Things I hate

[Durifern]

The way we play:

#1) Use a grid when it´s needed. Makes it easier and you tend to think more about tactics. But it limits you in the way that the master can´t make judgement calls as he sees fit.

#2) We try to use the rules as written, sometimes we have to look things up, particularly when spells are used but I try to keep it to a minimum (which means I know at least the spells I´m going to use

#3) XP awards are halfed to slow level progression, characters are sixth level and most of them still don´t have a magical primary weapon, so I´d say I´m not too generous in that regard either.

Things I hate:

#1) DMs who think they don´t have to prepare.
A year ago I played in a new group with a DM who bragged that he doesn´t have to prepare for adventures. I´m sure there are DMs who are able to do that but he wasn´t one of those.

#2) Giving total freedom to the players and not being able to handle it.

#3) DM´s who decide everything themselves rather than letting the dice decide.
Example: the aforementioned DM did role dice in combat but I always got the impression that it didn´t matter what numbers came up, battles ended when he thought it was enough. That really freaked me out cause I never felt that it was due to my or my fellow players' actions that we won.
It´s not that the DM should be forced to do what the dice dictate but the players should always have the illusion that it is so.

#4) Haven´t encounteres it yet but pet NPCs just seem so wrong.
Had a minor "Golden Boy" experience and yes, it was a fun-killer.

 

[jdavis]

No big deal.

I started playing AD&D 20 years ago, and I certainly had no minis. And neither did anybody else I payed with back then. It is easy to see how one would establish playing a certain way and stay with it.

But 1E and 2E were very different than 3E in that 3E really does assume the use of minis as default. Still not saying dumping them is bad, just pointign out that there is an assumption there.

Anyway, here is Monte's conclusion from the link you posted:


Maybe Monte has a better command of language than me. But I have not disputed a single point here. I have said that, if you don't use minis, making sure you fully understand everyone's intent can slow down the game and that you have to abandon some of the tactics that the rules supply.

Oh I agree that 3ed is written that way and 3.5 will be even more that way, they got a new line of mini's comming out you know. I don't think we are really disagreeing on the big picture here.

Our games are much faster without the grid but we have played that way for a long time, I still game with some of the same people I started gaming with and the new person in our group has been gaming with us for 12 years or so, we all know each other and are comfortable with each other, it makes a big difference in game play. We really don't loose anything or have any confusion without the grid at all, we don't really leave out rules or skip that much stuff out of the book. We just don't need a grid (we do use maps sometimes, but they are rough maps on scratch paper). It's just what we are comfortable with, I've tried gaming on a grid and it was a mess (although I really like some other games played on a grid, like Battletech). We are fine without the grid or the mini's, if it's not broke don't fix it.

#4) Haven´t encounteres it yet but pet NPCs just seem so wrong.

I gamed with a guy years ago that liked to run a NPC that was the center of the adventure when he DM'd, it got old real quick, it was like he was reading us a book. His NPC did everything and made every decision we just tagged along, after two or three games of the whole group just being the background for his ego-quest we finally just got sick of it. He was actually a good gamer but some people just shouldn't be allowed to run a game.

Lack of common sense. (Just ask yourself, whether you are Player or DM, 'If I were this character would what we are doing make sense to me?' If the answer is 'no', then Don't do it!!!

Had a guy whose character sold his soul for a "magic" rope belt, it was so stupid you couldn't even laugh at it. He only gamed with us three or four times but he never failed to suprise us with some off the wall move or goofy plan.

 

[Azlan]

#1 Use a grid...I can't say how much I HATE it when DM's don't do this.

Player: How many guys did I get with that fireball?

DM: unnnn maybe 5

Player: But you said that they were grouped together...at least 10

DM: Well...that's not what i meant...

Yes, well, I hate it how players can use that grid to plot the ideal impact point and burst radius of their fireballs, thereby catching as many opponents and as few allies as possible.

For one thing, there really is no visable, overlaying grid on the battlefield to assist a caster in doing this; for another thing, the caster does not have a complete, unobstructed bird's-eye view of the battlefield; and for another thing, a combat round lasts only six seconds, though players tend to take 15-30 seconds to figure out where to best place the impact point of their fireballs. If ever you've played in a multi-player Neverwinter Nights D&D campaign, where combat is real-time and there is no grid overlay, you know that it's really hard not to catch your allies along with your opponents in your fireballs, and catching the maximum amount of opponents in a single fireball is difficult as well.



Actually, I don't hate how players can use the grid to their advantage. ("Hate" is too strong a word for how I feel about this.) After all, it's just a game. But it just goes to show, neither solution is perfect: neither miniatures and a grid, nor totally abstract, "it's-all-in-your-head".

 

[Agback]

I personally can live without a grid except for in crowded, complicated combats. All it takes is the players being willing to act on their intent and ask the right questions, like "how far apart are the three orcs? Less than 20 feat? Good, I fireball 'em!"

Yeah, well. I find that those questions are themselves time-wasting interruptions, and a grid can answer an infinite sequence of them in no time and while the GM is concentrating on something else. Bring on the grid!

Regards,


Agback

 

[maddman75]

WotC likes minatures because it's something else they can sell

History disagrees with you.

 

[jdavis]

History disagrees with you.

Ok I should of said "try to sell" or maybe "make a mess of trying to sell".

 

[jdavis]

Yeah, well. I find that those questions are themselves time-wasting interruptions, and a grid can answer an infinite sequence of them in no time and while the GM is concentrating on something else. Bring on the grid!

Regards,


Agback

I found the grid just brought on many more problems than a few discriptions that take seconds, you would think the fate of the universe was involved in every move, we needed a chess timer to get people to stop staring or counting spaces to every single place they could move to, it was a nightmare. Of course it may of gotten better if we used it long term but nobody in the group liked it at all, guess we're just old fashoned. A good discription takes a few seconds and a good DM should be describing things in detail whether you are using a grid or not. We had the same discusions and discriptions and questions with the grid out as before only now people are trying to figure out what the best of their twenty possible moves they should make and how to angle their backs so they don't get flanked and they are counting the squares from every enemy to every player every move it just got long winded for everybody.

 

[Gundark]

more things I hate

there have been some good points here. When I started this thred there was a few things I left out that others have mentioned.
Storyline nazis can really wreak the fun. I remember one DM who have NPC's physically grab the PC to stop them from getting off track.
Player:Well I'm going to leave this city and investigate the forest
NPC: ( who was uber character ) No you must not there is still things here that you must learn (physically holds the character).
Player : *&^%$#

Also the DM would have the NPCs peons jump in the way of spells ( which gets back to the rules rant of my original post)

Focusing on one player sucks...I've seen this too. Its good if everybody gets a turn. But when it is constantly one player then it licks.
The Grid or not ot Grid posts have been interesting. I feel that a grid speeds things up in the long run. Yes the DM can describe all the action. But that's a lot of work on the DM's part. Plus not every players is always paying attention to what's going on. The grid does answer a lot of questions.

Lastly I would like to add a DM that I used to play with who had the Players advance too fast. Like we would get to 20 level in about 4 months. He would just get borered with a campaign and would want to bring on something else. I don't hink this one tis common, but there you go.

 

[barsoomcore]

Actually, if you go back and re-read the quote from you that I posted, you will see that that is NOT "all" you were saying.

You stated that playing without a grid requires better DM descriptive powers. Obviously inferring that using a grid implies the opposite. Which is, as I said, BS.

Sorry, I got carried away with trying to be polite and actually changed the intent of what I was saying.

Probably a good thing in the long run.

But you're quite right. Or rather, you're wrong. What I said was not that working without a grid REQUIRES superior descriptive powers, but that working without a grid TEACHES superior descriptive powers. I hold to that. If the only way I have of communicating to you how much room there is is by telling you then my descriptive powers (or lack thereof) will have a direct impact on the quality of play. We learn faster when we see a direct impact. Use of a grid allows a DM of inferior descriptive powers to get along okay, where if no grid was being used the DM would be forced to learn more quickly.

I'm sure your players consider you spectacular in every way. But then you, like me, learned to DM without grids or minis. So your brilliance only serves to strengthen my point.

 

[BryonD]

If you are now trying to to say that you were not implying that your form of gaming is superior, then I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

However, you are still wrong.

You and I could describe the same situation in each of our games.

My description is held to an objective standard and therefore must be more accurate.

Your description will never be anything more than 100% imagination. Without a standard, you are not forced to learn anything.

Now I will not say that makes my way better or that my way teaches you more. But it certainly doesn't teach you one tiny bit less.

Oh, and I really learned to describe things well when I started playing GURPS with some people back in high school. They and their grids brought a cool level of depth, decription and cool tactics to the game that I had never experienced prior to that.