Ashrum the Black
Explorer
Heh.
alsih2o, you rock....
alsih2o, you rock....
Sympathy for the Players
- Thread starter Tom Cashel
- Start date
Tom Cashel
First Post
Nice one, Clay. And here I was wondering if anyone would "get" the thread title... 
I don't know about the players in question, but maybe they don't want to play the advanced tactics side of D&D. Not everyone likes such games.
For example, in my current Shadowrun campaign, emphasis lies on the characters' weaknesses and the often amusing trouble they get into, not on cunning plans and sly tactics against smart foes. It is more of a sometimes cheesy action movie with comedy elements than a tactical wargame, but we want it that way.
For example, in my current Shadowrun campaign, emphasis lies on the characters' weaknesses and the often amusing trouble they get into, not on cunning plans and sly tactics against smart foes. It is more of a sometimes cheesy action movie with comedy elements than a tactical wargame, but we want it that way.
In one campaign, I prepared my players to fight the ultimate bad guys by running their characters through a magical simulator that was like the holodeck on ST:TNG. (This simulator was built and run by gnome artisans and illusionists.) That way, the player characters could test out their new abilities, spells, magic items, etc., as well as develop tactics and teamwork; all of this, against simulacrums of their arch opponents.
Because it was just an illusion, the player characters would not suffer real deaths. (They usually did all "die", their first time in the simulator.) Thus they lived to learn from their experience. And afterwards, NPC observers would debrief the player characters, pointing out what they did wrong, and how they could do things better.
Because it was just an illusion, the player characters would not suffer real deaths. (They usually did all "die", their first time in the simulator.) Thus they lived to learn from their experience. And afterwards, NPC observers would debrief the player characters, pointing out what they did wrong, and how they could do things better.
Last edited:
Marimmar
First Post
On tactics
Tom, your description reminds me of my gf who recently learned to play the game. It was quite astonishing for me as gm in 1:1 games with her to see how many tactical faults an inexperienced combatant makes. This is not stupidity, it's just lack of experience.
Some rules of engagement:
-Act as a team, talk with your comrades about your actions as much as the gm allows.
-Don't charge ahead unless you know that your comrades will be right behind you. Otherwise keep formation and ready attacks against approaching enemies. It's always better to have a friend at your back and at your flank than being surrounded by enemies.
-Withdraw from combat if under 15 hp. Any critical hit may instakill you. (This applies only to characters of level 3+) Withdraw from all enemies (e.g. trolls) that can 'rend' if under 30 hp.
-Flanking is nice, being flanked is not-nice. Flanking is a pack tactic that should be applied only when fighting against fewer opponents that your group numbers PCs, otherwise you might get flanked by your flanked opponents buddy.
-Protect those party members that deal more damage than you, that can heal you, and that are too weak to face the opposition, in that order. The last man standing can bind the wounded and dying, he should be from your party.
-Carry polearms, they even out the field when up against large enemies with reach. Against smaller opponents they give you the added advantage of additional AoOs.
-Carry ranged weapons, if you can kill or damage from a distance why bother going toe-to-toe suffering lots of damage?
Just some thoughts.
~Marimmar
Tom, your description reminds me of my gf who recently learned to play the game. It was quite astonishing for me as gm in 1:1 games with her to see how many tactical faults an inexperienced combatant makes. This is not stupidity, it's just lack of experience.
Some rules of engagement:
-Act as a team, talk with your comrades about your actions as much as the gm allows.
-Don't charge ahead unless you know that your comrades will be right behind you. Otherwise keep formation and ready attacks against approaching enemies. It's always better to have a friend at your back and at your flank than being surrounded by enemies.
-Withdraw from combat if under 15 hp. Any critical hit may instakill you. (This applies only to characters of level 3+) Withdraw from all enemies (e.g. trolls) that can 'rend' if under 30 hp.
-Flanking is nice, being flanked is not-nice. Flanking is a pack tactic that should be applied only when fighting against fewer opponents that your group numbers PCs, otherwise you might get flanked by your flanked opponents buddy.
-Protect those party members that deal more damage than you, that can heal you, and that are too weak to face the opposition, in that order. The last man standing can bind the wounded and dying, he should be from your party.
-Carry polearms, they even out the field when up against large enemies with reach. Against smaller opponents they give you the added advantage of additional AoOs.
-Carry ranged weapons, if you can kill or damage from a distance why bother going toe-to-toe suffering lots of damage?
Just some thoughts.
~Marimmar
Beginners
I've noticed that beginners play with no tactics. They can be 10th level characters with many magical items and still get slaughtered.
I know my players are like that, although most have played D&D for 6 or 7 years. So when I decided to run City of the Spider Queen, I allowed them to make characters who had too many magical items. I winced when I saw their final character sheets. The wizard of the party had an Intelligence score boosted to 26 and the cleric had 24 of Wisdom. The fighter has an AC of 26! Bear in mind that they play 8th level drow characters. In addition I gave them all Drow House Insigna's, Piwafwis and exotic weapon proficiency(handcrossbow). They have SR 19 for crying out loud!
First game, they barge into the Dordrien crypts and kick major ass. I was starting to regret being pre-game Monty Haul DM. Second game came along, and for those who are familiar with the module, after they killed most of the sentries, I sent the Hunter-Killer team. This group of drow are sent to kill the PCs if they appear really strong. I admit they are strong but I'd say they are equivalent in level to the PCs. In fact, they have less magic then the PCs.
I nearly slaughtered them all. A flamestrike finished the cleric who had 70 hp, the wizard who has 45 hp(yes that much) was in the single digits. The rogue was too weak to help. Only the fighter remained. BTW, I calculated the cleric's odds of getting 70 hp, the player had 1 chance out of about 2 million. I am not saying he cheated or anything... Anyways, it just goes to prove that overconfidence can be the PC's bane.
I don't know any sites that give any advice to PCs, since most games depend heavily of the DMs style. Moreover, those sites would a metagamer's heaven. I like the not so subtle hinting during combat. Just mention either in the description that there's a cliff and bullrushing opponents of it could be nice.
I've noticed that beginners play with no tactics. They can be 10th level characters with many magical items and still get slaughtered.
I know my players are like that, although most have played D&D for 6 or 7 years. So when I decided to run City of the Spider Queen, I allowed them to make characters who had too many magical items. I winced when I saw their final character sheets. The wizard of the party had an Intelligence score boosted to 26 and the cleric had 24 of Wisdom. The fighter has an AC of 26! Bear in mind that they play 8th level drow characters. In addition I gave them all Drow House Insigna's, Piwafwis and exotic weapon proficiency(handcrossbow). They have SR 19 for crying out loud!
First game, they barge into the Dordrien crypts and kick major ass. I was starting to regret being pre-game Monty Haul DM. Second game came along, and for those who are familiar with the module, after they killed most of the sentries, I sent the Hunter-Killer team. This group of drow are sent to kill the PCs if they appear really strong. I admit they are strong but I'd say they are equivalent in level to the PCs. In fact, they have less magic then the PCs.
I nearly slaughtered them all. A flamestrike finished the cleric who had 70 hp, the wizard who has 45 hp(yes that much) was in the single digits. The rogue was too weak to help. Only the fighter remained. BTW, I calculated the cleric's odds of getting 70 hp, the player had 1 chance out of about 2 million. I am not saying he cheated or anything... Anyways, it just goes to prove that overconfidence can be the PC's bane.
I don't know any sites that give any advice to PCs, since most games depend heavily of the DMs style. Moreover, those sites would a metagamer's heaven. I like the not so subtle hinting during combat. Just mention either in the description that there's a cliff and bullrushing opponents of it could be nice.
kengar
First Post
MarauderX
Explorer
I would have to say that muhcashin is absolutely right. Sometimes it's how a DM will run the different tactics in a game, but more often than not it's about how experienced the players are. Players sometimes know when they are about to run into a tough situation and will prep for it, stage an ambush, or do something that will give them just a little more edge so they don't die. Beginners I have had think of it as a book which they are reading, and not concerned with how much they do affects other things in the game. The only reason I know so well was with 2 different groups which I ran the exact same adventure (I was unprepared for the second group, so I used what I knew already.)
The first group was experienced, and was more paranoid than the second which led them to a much more successful adventure mostly because they had a plan for everything. The second group was just like 'oh, we have to go from point A to point B now to complete the mission. we do that.' Perhaps it was the age difference too, but the second group just seemed to be punching bags all the time as they would go toe-to-toe with each and every bad guy they could find without trying to gang up on one nasty before taking on next in a single battle. I told them about some of the things they might want to do (I had an NPC ranger with them) and they would usually ignore it and then wonder why the ranger, who had used ranged fire and waited for the evil melee guys to come to him, survived. It was a blow to one of the player's pride (military) when I was trying to explain about the use of tactics in the game to have a better understanding of how to survive. That group wasn't much fun and we disbanded after session 2.
The first group was experienced, and was more paranoid than the second which led them to a much more successful adventure mostly because they had a plan for everything. The second group was just like 'oh, we have to go from point A to point B now to complete the mission. we do that.' Perhaps it was the age difference too, but the second group just seemed to be punching bags all the time as they would go toe-to-toe with each and every bad guy they could find without trying to gang up on one nasty before taking on next in a single battle. I told them about some of the things they might want to do (I had an NPC ranger with them) and they would usually ignore it and then wonder why the ranger, who had used ranged fire and waited for the evil melee guys to come to him, survived. It was a blow to one of the player's pride (military) when I was trying to explain about the use of tactics in the game to have a better understanding of how to survive. That group wasn't much fun and we disbanded after session 2.
My group is similar (I especially enjoy mmu1's quote about "interspersed with random bouts of paranoia") also.
Its not about experience, these guys all have plenty. But their playstyle just isn't tactical. There is no "team leader". If I make them make quick decisions under pressure, they'll all scatter and start looking out for themselves. No sense of tactics.
But, what to do about that? We have plenty of fun playing as-is, and I've kept the death rate relatively low (but not zero, lol) so far, which I think is necessary to keep the "fun" alive.
Would I think about running them through a "meatgrinder"? Oh, I really don't know. First I'd have to explain what a "meatgrinder" is, and how I'd expect them all to die multiple times. It sounds like Tom did that. Then once they had all died a couple of times - which I think would be inevitable - I'd ask if they were still having fun.
If they weren't having fun, I'd suggest we just close out the adventure and play something more forgiving. I'm not trying to forge the perfect tactical player in the fires of my D&D game. I am getting together with some friends to have a good time.
Similar Threads
