Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Votan" data-source="post: 5065815" data-attributes="member: 18680">I am actually curious about this "not if the DM is competent bit", myself.  It has been about 20 years since we played G1-G2-G3 and then all died off in the D series (I read about the Demonweb pits after the fact as our hardy band of giant killers was annihilated by the underdark).  But, when reading the modules, I remember seeing treaure we missed but not tons of it (especially in the Hill Giant portion where we stuck around so long the DM improvised a raid to get us moving).  It's possible we had an incompetent DM.  I don't think so -- he made the game fun and had no trouble with a fearsome TPK later on (some sort of energy draining lances weakened us enough to get finished off).  We had some house rules (our wizards cast like sorcerers rather than memorize spells).  Replacements happened -- in particular I hated the Elf F7/W 11 I had who could not advance.  But we sure got at least half of the treasure.  We were doing worse in the underdark because the random encounters were tougher and we could not fall back and rest so easily.  I don't want to dismiss your point of view nor are duelling ancedotes very helpful but I think you might have a high threshold for DM competence if getting half the treasure is evidence (and I know we got more than half as the gotcha moments only really showed up in the D-series).</blockquote>