Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Weiley31" data-source="post: 8592266" data-attributes="member: 7017196">Yeah I can see/agree with Colville in regard to the fact that EVERY TABLE is different in way they are played. Especially when it comes to DM styles and what the players want. When I started doing my duo only DND focused, both the player of the Warlock pc and the Ranger pc were trying DND for the first time. Ever. Like they didn't even play any of the prior editions. They have heard of it before, but didn't really have/knew anybody that played it. So for the first couple of sessions after having our Character Creation/Session 0, I would explain to both players every table is different in how DND is played. How I may DM/run the sessions or whatever, will totally differ compared to how another DM/table will operate. And I did that because I didn't want either of the players to get confused if they saw differences or even being hit with a "RAW" type explanation were trying to do something that was supported by the rules. Because some DMs might be so "sporting" to explain such things in a nice way at a different table. (Especially since there are some unfortunate DM horror stories out there that ruin the hobby/game for people.) And I felt that was hella important. And both players seemed to have understood that.Because there were times that as a DM, I allowed/ruled a decision or action that made sense to me. During a carriage chase scene involving Bandits, the Warlock player wanted to use Mage Hand to smack a Bandit rider's horse, to cause it to like go crazy and throw the rider off. Now I know that Mage Hand can't be used to make attack rolls. And something like that would probably have counted as an attack roll. But the Warlock player was just so happy with himself for coming up with, what he thought, was a smart/tactical solution in a sudden, high speed situation. And, to me, it made perfect sense to allow such a thing to happen, despite Mage Hand, RAW, not being able to do that.Same thing with the Rope Trick topic. Some would say that allowing it to do anything else, outside of its function, wouldn't be kosher/RAW written. And while true, I wouldn't have any problems having it completely negate a confrontation with monsters if said monsters weren't smart/led properly/saw it first hand, or able to Detect Magic the spell. Because again, something like that would make a whole heck of a lotta sense to me as a DM. At another table, allowing something like that could cause an argument between players/DMs or perhaps having the DM be viewed in a negative light. Especially if you get those "Rules are Law" type DMs/players.As for encounters, I'm still figuring that out. Especially in a Duo-Style focused campaign. The ranger player fought an Assassin Stat Block enemy, which is CR 8, while being at Level 3. He won against the Assassin, but when the Assassin hit, half of the Ranger's HP was pretty much gone. (I guess I should be lucky the Assassin wasn't able to pull off the Auto-Crit.) And I still remember the Ranger pc player going, "What happens if we die?"....................................still trying to figure out an answer for that as I plan on this Duo Campaign to just be the Ranger/Warlock PC, just so they can like enjoy a full campaign and get comfortable with playing as a whole. So yes these two are getting a Main Character-type experience for their very first Campaign.</blockquote>

Verification