What Spells give the DM the most headache...

[fourthmensch]

There is nothing like having the party teleport past the ENTIRE ADVENTURE and go straight for the big bad guy.

Especially when you have prepared enough material for several sessions and they have successfully ignored all of it.

Yes, these spells do make a DMs job harder. I think we have all been in that really irritating situation where a PC pulls one of these spells out of his pocket and skips over everything you've planned.

On the other hand, it is the DMs job to know what his players are capable of, and its not the spell's fault when we make a mistake. We simply have to plan better.

There are all sorts of ways to make it impossible to teleport right to the last encounter. If they are unaware of where they need to go, then a lot of the adventure is figuring that out. If they don't know who the BBEG is, then its unlikely they will be able to find him without old fashioned leg work. Etc etc.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think this:

First I let the pc's have their spells so i give up any right to be irritated by them.

And this:

On the other hand, it is the DMs job to know what his players are capable of, and its not the spell's fault when we make a mistake. We simply have to plan better.

Are pretty important to remember, in general. That said, the spells that seem the most 'abusive' are the anti-railroading spells that allow the PC's to direct the plot, it seems...spells to avoid encounters, to move the party, or to bypass the difficult part are the most popular, and the most frustrating for DM's who can't/won't "go with the flow," and dislike that the countermeasures are generally "more spells."

 

[Lord Pendragon]

On the side note of the Ravid, I found this little tidbit interesting:

Flight (Su): A ravid can cease or resume flight as a free action. A rast that loses this ability falls and can perform only a single action (either a move action or an attack action) each round.

Since Alter Self doesn't bestow (Su) abilities, a native outsider that changes into one will basically fall to the ground and flop around, only able to take a single action each round. Basically, he'll have to suck up a Slow effect, for that +15 natural armor. Not sure how good a trade that is...

 

[Felon]

On the other hand, it is the DMs job to know what his players are capable of, and its not the spell's fault when we make a mistake. We simply have to plan better.

No, with the fairly unrestricted way that spells like teleport and wind walk work, the DM simply has to be perfect (which is unpragmatic for many people), or he simply has to whack the spells with a nerf bat whenever they jeopardize his plot (which gets lame after a while), or he simply has to have that special, precious breed of players who don't show up at the gaming table just to find ways to do as little adventuring as possible (God bless every one of them ). Or he and his gaming group simply have to accept a certain amount of magically FUBARed scenarios whenever he leaves a potential exploit unaccounted for.

I really don't understand what drives this "always blame the DM" rationale. While it's true the designers can't be expected to dummy-proof eveyr little aspect of the game, they do need to handle powerful effects with an eye on their potential to drive huge holes in a DM's plot. The scry-and-teleport combo deserves a good deal more attention than they gave it, and I don't know what they keep thinking with regards to wind walk. They revise and revise and on some things they just keep missing the mark, and sometimes it is their fault (for whatever the assignment of "fault" is worth; usually zilch).

Granted though, as Kamakazee put it, life gets a lot easier when you opt to let the players drive the pace of the adventure, instead of needing every encounter to happen in a precise order. Then it's just the broken combat spells like huge AoE snares that you have to fret about.

 

[fourthmensch]

No, with the fairly unrestricted way that spells like teleport and wind walk work, the DM simply has to be perfect (which is unpragmatic for many people), or he simply has to whack the spells with a nerf bat whenever they jeopardize his plot (which gets lame after a while), or he simply has to have that special, precious breed of players who don't show up at the gaming table just to find ways to do as little adventuring as possible (God bless every one of them ).

Mmm, point taken, Felon. That last bit is the key--I probably have a much more positive stance on most spells because I work with a group of great players. They work with me to create the plot, deriving fun out of overcoming challenges and achieving goals, not simply from screwing the DM over. I'm lucky that way.

 

[BigTom]

Yes, these spells do make a DMs job harder. I think we have all been in that really irritating situation where a PC pulls one of these spells out of his pocket and skips over everything you've planned.

On the other hand, it is the DMs job to know what his players are capable of, and its not the spell's fault when we make a mistake. We simply have to plan better.

There are all sorts of ways to make it impossible to teleport right to the last encounter. If they are unaware of where they need to go, then a lot of the adventure is figuring that out. If they don't know who the BBEG is, then its unlikely they will be able to find him without old fashioned leg work. Etc etc.

Well, the problem was that it was their first time using the spell, and there was a fairly significant plot device built into the campaign that should have told them that it was a bad idea not to follow the ground trail that existed.

I can't go into detail since at least one of them reads the board.

 

[Ferox4]

That rule ("Any creature with an Intelligence score of 12 or higher can notice the sensor by making a DC 20 Intelligence check. The sensor can be dispelled as if it were an active spell") is still in 3.5, actually, hidden in the Schools of Magic discussion under "Divination."

cool - i did not know that - thanks

 

[jessemock]

I really don't understand what drives this "always blame the DM" rationale. While it's true the designers can't be expected to dummy-proof eveyr little aspect of the game, they do need to handle powerful effects with an eye on their potential to drive huge holes in a DM's plot.

No; they really don't: DMs know going in whether these spells are available in a campaign (and whether the PCs have them) or not. A DM who continues to adhere to the same adventure formula for high-level PCs as for lower-level ones is simply a poor DM.

These spells change the nature of the game. Why, then, should a DM behave as if the nature of the game hasn't been changed?

 

[Felon]

They work with me to create the plot, deriving fun out of overcoming challenges and achieving goals, not simply from screwing the DM over. I'm lucky that way.

Sounds like you are. Be careful--it's all too easy to take good players for granted sometimes.

No; they really don't: DMs know going in whether these spells are available in a campaign (and whether the PCs have them) or not. A DM who continues to adhere to the same adventure formula for high-level PCs as for lower-level ones is simply a poor DM.

This smacks of the very "DM-elitism" that I was referring to. The designers should not structure the game based on the assumption that every DM out there is up to par, having dilligently taken his night classes in order to qualify for his DM'ing license. To design a system without a regard to fault tolerance because you place all responsibility for smooth operation on the thousands of end-users' shoulders is an impractical, ill-considered design strategy.

Rather, they should structure D&D under the much more realistic assumption that there are quite a few folks who wind up wearing the DM mantle that don't have a full grasp on how the nature of the game changes over time, and are not intimately familiar with how every high-power spell works (along with every feat, magic item, class ability, and so forth) and furthermore that a good many of these less-than-ideal DM's can actually be overwhelmed by all of the responsibilities they have to deal with, along with all of the curveballs the players can throw at them. Bearing that assumption in mind during the design process will keep D&D alive and healthy, as opposed to a closed-system mentality that dismisses overwhelmed DM's as being unworthy of their exalted position. It's the overwhelmed DM's that the designers should spend their time looking out for.

 

[fourthmensch]

This smacks of the very "DM-elitism" that I was referring to. The designers should not structure the game based on the assumption that every DM out there is up to par, having dilligently taken his night classes in order to qualify for his DM'ing license. To design a system without a regard to fault tolerance because you place all responsibility for smooth operation on the thousands of end-users' shoulders is an impractical, ill-considered design strategy.

That's a good point. But neither blaming the DMs nor designers is necessary; I think there is a middle ground between the two.

At high levels there are bound to be spells that leap out and surprise a DM, especially when they are used by creative players (if I had a nickel for every time... ). However, there are certain spells whose ramifications, at least the basic ones, seem obvious. A DM should simply not ever count on his PCs going on a lengthy wilderness trek to get from point A to point B if they are 9th+ level. They will want to teleport to their destination, and planning the sessions otherwise (without good plot reasons, of which there could easily be many) is pretty much setting yourself up for frustration.

Its things like this that people are referring to when they say that DMs have to plan games for high-level parties differently than they would for low-level. I wouldn't go so far as to say it is poor DMing (I'm on that high-level learning curve now, myself, and still making bone-headed mistakes by the week), but I do think that it is better, in the long run, to adopt a more flexible style than to blame the system.