Readied actions - too much DM advantage?

[Kahuna Burger]

"The fiend fireballs you... The fiend fireballs you... the fiend fireballs you..."

"I ready a spell turning."

"uh... The fiend charges you with his sword..."

Has this ever happened to you? But seriously, how can a DM fairly respond to a readied action? If they're already certain what the NPC was going to do next, its no problem, but if they were keeping their options open, they're kinda stuck. And that assumes they actually WANT to be fair to the players. In the meantime, the DM can have a npc ready any action and the player will have no clue what it is. (and again, we can't always prove if that action/requirement was being readied before it conviniently foiled the PC's attack.)

Does anyone here use cards/sealed envelopes/etc to do readied actions to make it fair for all on hand? has anyone but me ever had/worried about a problem?

Kahuna Burger

 

[Wormwood]

"The fiend fireballs you... The fiend fireballs you... the fiend fireballs you..."

"I ready a spell turning."

"uh... The fiend charges you with his sword..."

Has this ever happened to you? But seriously, how can a DM fairly respond to a readied action?

Well, the example you gave above would be a *not* responding fairly to a Readied action.

Don't do that and you should be fine.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Re: Re: Readied actions - too much DM advantage?

Well, the example you gave above would be a *not* responding fairly to a Readied action.

Don't do that and you should be fine.

ah, if life were always that simple....

Kahuna burger

 

[Destil]

"The fiend fireballs you... The fiend fireballs you... the fiend fireballs you..."

"I ready a spell turning."

"The fiend fireballs you... The fiend fireballs you... the fiend fireballs you..."

After all, Spell Turning dosn't stop a fireball.

Anyway, every aspect of D&D works like this, and knowing how to properly meta-game and how not to is just one of the facets of being a good DM. The DM dosn't work to win against the players, after all.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Re: Re: Readied actions - too much DM advantage?

Anyway, every aspect of D&D works like this, and knowing how to properly meta-game and how not to is just one of the facets of being a good DM. The DM dosn't work to win against the players, after all.

um, maybe yours doesn't....

but anyway, I was looking for a little more... um... concrete responses. So how DO you 'properly metagame' this particular rule subset?

Kahuna Burger

 

[fba827]

For us, it is not really a problem/issue. And I think it would just add an extra time-delay (wait, I ready an action *find paper, scribble scribble scribble*)

However, if there are ANY trust issues between the DM/Players (i.e. wondering if the DM is playing with the players or against the players) then your proposal would be one way to help avoid it and make things less questionable. (i.e. no one will leave the table that day muttering how he would swear the DM changed the tactic because of the ready action).

If time delay becomes a problem, have a bunch of ready made cards with common options "Ready a counter spell" "ready to fire my bow at the first through the door" etc. With a bunch of blank ones if a new one is needed.. then just pick the one you want as needed keep it face down ... (though this presents the issue of several using the same set of cards - can see which are missing or if the choice you want is already missing , etc..)..

it could go on.. just a matter of how complex you want it

Bottom line:
If the trust is there, then no need for the added complexity.

If the trust is at all questionable, then go with what you've proposed -- anything to help foster the idea that everyone is playing fair (if there was ever any doubt) then it should be explored.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Bottom line:
If the trust is there, then no need for the added complexity.

I wonder if this is true. The example I gave was of course extreme. But I could easily see being in a situation where I as a DM have not yet decided who the BBG is going to try to waste next turn. It depends on what they do and who is in what position. Then one of the players who was on the list of wasting possibilities says "I use my cool once a month ability to prepare an almost sure death for the guy if he tries to waste me."

Well, I hadn't decided who he was gonna try to waste. And it was pretty subjective to begin with. So play with the player and give him the easy kill for thinking creativly, play against the player to make the fight more interesting for everyone else, flip a coin? Unless you are a world class compartmentalizer, I don't think lack of trust is the only way this becomes relevant...

Kahuna burger

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

Well, if a player did this, he'd be accused of metagaming, and IMO it's just the same for DM's. If they ready any action, then they should go through with that action, unless there is a very good reason not to.

Of course, one way to portray a super high intelligence villain is to let them 'hear' the PC's plans as they go along, reflecting the villains ability to react to any situation.

but what is good for the PC's is good for the DM, unless of course there's something even better for the story and the all-round fun.

 

[Endur]

GM announce ready actions

As a GM, I will announce when a NPC seems to be waiting. I don't say what he is thinking about, but I'll make it fairly obvious that he is waiting to do something as soon as a trigger event occurs.

Tom

 

[EarthsShadow]

usually if i ready an action for a npc in a game i run i will write down what the readied action is on a piece of paper...

example of one instance: the four players entered a room and confronted the final obstacle for this adventure, which was the orc leader and his two bodyguards. Because the characters had made so much noise before they arrived i figured the main boss leader would have prepared a spell (cleric) on himself and also had a readied action that he would attack the first person that entered his threatened space. I wrote this down so I wouldn't forget.

Sure enough, one of the characters got in his space, he smacked the player a good one (I roll all combat dice in front of him and when he saw the natural 20, 2x in a row, come up, he knew he was going to take a smacking). He took like 40 points of damage because the item was a magical item that hated good, and this character was good and the orc leader was evil, and the player accused me of cheating.

I soon learned that anything bad that happens to a player's character will usually cause the player to accuse the DM of cheating against him, but such is life.

I even told them all that the Orc leader in the back of the room seemed to be hesitating, waiting to see what they were doing (orc leader did win initiative over the player that got to him first).