When the GM gips you (a rant)

[IcyCool]

I'd have to wonder why, as they were 3rd level warriors (good BaB), and the barrels weren't rolling faster than any character (few classes get AC bonuses for movement).

Because rolling barrels are harder to hit than stationary ones. I would have absolutely at least applied a -2 circumstance modifier to hit. Thus, IMO, the barrels would have required an 8 or better to be hit. With your good BAB, that means you'd need a 5 or better on the die roll (provided your NPCs didn't have any other attack bonuses). Did you roll a 7 on the die roll, or was that the total of the roll?

Using IK military pistols (80 ft range inc). At best the roll would have suffered a -2 to hit. The barrels didn't have cover.

Were they that far away? If so, there's your answer right there. Were they proficient in the use of the weapons?

Was there something else the GM did that got on your nerves enough to rant? This just seems an odd thing to get really upset over.

At any rate, if you ranting means you can 'let it go', then by all means rant away!

 

[Storyteller01]

Did you roll a 7 on the die roll, or was that the total of the roll?

7 on the die roll.

Were they that far away? If so, there's your answer right there. Were they proficient in the use of the weapons?

No to the first, yes to the second.

Was there something else the GM did that got on your nerves enough to rant? This just seems an odd thing to get really upset over.

Just that there wasn't much need for the fireball. The tharn monk was cleaning up rather well (spiked chain, improved trip, and +7 to hit before counting strength in the 20's against low to mid level undead).

At any rate, if you ranting means you can 'let it go', then by all means rant away!

I do appreciate a sympathetic ear.

 

[Glyfair]

To me, it sounds like the DM just didn't want the trick to work and made it difficult. Strange to me since hitting the barrels shouldn't be difficult, but they really don't explode into fireballs (fires might start depending on the alcohol and amount of fumes, but no real "explosions").

 

[MarkB]

Because rolling barrels are harder to hit than stationary ones. I would have absolutely at least applied a -2 circumstance modifier to hit.

You mean a +2 modifier to AC. A person doesn't get worse at shooting because the target is moving, but the target does get harder to hit.

I'd say there's every chance that the difficulty the DM assigned to the attack roll was fair, or at least close enough considering that he was winging it. However, I do sympathise with Storyteller - being a 3rd level character with a 9th level NPC commander does have the potential to make one feel more like a spectator than a player. The character may as well have stayed in the bar and drunk his 23gp of volatiles himself, if the NPC is going to just trot out and hit the combat with a 9d6 fireball.

 

[BlueBlackRed]

If he does things like that all the time tell the noob DM that it's time to step aside and you're going to show him how "the big boys and girls" run a game.

The PCs are the stars of the game, only sharing the spotlight with each other and their adversaries.

 

[Chimera]

It gets to be the head NPC's turn. His action: toss a 9D6 FIREBALL igniting the area, undead, barrels, and two characters who were in melee at the time (one of which died, but admittedly my plan might have killed him too).

This is where I stop the game and say;

"Excuse me, you have an NPC throwing a 9 die fireball at 3rd level PCs??? Just what the (insert choice of expletives) are you thinking? If this is the way you run a game, then I serious have to reconsider playing."

I guess another question is whether the "head NPC" is an enemy or not. I'd have a serious hard time if it was the enemy, being thrice the level of the PCs. If it was a neutral party or an ally, then I'd have to beat the GM around the head and shoulders for shear game-wrecking stupidity in killing PCs in this manner.

 

[Cedric]

My opinion doesn't count, because I wasn't there. However...to be honest, I'm not seeing the problem.

Missing on a 7 is reasonable. There are different ways to figure the exact "to hit" in this situation, depending what the GM specifically had in mind. So that's fine. If you'd said they missed with a 12 on the die roll, I'd object.

The GM obviously agreed your plan would work, and when the warriors failed to make the shot, he had an NPC assist.

Yes, the NPC was more powerful, but was there a reason why the NPC shouldn't be of higher power level? Especially at low levels you have to used to the fact you aren't the biggest kid on the block.

And the plan had been to shoot the barrels with guns? I wouldn't have let that ignite them. Knocking out the bunghole, stuffing it with a shirt and setting it on fire before rolling the barrels I would go with..but not just shooting it with a gun.

Eh *shrugs* I'm not trying to irritate you. I respect the fact this upset you. I just view it differently I guess.

Cedric

 

[shilsen]

My opinion doesn't count, because I wasn't there. However...to be honest, I'm not seeing the problem.

...

Eh *shrugs* I'm not trying to irritate you. I respect the fact this upset you. I just view it differently I guess.

I've got to agree with Cedric. As both DM and player, I seriously dislike having NPCs around who steal the PCs' thunder, but at the same time, I understand that it may make sense once in a while. As Cedric points out, that's especially likely when the PCs are low level. And the issue of missing the barrels seems a fairly minor issue.

Now if NPCs outshining the PCs happens on a regular basis, you have a problem. But if this happened in just one session, I'd just politely tell the DM that you hope it won't happen too often, since it can be boring/irritating for the PCs/players.

 

[Brimshack]

Something like this could happen once within reason, even once in awhile. I would take 1 of 2 actions:

1) Wait and see if this is the pattern without raising the issue at all. If you see NPCs solving problems consistently while your characters struggle to get a sword in edgewise, then simply quit.

2) Discuss it with the DM yourself, one on one and politely. There is no need to be confrontational. You could ask him what is philosophy is on the subject. Few DMs would say outright that they live to steal the thunder of the party, but if he states explicitely that he doesn't believe in that sort of thing, then it will weigh in his mind the next time the prospect comes up. Alternatively, you could simply explain that you do not really enjoy campaigns where the NPCs solve all the problems. You don't even need to call attention to the previous conflict or put him on the spot, just state a clear preference and let him think about it. As with option # 1, if the pattern continues, then you can leave then.

Faced this problem myself recently and used option # 1 myself while watching an epic demon fight a good dragonus ex machina while the 10th level party struggled to add a nickel or a dime to the overall damage. It was the umpteenth time in that campaign that we we put way over our heads and then rescued, and I was just tired of being a spectator. Once or twice is no real problem, often thankful for the help. Standard Operational Procedure = I'm out. Today, I would probably use option # 2, just discuss it once and ask the DM to rethink his approach before walking out. Don't know if that would have worked, but it might have. Not working would have worked out about the same in any event.

As a side note, I think the notion of overwhelming the characters in a single game then letting an NPC handle it might serve a constructive role early in the campaign. It's sort of like showing them how far they have to go, giving them a base line against which to measure their progress. So, you can later say, "remember when we couldn't even handle a pack of lousy ogres, hehehe!" [/Oldfartvoice] It really is a common narrative theme, getting your butt saved while still learning the ropes. But I would also make a point to throw something characters could handle their way in the very same session, something to give them a sense of accomplishment. If the same thing is happening several levels down the road, then you have a real problem.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Then, the DM's helper (circumstance modifiers) come in because they are rolling.

Check me if I'm wrong but D&D has never, ever factored in movement speed to to-hit chances and only EXTREMELY marginally to AC (and that in only in older edtions). In other words nobody in D&D EVER cares how FAST something is moving when trying to hit it with anything. What matters is only if the SHOOTER is moving.

Just FYC.