Rant - What was the GM thinking?

[Gnimish88]

Recently, our group slew a BBEG in a large (~10000 SF) cavern with a soil floor. After grabbing the treasure that was organized around the room and using Locate Object to find some items (buried about half a foot down) left behind after a less successful encounter with the BBEG, we left the cavern and headed to the surface.

A week later, we returned, wacked some unfriendlies intending an ambush, and talked to a spy that had warned us of the ambush. He showed us a large (~20' across and ~3' deep) hole where an orb of some power had been discovered and taken away by our enemies. Right near where we had dug up our items. Needless to say, many teeth were gnashed, but we chalked it up to the intended flow of the plot, after all, what reason would we have to dig a large hole after finding what we were looking for so quickly? Not so, apparently, since the GM went on about how easily we could have found it (take 10 on my rogue's search) had we just looked.

It is my feeling that, since we had no reason to search the entire cavern in the first place, why mock us for not finding the item? Certainly, we will now thoroughly search all rooms, time allowing, but I feel he was unfair in actually expecting us to go looking for something we had no reason to think existed.

 

[the Jester]

Eh, you missed some loot. Big deal. Someone else got it- big deal again.

It happens. I don't mean to sound blase, but if you don't even search the room you give away the loot.

 

[Arnwyn]

Because mocking players is fun. Duh.

(Seriously, though - who knows? Without actually being able to see into the DM's head, view all his maps and notes, and have him carefully explain why the situation was the way it was... well, we'll never know, will we?)

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

A rookie DM who needs to work on his descriptions.

 

[Mystery Man]

Actually if your bonus was high enough to find it without rolling he should have just told you you spotted something. At least that's what I do.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

(Seriously, though - who knows? Without actually being able to see into the DM's head, view all his maps and notes, and have him carefully explain why the situation was the way it was... well, we'll never know, will we?)

That's how I see it. Ehr, don't see it...

Whatever.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Monte Cook had a great house rule about "taking zero" for Listen and Spot checks. Basically the way to see if you find something when you're not looking for anything. He also suggested that sleeping monsters "take zero" to see if they wake up when the party is walking past them.

 

[BSF]

Yes, if it were that easy and you have decent spot, then he should have said something. There are lots of times where I let my players have gimme's just because their characters are so skilled.

This isn't to say that the players never need to think about their actions. But I have been trying to put it into my mind that there are many situations where it is logical to assume that the PC's are taking 10. There are also situations where it is not logical to assume that, but it is kind of a judgement call and I am more concerned with getting them into the story.

 

[Nifft]

"Taking 10" on a Search check means spending some time looking at a specific 5 ft. by 5 ft. square. Unless it's a secret door and you're an Elf, or if it's stonework and you're a Dwarf, you gotta specifically say "I'm taking however much time to Search from XXX to YYY." That's probably 4-6 "squares" per minute for taking 10, or 1 square per 2 minutes for taking 20.

Were you under any time pressure? It sounds like "taking 10" would have taken a lot of time.

-- N

 

[Quasqueton]

It is my feeling that, since we had no reason to search the entire cavern in the first place, why mock us for not finding the item? Certainly, we will now thoroughly search all rooms, time allowing, but I feel he was unfair in actually expecting us to go looking for something we had no reason to think existed.

I'm the DM. I was wrong to "mock" the Players, though it was more an exclamation of flabbergastedness than an actual mock. But still, I shouldn't have commented at all.

Most DMs want the PCs to find and learn about all the little "easter eggs" of the campaign/dungeon. Most DMs *want* the PCs to find the hidden vault and recover the treasure horde. Most DMs *want* the PCs to learn of the secret organization behind the assassinations. Most DMs *want* the PCs to figure out the mysterious clues. So when the PCs don't search the room with the secret door, or don't question the captured assassin, or translate the unknown writing, DMs sometimes get . . . disappointed. And in my case, the DM spouts off when he should just shut up and keep the game moving on.

But in this case, there was irony to intensify the disappointment. In the previous such caverns (six to be exact) the party did actually take the time to search (Take 10) the entire area. In most of those 6 caverns, the party even spent the night in them, allowing the rogue to spend many hours to complete the search. So, when the one chamber that actually had something to find in it was not searched (even though the party had the time), I lost control of my mouth, and commented.

Bad form on my part.

Quasqueton

P.S. For the record, a "random" search was not the only way to learn of and find the buried item. It was just the way I was expected this particular party to find it, based on their previous actions -- searching each cavern.