Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kigmatzomat" data-source="post: 2797782" data-attributes="member: 9254">That is the DM, mostly.&nbsp; I am prety insightful and can put up decent cost-effective defenses but I make a point to never tweak the defenses to address the players' plans.&nbsp; I prefer to know the players plans in advance mainly so I can more easily run the encounter; if I *know* that the guards are going to be confused by the plan that's great but if *I* am confused by the party's plan I have to decide how the various NPCs will react and many of them will be more competent than I am.&nbsp; I've had the &quot;prescient&quot; DM where whatever you do is countered.&nbsp; We finally called him on it&nbsp;&nbsp; by going into one game with no plan.&nbsp; Lots of gear, lots of options, no plan.&nbsp; We decided our plan of action 10-30 seconds in advance, no more.&nbsp; It was our most successful adventure with that GM.&nbsp; (He had a helicopter gunship start attacking our homes in retaliation, even though IIRC we didn't kill anyone and only stole a videotape that was being used for blackmail.)I dealt with this by setting up plans where if they deviate they die.&nbsp; The archer starts shooting early?&nbsp; He's the most exposed individual.&nbsp; The fighter breaks plan?&nbsp; Guess she's on her own against that troll.&nbsp; I call it &quot;planned darwinism.&quot;&nbsp; It requires repeated willful incompetence to reach this point.&nbsp; it doesn't hurt that I tend to play LN or NE characters who see it as a necessary learning/expunging event.&nbsp; Simple brain-fart moments happen and sometimes the plan is too subtle for everyone to grasp (&quot;When I say now you beat on your shield and attract the wyvern.&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Okay.&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Now we need to-&quot; BAMBAMBAMBAMBAMBAM! &quot;WHAT ARE YOU DOING?!?!?&quot;&nbsp; &quot;You said now so I'm beating my shield.&quot;&nbsp; BAMBAMBAMBAMBAM).&nbsp; Besides, the simplest plans are best.&nbsp; If it requires more than two sentences to tell each person their part the plan is destined to fail.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kigmatzomat, post: 2797782, member: 9254"] That is the DM, mostly. I am prety insightful and can put up decent cost-effective defenses but I make a point to never tweak the defenses to address the players' plans. I prefer to know the players plans in advance mainly so I can more easily run the encounter; if I *know* that the guards are going to be confused by the plan that's great but if *I* am confused by the party's plan I have to decide how the various NPCs will react and many of them will be more competent than I am. I've had the "prescient" DM where whatever you do is countered. We finally called him on it by going into one game with no plan. Lots of gear, lots of options, no plan. We decided our plan of action 10-30 seconds in advance, no more. It was our most successful adventure with that GM. (He had a helicopter gunship start attacking our homes in retaliation, even though IIRC we didn't kill anyone and only stole a videotape that was being used for blackmail.) I dealt with this by setting up plans where if they deviate they die. The archer starts shooting early? He's the most exposed individual. The fighter breaks plan? Guess she's on her own against that troll. I call it "planned darwinism." It requires repeated willful incompetence to reach this point. it doesn't hurt that I tend to play LN or NE characters who see it as a necessary learning/expunging event. Simple brain-fart moments happen and sometimes the plan is too subtle for everyone to grasp ("When I say [i]now[/i] you beat on your shield and attract the wyvern." "Okay." "Now we need to-" BAMBAMBAMBAMBAMBAM! "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?!?!?" "You said [i]now[/i] so I'm beating my shield." BAMBAMBAMBAMBAM). Besides, the simplest plans are best. If it requires more than two sentences to tell each person their part the plan is destined to fail. [/QUOTE]

Verification