D&D General Playing to "Win" - The DM's Dilemma

For sure. Yeah, I’m not at all opposed to modifying monsters or using from-scratch homebrew ones. I just think that, especially when modifying monsters, it’s important to consider the players’ perspective and ask, will this feel more like a fun challenge or a screw job?
Which is more art than science, definitely. I've been playing a long time, and do a pretty good (I feel) job at reading my players and understanding their expectations, so I can generally get away with it; but DMs with less experience and/or more "structured" players can need more guidelines.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Depending on where you are. In dungeons (which is where this was) it is based on "dungeon level" which is only analogous to PC level if the players decide it is. In the wilderness, it is based on what lives there.

APL based encounter charts are an abomination.

Oh? How many level 50 , 100 and 1000 dungeons do you have out there?
 

Oh? How many level 50 , 100 and 1000 dungeons do you have out there?
I can't quite tell what you are objecting to.

Generally, dungeons are more dangerous as you go down (or up for towers or whatever) but the players get to choose whether they want to hang around where they are "safer" or they want to push for higher rewards (with the higher risk).
 

For a while I was playing in a 4e game in which the understanding was:

Since the players can work together to develop tactics and get time between rounds to make plans, the enemies get to act with metaknowledge of whose defenses are weakest, how spell effects work, etc.

I liked this because, even if it wasn't supported by in-game fiction, it made combats feel fair.
 


Every DM has their own perspective on this question: do you play the monsters to win?

The thread about how often a PC death "should occur" has had myself thinking on this for a while now. I know, as DM, I can throw whatever I want at the PCs, and while I don't think success should be guaranteed to the players, I do feel the point is generally to make certain they have a fighting chance--perhaps even a fair one on occasion. ;)

But how cunning and resourceful should their opponents be? What lengths should they be willing to go to defeat the characters? (dependent on their personality, alignment, behavior, morals, etc. of course)

How much foreshadowing should the DM feel necessary to warn the players, "Hey, this is going to be a tough fight, perhaps a TPK, so I'm giving you hints of a warning here..."?

While "not fun" for the player in question, one tactic is using magic or terrain to isolate one PC from the party; either to deal with that character or remove them from the battle while the other PCs are dealt with. This typically greatly increases the monster's chances of defeating the party (the "win").

Another strategy is using a familiar or similar creature or magic to spy on the PCs to observe their strategies, strengths, and weaknesses. This allows your monster to gauge which PC is the greatest threat and in what fashion, so they can counter the PCs as well as possible.

When the adversaries are multiple casters, such as a Hag Coven, this creates situtations which some players might feel are "unfair" and certainly "un-fun".

For myself as a player, since I often DM, this has never been an issue for me. And while I feel a primary goal of the game obviously is for everyone to have fun, I sometimes find myself at odds because what is fun for myself as DM is a believable world which challenges the PCs, not a game where the players just get to enjoy themselves and "win" all the time.

The last thing I enjoy and very rarely ever do is bail the players out of the situation. I try to give them warning, the chance to learn what they can instead of just charging blindly ahead, retreat (to a point---sometimes you are just in too deep!) and regroup, etc. but if they fail to take advantage or think of such things for themselves, I often feel like they have no one to blame but themselves.

I know the battle looming ahead for my party looks bleak for them from my point of view. While well-equipped and working well as a team, I see the potential for a TPK, particularly if I separate the PCs from one another and deal with them as smaller units instead of a whole group.

Weeks ago, I posted about the dragon encounter the PCs faced. Even though only 7th level at the time, the managed to "fend off" an Adult Black Dragon (CR 14), at the loss of a party member. Through some luck and planning, they managed to avoid the second encounter as the dragon hunted for them after resting. So, perhaps this encounter will go better for the players than I am imagining. We'll see.

Regardless, I am not really looking for "answers" or anything, other that what you might care to share from your own persepectives or opinions.
I agree with you. I want a believable world with challenges that are legitimate in the context of their place in the setting. I'm not going to "gotcha" my players, but I'm also not going to soft serve a threat that should be dangerous. The players get to decide what their PCs do and where they go. They will have opportunity to learn the nature of what they might face, at least to a degree, but I will not adjust it to accommodate for the power level of the characters.
 

I don't think it is, if the GM is following the rules of the game in setting up encounters and in play. Of course the GM can always throw 1000 tarrasques at the party, but that isn't what we are talking about here.
Exactly. "The DM has infinite dragons" has always been a nonsense argument to me.
 

Maybe we can talk about an example and folks can use it to illustrate how they prefer to do things. I will use a real world actual play one.

In a dungeon, two PCs wandered off on their own to scout while the others short rested (I know, I know, but they wanted to). They ended up encountering a hungry grick, which attacked. By some luck, the thing dropped one PC to 0. I decided to have the grick grab the PC and retreat to its lair to eat the PC, becuase it was a hungry predator. The other player ran and the captured PC was devoured.

Would you have done it differently?
Nope. That sounds perfect to me.
 



Trending content

Remove ads

Top