Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Jeremy Crawford is the architect of a lot of things in 5e I disagree with, but it's very nice to see what the devs actually think about the game.
D&D General The Problem with Talking About D&D
- Thread starter Mezuka
- Start date
Thank I will correct my post.
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
The game's designer advocating deception does not make it not deceptive. Besides, Mearls (edit: who is not the person shown in the video, just to be clear) had already made clear that he thinks "play the DM, not the game" is perfectly acceptable--remember, he's the one who advocated, "Just guesstimate whether they succeed or fail based on whether the die was 1-8, 9-15, or 16+. Your players will never know."
That condescending and controlling attitude is exactly why I oppose this sort of thing.
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
Just because they advocate it doesn't make it right for many people, though.
Now, what he says about the HP being listed is average is definitely a valid point. I can honestly tell you as DM if I have a solo bad guy, they nearly always have maximum or near maximum HP, but I make that choice BEFORE the encounter begins because I know the sort of damage a party can dish out against a solo creature.
I have also used reduced-HP / nerfed creatures because I know the standard would likely be a TPK. But again, that decision is made before the encounter starts.
Before an encounter begins I might also make an "Orc Commander" with a +1 or 2 to AC, attack rolls, etc. as a leader of a band of orcs, who will likely have better hp. But that is part of the design of the encounter, not on the fly to make it harder.
Indeed asking for more balance or sharpness in encounter building look futile when the Dev approve changing monster hit point during encounter.
Levistus's_Leviathan
5e Freelancer
You are literally proving Colville's point here. All of our tables are different. We run the game differently, we have different party and player composition, and we all have different styles and types of fun. Just because you personally have never had to fudge a roll, alter an encounter, or change a monster's stats during combat in order to avoid a TPK or make sure your players have more fun at the game does not mean that it couldn't be necessary or a valid solution at another DMs table.
We all play the game differently. We all have different players, playstyles, and adventuring parties. This fact proves that what might be acceptable at one table might not be acceptable at another. You're actively spouting "badwrongfun" because you cannot comprehend how another DM might have to use a tool that you never have used.
You're proving Colville right. I have been gaming for longer than you (certainly not as long as most people on this site, but longer than 4 years), and I have had to do similar things to Colville in order to prevent TPKs and keep the game fun for my players. Just because you don't have the same experience doesn't mean that mine is invalid or "cheating."
(Furthermore, being "deceptive" is often a necessary part of being a DM. DMs are the storytellers of the table, and like any good storyteller, a DM sometimes has to mislead or even outright lie to their players at different occasions in order to craft/foster a better story. There is no substantial difference between adjusting an encounter mid-combat than there is to having the BBEG pretend to be a good guy in order to deceive the party and players.)
D&D 5E is not just the most popular version of D&D ever, it's the most popular TTRPG ever released by a long shot. Obviously it works well enough for most people, warts and all.
Nothing is ever perfect, but if 5E were as broken as you insist, or if most DMs had to put as much work into it as you claim to put in, I find it hard to believe as many people would play it. I'm happy you found work-arounds, it works fine for me with only a handful of minor tweaks. From discussions with real people that I actually talk to in person that seems pretty common.
In any case, it just goes to show as Matt stated that people run different games and customize them as much or as little as they feel is necessary.
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
Again, hard disagree.
You do not ever need to "outright lie" to your players. Ever. Period. This isn't a rules thing, it's a human-interaction thing.
Not giving your players a perfect crystal-clear down-to-atoms breakdown of everything is not the same as actively deceiving them and preventing them from discovering that they were deceived. The fact that DMs who fudge go so far out of their way to avoid players discovering it is exactly why it's such a problem. They admit that their players would get upset if they found out about the fudging--whether explicitly through their words, or implicitly through their efforts to maintain the illusion of choices actually mattering and not constantly having the caveat "assuming the DM doesn't secretly interfere and do everything in her power to avoid you finding out that she did."
Levistus's_Leviathan
5e Freelancer
I'm pretty sure that Colville is open about that with his players. I certainly am with my players. I make it clear to them that because I homebrew monsters frequently, I might have to alter their stats mid-combat in order to prevent a TPK.
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
It is not made clear to his players. He has said, in another video, that he will straight-up lie to his players about whether he honestly rolled a particular result. To the point of faking die rolls so there's a physical object to point to. He will straight-up tell them that he's playing exactly by the numbers when he's not, and he thinks this is perfectly acceptable.
Similar Threads
- Locked
