New Game of Death: Battle Royale of the GAWDS

[clockworkjoe]

I made the check listen instead of spot, because you would hear it before you would notice the shadow and look up. I would assume characters would be watching a lot of things besides the ground. However, to be nice, I will allow Also, If you make both checks you take no damage. And Martok has to be directly above you for it to work.

As for the 10d6 damage being unfair, I don't see how it is. You could have pulled the same thing with a bag of boulders or even an extra large bag of holding and some anvils. Hell, someone could have bought 20 bags of holding and filled each bag with acid and then telekinesised it overy Maturak's head. Dropping very large things over someone's head isn't very hard to do in 3E D&D and it is very very damaging.

As for me being unfair, I haven't banned/punished anyone for criticizing me/the game and I won't unless someone starts a flame war that gets this thread closed or something similar. I have altered several rulings that people have complained about because the rulings were widely regarded as unfair.

Most importantly, I have been INCREDIBLY SLACK about characters (Reaper punished it way too far). For example, Ancryx's advantage is that he is a lich. For no cost. I won't mention the other things I've let go because that would compromise the players involved. I think the best evidence that I'm not playing favorites is being so generous to most of the players that wanted unusual things for their character.

I am not a rules lawyer. I try to follow the rules as closely as possible but I can't bring myself to obsess over them. I know I'm going to get some rulings wrong so I just try to be as fast and as accurate as possible. And of course I bring my own personal prejudices and biases to the table. Any GM would.

Finally, if you don't like how I am running the game, then please, pretty please start your game of death! I would honestly love to see more of these games being run. All I know is that I probably won't run another one, at least not in the immediate future, because it is too much work with too little reward. I am getting tired of many people accusing me of all kinds of crimes for running this game. (don't worry, I will see this game through.)

 

[Azure Trance]

I've been following this thread since it first began and thought (still do) it's great to see PCs battle it out; but the constant bickering by Reaper really downplays it. I can't remember them all; perhaps some of them truly were a mistake, or unjustified, but it seems every post by him says that there's something wrong / not right / should be fixed in the game.

 

[Saepiroth]

I probably won't run another one, at least not in the immediate future, because it is too much work with too little reward. I am getting tired of many people accusing me of all kinds of crimes for running this game.

you know, Jinx's game on SA was town under by constant bickering, too. this isn't an ACTIVE death, by no means, but your slightly SA inspired style is, well, just really appealing.

i repeat,

 

[clockworkjoe]

you know, Jinx's game on SA was town under by constant bickering, too. this isn't an ACTIVE death, by no means, but your slightly SA inspired style is, well, just really appealing.

i repeat,

well I need some time to recharge after this thing is done regardless of what happens.

but I'm curious about Jinx's game. What happened? I tried to follow it but I just don't have time.

Also, one last thing about the tree token:

This 100 GP magic item slew a dragon in Piratecat's game. A very big dragon. Don't forget that.

 

[Saepiroth]

but I'm curious about Jinx's game. What happened? I tried to follow it but I just don't have time.

i think he should probably explain himself; he stopped it pretty suddenly. actually, he stopped it about two rounds before i got to join in with this fellow. it's superficially unbalanced as all hell, due to the chaos, and the bending of the item creation rules, but i was going to play it up to it's lasheresque hilt. and i wouldn't be able to use any of the special stuff until i "discovered" it anyway, so... ah well. i've soared off on a tangent. what i mean to say is that Jinx should probably explain himself, because A) i'm not so sure I have a grip on it, myself, and B) anything i say will probably be heavily tainted by dissapointment.

however... you may find these threads interesting. we've stirred up a good bit of D&D interest on the SA forums, now, so perhaps you might want to try a GoD again eventually with some people with their quality insured by the omniscient 10 dollar shield. and of course, selected invites from here; to be precise, invites for everyone playing now who isn't reaper.

Jinx's game thread (closed, sadly )

Jinx's Discussion thread (last two pages = CHOCK FULL O' SORROWS)

DanSTC's game&comments thread (the final currently existing hope for D&D on SA. a module, admittedly, but every player slot filled in about ten minutes, and that includes the time it took me to drop my reserved slot. i wish i hadn't now... i originally thought i would be playing in Jinx's game and so decided to leave it open for someone who couldn't play there. oops, i guess. )

 

[reapersaurus]

perhaps some of them truly were a mistake, or unjustified, but it seems every post by him says that there's something wrong / not right / should be fixed in the game.

maybe you should read some of my (currently) 69 posts again - "every post by me" is not as you're remembering.

I actually just typed a long post offering my hand to clockwork to leave his past rulings in the past, and concentrating on what the rest of the Game brings us all, but that was just eaten by my computer freezing.

So while I am offering to let bygones be bygones, I can't believe that people are making it out like I've also caused a "problem" here.
I voiced my view of what happened to Maturak, and many people commented on how they saw it (they seemed to have valid concerns, it seemed).

While clockwork admitted he didn't think it thru right, he seems open to making sure his rulings are accepted by the group.

I hope no reader of this thread thinks that happened on its own:
I have no doubt that unless I had voiced my concerns, we would all be stuck with a GoD that lost all sense of reasonable play, with 100 gp items doing 20d6 damage with no save.

This is a collaborative simulation, and I think all of us play our parts.

 

[Saepiroth]

I can't believe that people are making it out like I've also caused a "problem" here.

the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

the loose nail gets the hammer.

the indiscreet mob informant gets the 9mm round to the back of the skull.

 

[clockworkjoe]

...

 

[Azure Trance]

...

Why is her hair shaped into bunny ears?

 

[Bhaal]

the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

In a surplus economy, the squeaky wheel gets replaced .

There's something to be said about joining someone else's game, and as soon as issues come up immediately questioning the creator's ability, credibility and integrity instead of trying to dicuss it in a civil manner. There's a difference between saying "I think this was bad judgment on the DM's part" and "I think this was bad judgement and OH MY GOD THE DM IS FORCING US INTO THIS GAME JUST SO HE CAN JUST PLAY FAVORITES AND BE AN UNFAIR GRUDGEMONGER AND MAKE BAD RULINGS TO MESS WITH US!!". Apparently there's no room for slip-ups; as soon as he makes a bad call it's construed as intentional, malicious and personal. If clockwork is such a purposfully unfair DM, why do you play in his games?

I'm not saying this to start a flamewar, hear me out. I've got no problems with people disagreeing with and even arguing some of the DM's calls. Everyone is pulling tricks up their sleeve and a large number of them are not easily defined by the rules. To make things worse, it's other PCs who are the ones affected by the non-standard activities (and the on-the-fly rules that dictate them), so anything that needs a jugement call is always going to be under scrutiny by SOME side. Keep in mind that this will happen no matter who's running it, due to the nature of the game. In short: no matter who was running this, there is bound to be contraversial decisions by the DM.

That being said, it's completely counterproductive--to both your argument AND the game morale--to immediately attach ad hominem insinuations as the source of the debated judgement call; it's immature. On top of that, implying that people don't bring up issues because they're in fear of CWJ "getting defensive and retributive" steals EVEN MORE credibility to ANY POINT you are trying to make, because all of a sudden any point you do try to make seems to revolve around the DM being a horrible, awful person. He who slings mud loses ground, and all those other sayings.

My point is this: If you have a problem with a judgement, fine, but don't debase your argument by debasing the judge. It hurts the game, it damages trust, and it takes out all the fun. We're here to have fun, right?