Players not taking AoO

[GameWyrd]

So what are players there for, for the DM to look at?
Do they have any responibility?

*blink* *blink*
Players are there to roleplay. They're there to breath life into the characters in the story, to talk to the NPCs, to make decisons and take actions. They're responsible for playing their character appropriately and good players will do their bit to ensure that other players in the game have something to do, don't get shouted down and encouraged to roleplay as well.

One of the roles of the DM is to make the rules as transparent as possible. A player only needs to know the rules well enough so they don't distrupt the game.

I honestly can't believe DMs would ever willingly let a player miss out on a valid AoO. It seems to be popular here - and it's choking.

The DM should jolly well describe the way the orc makes a clumsy lunge forward and leaves himself open to an attack by doing so. You're not really DMing if you don't do this. You're performing some other sort of role, one that doesn't provide the players with the cooperation due. Do you expect your players to keep track of the hit points the monsters have left and keep on running them unless the players notice their enemies should be dead?

 

[GameWyrd]

"You will want to inform your players when rule provided opportunities arise" So I should remind them that the mage slinging fireballs at them has a low fort save? Or that they should stay away from the big barbarian with the glowing axe?

Pretty much. Yes.

If the mage is a weedy looking fellow then you should describe him as such. If a player has his wizard character look around for a suitable target for a spell that will require a fort saving throw then it's your role as the DM to point out good looking targets.

If the barbarian is showing might and prowess over and above anything the characters have taken on before then you describe him as doing just that.

 

[Sixchan]

Pretty much. Yes.

If the mage is a weedy looking fellow then you should describe him as such. If a player has his wizard character look around for a suitable target for a spell that will require a fort saving throw then it's your role as the DM to point out good looking targets.

If the barbarian is showing might and prowess over and above anything the characters have taken on before then you describe him as doing just that.

But iin the above situation you're doing what I think most of us who wouldn't point it out are doing anyway!
"If the mage is a weedy looking fellow then you should describe him as such."
Right. I mention the mage looks frail and weak. I DON'T say "He looks like he might have a low fortitude save."

In the same manner, I say "Your opponent has let his guard down momentarily" or "The wizard runs past you in an attempt to escape" [proceed to show the path of the wizard]. I don't say "Your opponent has let his guard down, provoking an Attack of Opportunity from you." Because as a DM, I describe what the characters see, not what the players see.

Now, I think that that's what the other DMs who don't mention AoOs to their players do as well, right?

 

[GameWyrd]

In the same manner, I say "Your opponent has let his guard down momentarily" or "The wizard runs past you in an attempt to escape" [proceed to show the path of the wizard]. I don't say "Your opponent has let his guard down, provoking an Attack of Opportunity from you." Because as a DM, I describe what the characters see, not what the players see.

Oh sure. I don't imagine many people on the ENWorld forums are still at the DMing level where they speak rule mechanics.

"The wizard runs past you in an attempt to escape, limping from a wound on his side and apparently heedless of the danger he puts himself in by trying to rush past your sword arm. "

Also. If you're going to use the word "you" to describe a scene then you're talking to a specific player. My added extra makes that explicitly clear. If I was describing this then I'd be looking at the player in question and would stop and wait for her response.

Why wouldn't you wait for the player's response? Why wouldn't you explain why you're waiting?

If the player blinked dimly at me then I'd explicitly state, "There's a chance here to slash at the mage before he gets behind you."

In the games I'm used to playing in this might provoke some debate. Why attack someone who seems to be beaten? Would you risk killing the man? Just where he is rushing off to anyway?

 

[Sixchan]

I would wait for the player's response. Even a player who didn't understand AoO could prbably figure out that's a chance to attack. In my group, I probably wouldn't have to wait for a response, they'd already be trying to kill the mage.

If they say "I let him go", fine he gets away. If they say "I try to attack him as he runs past" they get an AoO. I don't say they have an opportunity to attack, but since my players seem to always know when they get extra chances to attack, indicating that they've got the extra chance isn't much of a problem for me.

 

[jaerdaph]

I honestly can't believe DMs would ever willingly let a player miss out on a valid AoO. It seems to be popular here - and it's choking.

I really don't want to see you upset GameWyrd, not on Christmas

I think my biggest role as DM is to provide my players the game they want to play. If they want to track their own AoO, that's what I give them. If I were to DM for a group I'd never gamed with before, at a convention perhaps, and they liked the idea of having AoO that might otherwise be missed pointed out to them, then that's what I'd give them.

This topic has got me thinking about something that could be related - how many of you use miniatures/counters on a 1" grid when you play? I do this (counters and grid), and doing so makes most AoO easy to spot, for DM and players. I think we'd all agree that trying to keep track of AoO without visual aids is very difficult.

I guess what I'm wondering is if the two different viewpoints on whether or not to point out AoO to players (or viceversa to the DM) is somehow related to the use of minis/counters.

So help yourself to some virtual eggnog and share your thoughts

Edit: Fixed typo that snuck in because my eggnog's spiked

 

[GameWyrd]

I agree. The biggest role of the DM is to give the players the sort of game that they want.

I've found counters and floor plans are great when there are more than three or four players. The counters and floor plans are even more handy when there are more foes than heroes.

I've found that rather than adding to the crunchy hack'n'slash feel to a game that counters and floor plans can be used to avoid it. The counters really do make it easy to see where everything's coming from and all the players really need to know is that they can move 6 squares (in most cases). I've also found that counters and floor plans make the fight trickier. The DM never forgets that one of the monsters is hanging around and doing nothing and it's easier to spot that player who's strayed too far out on the flank and is running the risk of being cut off.

The draw back seems to be that combat can be less reactive with the enviroment. Sure, characters hide behind pillars - but only because pillars tend to be on every other floor plan. You see much less of the rogue leaping on the table to get a crossbow shot off or the mage knocking the bookshelf over as a distraction unless there are table and bookshelf tokens in use.

There; finished at 00:02 so that means happy crimbo to crimbo counters!

 

[jaerdaph]

Sure, characters hide behind pillars - but only because pillars tend to be on every other floor plan.

Thank goodness for d20 Modern so we can finally take advantage of advances in architecture Although now there's probably just going to be a lot of crates on warehouse floors...

Seriously though, I usually print out floorplans from CC2 at a 5' to 1" scale to use in the game, and include all room furnishings etc. so the players can take advantage of them or ignore them as they see fit.

 

[jaerdaph]

You see much less of the rogue leaping on the table to get a crossbow shot off or the mage knocking the bookshelf over as a distraction unless there are table and bookshelf tokens in use.

You know, if I were to hide the layer with the furniture and other movables on it before I print, then print that stuff seperately to create movable furniture counters, things might get even more interesting...

Thanks for the idea

 

[ced1106]

Sure, tell them. In particular, I'd tell the fighters when they could take AoO, the spellcasters when they're Too Close to a fighting opponent, etc. etc. Ditto, however, for Paladins straying too far from alignment, clerics ignoring their faith, and so on. In the end, of course, it's up to the GM and players to balance how they think their PCs should be played.

I still have trouble getting Steve to believe that, as the most powerful combat machine in the parry, "running away" isn't his only option. (;


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^