Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 6242681" data-attributes="member: 5143">True, but one would figure that it has some muscles just like humans do that close of their throat unless they are swallowing so you can't see down the whole thing.  It should also curve so being able to see in its mouth wouldn't let you see very deep into its throat, especially when its head is likely 20 feet above the ground which is a really poor angle for that sort of thing. I don't really care I thought it was cool at the time,,,WAY too much time to say something like "since you can only see his throat for brief periods of time while he's talking.  It takes about 3 seconds to cast a spell which is enough time for him to stop talking, use his arcana skill to figure out what spell you are casting and turn at an angle that prevents you from seeing your target, I'm going to give him a reflex save to prevent it from working"?Or to even avoid the rambling explanation and just say "I'm going to give him a reflex save".Heck, "I cast a spell at the dragon" seems a lot like saying "Roll initiative, we're starting a fight.  Let's see if I get my spell off before the dragon acts."  Which, in the cast of a CR 24 dragon it is almost guaranteed that the dragon goes first and kills the caster before he finishes the words for the spell.I'm not looking for a funny story when I play a D&D game.  Well, I am, but the funny stories are told outside of the game.  The game itself is meant to be as "realistic" a simulation of living in a fantasy D&D world as possible.This same thing likely would have happened at our table.  Someone would suggest using a wall of force to choke the dragon.  We all would laugh, saying how stupid that would be if it actually worked.  I'd laugh as the DM that someone would think I'd allow them to break the game like that.  I'd say "Roll for initiative then if you are going to attack the dragon.  There is no surprise round because you can both see each other".  Then the player would say "No, I'm just joking.  I know that dragon would kill us...I don't want to die."Then we'd all tell the story of how it would have been funny if the DM allowed it and they'd have gone up 3 levels and gotten a million gold and been the most powerful people in the world.  But it would stay just that, a funny story about how the DM was smart enough not to allow it.I do it EVERY time.  Allowing it even once is a bane to your game.  The players realize that all they need to do to win is make you laugh.  Then every battle becomes a battle to see who can come up with the silliest plan first.This seems like a poor explanation as to why it can't be done again.  I wouldn't be satisfied with that explanation.  It feels arbitrary like my success in a battle is entirely up to the DM.  If he wants us to be able to kill a CR 24 dragon without a roll, we get to....but use it on anything he wants to stay alive and it suddenly doesn't work.  What's the point of having abilities on my character sheet if I have no idea whether one is going to work from battle to battle?  What's the point in rolling dice if the DM is just going to decide whether we win on a whim?No, impossible victories need to stay impossible for the purpose of sanity and the integrity of the game world.  Ancient dragons like that are extremely feared for a reason.  They are extremely powerful and it takes near godly level magic to defeat them.  Having them die in one spell without a roll affects the perception of them.  By the players, the PCs, the other people in the campaign world, and most importantly ME.  I don't want dragons to be considered jokes in my game.  I don't want to avoid using them as an enemy because they can be defeated too easily.It wasn't that cool.  It was a string a battle encounters that ended in one press of a button.  Followed by me hinting that they should follow the adventure I had planned out since I put a lot of effort into writing up NPCs and a storyline that I thought was kind of awesome.  Followed by them saying "No...you just want us to leave our warehouse so you can kill us.."  Followed by me getting so frustrated that I gave up running the game.I like to keep the in game separate from the out of game.  Sure, the players were being jerks out of the game.  But their characters were just doing what made the most sense.  The world doesn't suddenly become deadlier because I have a beef with the players.  My NPCs don't know anything about what happened out of the game.All it really taught me is that it would have never gotten that bad if I hadn't allowed them to do something obviously game braking simply because they wanted to and it was funny.</blockquote>

Verification