Tactical arguments and how to avoid them
- Thread starter sniffles
- Start date
schporto
First Post
Please don't do this. It's really damn annoying when you start playing a combat and the party goes 'ok try that new tactic' and they start doing all sorts of odd things, (like 1 guy grapling the bad guy while the rest of the party tries to group bull rush him down the cliff, with the 1st guy using his ring of feather falling to escape and let the bad guy fall). Cool idea! Now, how the heck do you rule that, ok look up bull rush, can you do that as a group?, and grapple, can you realease a grapple when falling? or does that happen too quickly? How much damage from falling? Just give your DM a heads up to the tactic so they can look up rules ahead of time. Now if the DM is 'against' the players, this advice is moot, but in most cases that shouldn't be true. In game surprising the DM can be bad, and lead to the game slowing down even more.Rackhir said:
I've always let the players chat a bit with the assumption that the party when camping discusses what to do in certain situations. At a point though just say enough and do something.
-cpd
Mercule
Adventurer
Chaldfont said:
Amen. There's a balance. I've seen groups that charged the BBEG, but then pussyfooted around with an encounter 3 ELs below them. Both have bad consequences of a similar nature.
Really, I think a chunk of it is that players have a tendancy to not use reconnaisance (mundane or magical) effectively, if at all. Some of that may come from experience with overbearing DMs in the past, but it's still important. If you're having long conversations during combat, you aren't doing your homework.
If the PCs are the entire force (as is typical), then the entire group cannot be the scouting party. Or, if they are equipped for it, at least have the sense to fall back and plan. Discussing things 25' away from the 15th level orcish ranger is probably not a wise idea.
Don't forget the divination spells, either. These are shiny. If a party doesn't have at least a few at their disposal, I'd say their characters are operating at a one or two effective level penalty, especially at higher levels. You also don't have to act on the divinations on the same day. You can wait a day and maximize your spell compliments.
Sometimes just plan research (Gather Info, Knowledge + library, or even just asking for a map) can get you as much or more foreknowledge as magic, too. The mayor's father saw the dragon as a boy and told his son about the crimson scales? Guess you might need protection from fire and can put away that fireball.
If handled well by the party, preparation can be fun on its own. At the very least, the party can do it from knowledge, not ignorance, which should cut down on the arguing.
Mercule
Adventurer
Rackhir said:
Look, it's a way to get banned from my game!
I have no patience for adversarial players (or GMs). If you can't trust your GM with your plans, or are intentionally deceiving him then either you or he need to walk away from the table.
Seriously, it's stupid for anyone to push the game towards a GM vs. players mentality. The GM can, at the least, pull out any monster from the book and squish you. Yay! That really proved something, didn't it?
Your GM is your ally at the table. He's the one setting things up so you can play hero. You aren't trying to beat him and he isn't trying to beat you.
ThirdWizard
First Post
Chaldfont said:
It's a World of Warcraft reference (that made it on Jeopardy). There's a video of a WoW guild about to attack a group of enemies and Leeroy Jenkins, one of the guild members, decides to rush into the room and start fighting without any thought as to plans or tactics, getting his entire group killed in the process.
Mishihari Lord
First Post
Mercule said:
Banned?!
I happen to think discussing tactics offline is an excellent idea. As a DM, I try to be fair and not use my knowledge of what the characters are going to plan their enemies' tactics. This is hard - offline discussions make it much easier. The other point is that I like surprises. I will hardly ever be surprised by my players if they do all of their planning right in front of me.
Lord Pendragon
First Post
I agree. I do ask that players be familiar with the rules they'll be using in their tactics and, if something seems fuzzy rules-wise, they give me a heads-up so I can read up on the issue prior to the game. i.e. if their strategy involves bull rushing in a questionable way, they let me know that bull rushing will come up, and if possible give me the general nature of the ruling I'll need to make.Mishihari Lord said:
Aside from that, as a player it can be fun to surprise the DM, just as it can be fun to surprise your players.
My current game is a Star Wars campaign, and I'll plainly admit that I enjoy my players' reactions when I surprise them with a particularly unique adversary. Why shouldn't they have the same pleasure in surprising me?
It doesn't have to be adversarial.
Mercule
Adventurer
Mishihari Lord said:
I've got no problem with the offline discussion. In fact, I'd encourage it. My main beef is with the implied adversarialness of the "don't tip off the DM" quip.
Otherwise, knock yourself out. The two caveats are 1) don't do it with the intent of "tricking" the GM; and 2) if you're pulling off a rules-bending trick, you might want to verify that the GM interprets the rules the same as you do -- or, at least, give him a chance to make a ruling that isn't by the seat of his pants.
shilsen
Adventurer
Wait a minute - are you implying I'm not hostile and adversarial enough?Rackhir said:You need to relax. And don't worry I have no intentions of trying to play in your game you're far to hostile and adversarial a DM for my tastes.
That does it!
*goes off to crack open a new case of goblin ninjas and throw in some gnomes*
Similar Threads
