jmucchiello
Hero
Read the rules on Bull Rush again. If you succeed with the Strength check you can push your opponent backwards. A kick can be a Bull Rush without penalty in my opinion.MerakSpielman said:
Punishing Player Creativity?
- Thread starter dreaded_beast
- Start date
MerakSpielman
First Post
True enough, but luckily for my brain-freeze at that moment she gave up on the idea when it turned out they weren't lined up right for it to work.jmucchiello said:
In my experience, low-level characters seem to be the most creative. The problem is, first and second level PCs are so fragile that if they mess something up it can mean almost instant death. Example: Once they're high enough level that they might actually succeed at the jump-tapestry move above, they have (made-up numbers) a +4 sword, 27 Armor Class, 80hp, and 3-4 attacks per round. They can just kill the guards in a fair fight instead of doing stunts like that.
silentspace
First Post
Well, so far I've seen two types of 'creative' actions.
The first type is what everyone seems to be talking about, which is unusual combat tactics. Best way to handle that as a DM, IMO is to listen to the player's action, then state what roll they have to make. Don't do this until you hear the entire player's actions though.
Jump off the balcony and grab the tapestry: MEA, DC 10 Reflex save
Chance for Tapestry to rip off the wall: 50%
Tear down tapestry to cover opponents: Touch attack, using only BAB with a -4 penalty
Chance to land without injury: DC 15 Reflex save. If failed, only take half damage.
It's not really that hard, and doesn't take a lot of thought.
The second type, Merak's example of the puzzle, is different. As a player I found a similar way to bypass a trap, that resulted in the rest of the night becoming an argument between the other players,who thought it was a great idea, and the DM, who was reluctant to allow it. It was a new group for me so I stayed out of the argument. When we resumed play next week, the DM had a change of heart and allowed my action, and even gave me an exp bonus for it. But I also found out why he didn't want to allow it at first: the solution allowed the party bypass a really elaborate trap that he had spent hours on! Honestly, I felt bad for him, and almost wanted to undo it.
The first type is what everyone seems to be talking about, which is unusual combat tactics. Best way to handle that as a DM, IMO is to listen to the player's action, then state what roll they have to make. Don't do this until you hear the entire player's actions though.
Jump off the balcony and grab the tapestry: MEA, DC 10 Reflex save
Chance for Tapestry to rip off the wall: 50%
Tear down tapestry to cover opponents: Touch attack, using only BAB with a -4 penalty
Chance to land without injury: DC 15 Reflex save. If failed, only take half damage.
It's not really that hard, and doesn't take a lot of thought.
The second type, Merak's example of the puzzle, is different. As a player I found a similar way to bypass a trap, that resulted in the rest of the night becoming an argument between the other players,who thought it was a great idea, and the DM, who was reluctant to allow it. It was a new group for me so I stayed out of the argument. When we resumed play next week, the DM had a change of heart and allowed my action, and even gave me an exp bonus for it. But I also found out why he didn't want to allow it at first: the solution allowed the party bypass a really elaborate trap that he had spent hours on! Honestly, I felt bad for him, and almost wanted to undo it.
Teflon Billy
Explorer
MerakSpielman said:
I think this is the crux of the argument right here. If you aren't playing a game that allows for Cinematicly Appropriate maneuvers (like Feng Shui[ or it's bastard offspring; Exalted) then I don't hink you should be surprised when showy, daring moves fail (there is a reason they are called "Daring" after all)
Think of it in terms of Professional Wrestling: Those moves would get you annihilated in a "real" fight, but since Pro Wrestling exists in its own paradigm (where crazy, flashy moves are more damaging the crazier and flashier they are) fights unfold a certain way.
I recall an old GURPS game we had where one guy just did not get the gist of what was going on.
The group was playing hard-bitten mercenaries (and if you've ever played GURPS you understand just how grim it can be without its cinematic rules in place...which they weren't) and one player decided to play a slightly unhinged Goblin with a giant turban who beleived he was Sinbad.
He spent most of his time ehorting his "Sinbad-ness" to everyone the group met (much to their embarassment/consternation) and joining combat by trying to loop the fabric from his turban around the enemies and suchlike. It was rank foolishness in a non-foolish paradigm. It worked about as well as you would expect Adam West's Batman to work in a Dark Knight Returns-type scenario.
Which is to say, he was summarily dumped by his own side.
Varianor Abroad
Explorer
silentspace said:
Had both in my games. The second type is one that you have to just sit there and admire. 4-8 brains against your one will often arrive at a creative approach to bypassing something involved if they want to. (I'm reminded of the big tall tower with a balrog on the top that the PCs flew to the top of. This was in 1985 in my youth. They got to kill it and mopped up the rest of the tower quite handily.)
The first approach is one that is quite cool if it can be done right. For that, I like the Arcana Unearthed hero point rules. It encourages it and gives a PC a mechanic to handle the unexpected. In a recent game, the giant wanted to run when it wasn't his turn 60 feet through the water to stop a crocodile from chomping another PC. He has a 20 base move. He spent his Hero Point and did it. It's cool to allow dramatic things and better when you have a method.
MerakSpielman
First Post
I instituted a method for this in my most recent campaign. It involves "Swashbuckling Cards." (You can read about the campaign, and find a link to download the .doc file for the cards, by checking out my Story Hour in my sig.)Varianor Abroad said:It's cool to allow dramatic things and better when you have a method.
These card are shuffled, passed out at the beginning of each session, and returned at the end of the session if unplayed. Each (beginning with a cheesy movie quote) allows something unusual, unexpected, or flat-out against the rules to happen. They have criteria for when they can be played (in combat, out of combat, at any time, etc...). Some are useful, some are just funny, and some are designed entirely to make the DM (me) think fast on my feet to find a way to make it happen that seems reasonable. Some are campaign changing, such as "Love, Love, Love: Play when an enemy has died or become disabled. Instead of dying, the enemy repents and becomes an ally." The most recent one that was played was "Your Feelings Betray You. Play any time not in combat. A vital piece of information is unintentially revealed." Bloody near destoryed my plot, and an NPC who was previously unimportant now is central (otherwise he wouldn't have had the information). The other one that was played in the last session was "Soliloquy. Play any time. All combat comes to a halt as you make a dramatic speech. Take as long as you like."
All kinds of cheesy goodness, and it hasn't unbalanced the campaign yet!
Orius
Unrepentant DM Supremacist
DMScott said:
Same here. Rules manipulation means the player is likely trying to exploit a loophole to his advantage. Two example from my campaign:
One player tried to say his elf cleric could spot hidden pits because they were concealed with "hidden trapdoors". Thus his character could spot pits as secret doors. I squashed that one almost immediately, saying that as a DM, I get a +20 to save vs. rules lawyering.
Another character a while back tried to convince me that his character could use the weaponlike spell rules rules from Tome and Blood when he was casting magic missile, thus using feats like Point Blank Shot to make the spell more powerful. I overruled him, since weaponlike spells use hit rolls, where magic missile always hits. He said another DM let him use that, but I wasn't inclined to feel quite so generous....
ThoughtBubble
First Post
First, I hope the non creative DM and the creative players can find a way to make things work out.
In my expierence as a DM, the biggest thing that gets in the way of DM's working with player creativity is a lack of statement of intent. I had a fairly creative player in my group, but it never worked because I could rarely tell what he was trying to do. Thus, even the best roll in the world wouldn't help him, because I'd give the wrong outcome as an example. For example, a player stands around and waves his cape at the troll. I blink and continue in combat. The next round he tries throwing his cape at the troll. His cape ends up draped over the troll's shoulder. The round after that, he states: "Well, since I can't seem to distract them, I'm going to dig in my back for a torch." Whoops.
Another player in my group was the creatively stupid guy. He always tried to do amazingly heroic and dramatic things. As a LV 1 sorcerer however, trying disarms on the opponents, or attacking with a nonproficient weapon was generally a bad idea. He nearly died every other session. However, there are two moments that everyone remembers him for, the one that succeeded and saved the party, and the one that failed and changed the campaign.
There's a story I heard once, about a rogue who was in a winery, being chased by some form of acid slime. Earlier in his quest, he'd found out that the wine in the area was all the new stuff. So he leads the slime that way, then opens the barrels and tips it in the slime's path. With me as a DM, that wouldn't have done anything. But it turns out that wine at that stage is highly base. So the DM in that ruled that it weakened the slime. It was a cool manuver that relied on someone understanding a specific point. I wouldn't have caught that one.
In my expierence as a DM, the biggest thing that gets in the way of DM's working with player creativity is a lack of statement of intent. I had a fairly creative player in my group, but it never worked because I could rarely tell what he was trying to do. Thus, even the best roll in the world wouldn't help him, because I'd give the wrong outcome as an example. For example, a player stands around and waves his cape at the troll. I blink and continue in combat. The next round he tries throwing his cape at the troll. His cape ends up draped over the troll's shoulder. The round after that, he states: "Well, since I can't seem to distract them, I'm going to dig in my back for a torch." Whoops.
Another player in my group was the creatively stupid guy. He always tried to do amazingly heroic and dramatic things. As a LV 1 sorcerer however, trying disarms on the opponents, or attacking with a nonproficient weapon was generally a bad idea. He nearly died every other session. However, there are two moments that everyone remembers him for, the one that succeeded and saved the party, and the one that failed and changed the campaign.
There's a story I heard once, about a rogue who was in a winery, being chased by some form of acid slime. Earlier in his quest, he'd found out that the wine in the area was all the new stuff. So he leads the slime that way, then opens the barrels and tips it in the slime's path. With me as a DM, that wouldn't have done anything. But it turns out that wine at that stage is highly base. So the DM in that ruled that it weakened the slime. It was a cool manuver that relied on someone understanding a specific point. I wouldn't have caught that one.
Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
Orius said:
There is, of course, a difference between "rules-lawyering" and "bollocks".
-Hyp.
Michael Tree
First Post
As I see it, there are three types of creativity here. 1) Dramatic creativity, 2) Creative problem solving, and 3) Rule-manipulating creativity. I love the first two, but restrict the latter.
One of my favorite creative moments as a player was ultimately unsuccessful, but I'm glad my DM let me try. My wizard had been blinded by using alchemical drops of nightvision created by a mad alchemist (I failed my Con save). Well, not really blinded, but the world turned a featureless blue. I had only a few spells left, so tried to use them creatively, and proposed a plan to my GM. He said it was so weird and creative that he might let it work: I cast Blindness on myself, trying to wipe out the blue, replacing it with total blindness. Then I dismissed the spell, hoping to take the blue away with it. My GM made me make a Spellcraft roll to see if it worked, which I flubbed, so the world remained blue. But I'm gratified that my GM at least gave me a chance, even if it was a miniscule one.
I agree that creative solutions shouldn't automatically succeed, but I judge how difficult they are on the effect they're trying to achieve, not on how difficult it would be to do in the real world. For example, if an unarmored agile character needs to get down from a balcony, and has the choice of just walking down the stairs or grabbing a rope and swinging down, I won't penalize the latter just because it's more tricky in the real world. We don't play in the real world.
I don't want to reward pedantic caution in my games, I want to reward gutsy drama.
One of my favorite creative moments as a player was ultimately unsuccessful, but I'm glad my DM let me try. My wizard had been blinded by using alchemical drops of nightvision created by a mad alchemist (I failed my Con save). Well, not really blinded, but the world turned a featureless blue. I had only a few spells left, so tried to use them creatively, and proposed a plan to my GM. He said it was so weird and creative that he might let it work: I cast Blindness on myself, trying to wipe out the blue, replacing it with total blindness. Then I dismissed the spell, hoping to take the blue away with it. My GM made me make a Spellcraft roll to see if it worked, which I flubbed, so the world remained blue. But I'm gratified that my GM at least gave me a chance, even if it was a miniscule one.
Why does it matter if matter if something is 'actually' not a good move? If it's a good and appropriate move in the movies and books that the game is based on, shouldn't the game model that?MerakSpielman said:
I agree that creative solutions shouldn't automatically succeed, but I judge how difficult they are on the effect they're trying to achieve, not on how difficult it would be to do in the real world. For example, if an unarmored agile character needs to get down from a balcony, and has the choice of just walking down the stairs or grabbing a rope and swinging down, I won't penalize the latter just because it's more tricky in the real world. We don't play in the real world.
I don't want to reward pedantic caution in my games, I want to reward gutsy drama.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
