Players not taking AoO

[tburdett]

There ARE certain things the players have to learn eventually. Just because you don't remind them about everything they can do, doesn't mean your an @$$hole (As implied very heavily in your post). If they can't be bothered to keep track of 1 thing, which (Following my PRIOR suggestion) they would know about ahead of time, then why would I want to play with such self centered people anyways?

True, the DM should be fair and impartial. Requiring your players to actually know the rules is, in my opinion, fair.

I see, and exactly how much does it cost you, in any way, to remind a player to take an attack of opportunity? Would that really be such a tremendous burden on you?

 

[Sanackranib]

it a DM's job . . .

I see, and exactly how much does it cost you, in any way, to remind a player to take an attack of opportunity? Would that really be such a tremendous burden on you?

Excelent point - Good form! It's the DM's job to run the game, its what you're paid for (ok well maby not actually paid) - but running the game and maintaining the balance by seeing that the rules apply to both the PC's and NPS's is YOUR responcibility. otherwise you would just be a player.

 

[Darrin Drader]

The whole purpose of a roleplaying game is to make the player's characters die horribly. Doesn't it make that job easier if you don't remind them about the AoO?

Seriously, I don't remind players about it any more than I remind them to use their feats. If they forget, its their own fault. Or, to put it much more bluntly, I am not responsible for the incompetance of the players.

 

[Piratecat]

Jermal, profanity is not allowed here - even profanity heavily disguised with @ signs! Please respect that rule next time, even if you disagree with someone's post. Thanks; email me if this is somehow a problem.

 

[el-remmen]

You know, I was thinking about this. . And I realize that I not only remind my players when they can take an AoO - but I point it out when one of their actions would lead them to drawing an AoO. . .

Not doing so is like not reminding someone to collect $200 when they pass "Go" - it is unsporting.

 

[incognito]

I tend to go 50/50 on this.

I want my palyers to know the rules. The rules are pretty complex (as I said before).

and there are times when they deliberately may not take an AoO (becasue they are hoping the BBEG provokes an AoO instead of his peon servant), or

They may even want to cause an AoO on themselves (because they think the enemy does not have combat reflexes, and they want the MAGE to be able to walk though the enemy's threatened area that round).

See? The game is complex! So I do remind my players about AoOs for new situations that occur (like something without improved grab trying to grapple a character), but after a brief reminder in the beginning og the gaem, I won't usually remind them of the common AoO opp's

Now, some have said this implies a style of play that is DM vs. The Players, instead of DM with the Players. I don't agree. If I want to learn to play a good game of chess (or one of many other intellectual games), I have to make mistakes, and possibly feel the agony of defeat as a result of them.

And let's face it - a Character will probably not die becsaue he forgot to take an AoO on a Mage that did not risk casting defensively.

 

[Mort]

And let's face it - a Character will probably not die becsaue he forgot to take an AoO on a Mage that did not risk casting defensively.

That's not really true. That spell could be anything from magic missile (death to a low level character) to disintigrate (could kill anyone).

I remind the players because 1) their characters would know and 2) I plan difficult encounters and don't want characters dying because of a rules gaffe.

I actually tend to be much harder on myself then the players in this respect. For example If I have an NPC villain cast when they would provoke an AoO and I don't roll a die for casting on the defensive, if one of the players points this out I will give them an AoO.

I tend to think of the PC's as heroes, as such they get the breaks not my NPC's.

 

[incognito]

I tend to think of the PC's as heroes, as such they get the breaks not my NPC's.

see, that breaks versimmilitude (sp?) for me...You're saying the high level, Uber-enemy, NPC mage, INT 22 cannot remember to cast defensively? While you gently remind the 10 INT, 12 WIS Sorcerer, or Bard to?

W'sup with that?

 

[jaerdaph]

I ran into a friend that I have DM'd for in the past on the subway today (not all that surprising considering it wasn't crowded because nobody is working today except me apparently - although obviously I'm not that busy ) and we chatted a little about this.

He said something interesting that I thought I'd pass on (this isn't exactly verbatim): "I don't want the DM to play my character for me, even if his intentions are meant to be beneficial. I want my successes and my mistakes to be my own. If I wanted that, we could just rent a movie."

Anyhow, I thought it was interesting, but YMMV.

I think the point to take away from this discussion is that you should play the game however you and your players want to play it.

Happy Holidays and Gaming, Everyone!

 

[Mort]

see, that breaks versimmilitude (sp?) for me...You're saying the high level, Uber-enemy, NPC mage, INT 22 cannot remember to cast defensively? While you gently remind the 10 INT, 12 WIS Sorcerer, or Bard to?

W'sup with that?

The Uber-enemy NPC mage is there for my and the players amusement - no skin off anyone's back if he makes a mistake. The PC's have a hard enough time.

as for verisimilitude - I don't make mistakes often but when I do (in the guise of said uber NPC) well it's a classic scenario when the villain makes one small mistake that leads to his downfall - I don't think it breaks believability (the reality of the scenario) at all.

In the end, It's all in the name of fun. If your players are having fun, you're doing it right - regardless of your particular method.