Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zuche" data-source="post: 6031987" data-attributes="member: 6682151">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.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?  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?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.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.</blockquote>

Verification