM you have the power to arbitrarily change the effect of a power, item or something else at your whim is what I object to. That will cause me to walk away.

The item is designed to ward a campsite. Any ruling that limits its battlefront utility is not arbitrary. I, as DM, could tell you, "Sure, that music box should work as intended if it's kept out in the open," in advance of the scenario and then say, "Strange that it didn't work, isn't it?" when it did nothing.

You're then in the same boat as a player protesting because his drow PC drew an opportunity attack for moving through cloud of darkness past an ooze. Whether it's based on mechanics or an assessment of the scenario's features, the player assumed certain things as givens.

Players trust me on such things because they've seen the efforts made to be at least fair to them. They know there's a reason for something not working as they expected, based on either mechanics or scenario. They respect that I'll respect a different ruling in games they run. That matters more than what you think the rules say.

I am sorry that offends you. But really that is not my problem.

Please, no insincere apologies. So long as you won't waste any more of my time or that of my players and DMs (I've had to blacklist a few people for trying to have their cake and eat it too in this regard), I hope you have the time of your life.
 

Zouch,

As a long time player, DM, and coordinator for organized play I feel your pain. Players can be a handful. Again, I am sorry that my very forthright statements of what is acceptable at a table I am playing at seem to have struck a cord with you.

I have fun, I provide fun, and I make no apologies for it. What I have stated above is sympathy, not a "false apology".

One other thing. I play tested this Lair Assault. My group made it tougher because we broke the original badly (and no we did not use a pixie musicbox).

You are absolutely right, you and I should not sit down at a table together. We seem to rub each other the wrong way. Have fun gaming where ever you are at.
 
Last edited:

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top