Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="James Gasik" data-source="post: 9183381" data-attributes="member: 6877472">Ok, first of all, where does it say Wandering Monsters replace preset encounters?  I'll wait.Second of all, "loaded dice" =/= "adding an extra monster to an encounter".  If Wandering Monsters do exist that are in addition to preset encounters, then by rights, adding a Wandering Monster to an encounter is something a DM could do, if they feel the need.  Thirdly, the main reason I didn't call this sort of thing cheating is because a lot of people feel strongly about it, and I didn't want to end up fighting random posters for the next page or two jumping on me for saying so.In my posts, I said this feels like cheating to me.  Outside of politics and religion, feelings =/= facts.  I don't feel comfortable presenting the various tricks the DM has in their arsenal to keep their game going as cheating, because even though I dislike using them, I do see merits in these tactics, as long as they are used sparingly and without malice.  Oofta said he's totally fine with boosting encounters if things are going too easily for the players, because he claims this is what his players want.  If he's making adjustments to the game to keep his players happy, then I don't see it as cheating.DM's are humans, not gods.  We make mistakes, and all we can do is try to correct those mistakes.  If someone attempts to correct a mistake by fudging a die roll or adding a monster, or saying the bad guy is wearing full plate instead of half-plate, or has a rapier instead of a short sword in order to correct a mistake (ie, making the game too easy in a way that makes it less fun for the players), who is being cheated?Conversely, let's say an encounter beats up the party more than anticipated.  Is it now cheating to say an enemy in the next battle isn't present because they had to go to the bathroom?  Or that a spellcaster actually did use up some of his spells earlier in the day?  Who is being cheated, exactly?In a perfect world, every DM would get encounter design right, all die rolls would be average, and there'd never be a reason to make adjustments.  As the world isn't perfect, we sometimes need to use tools behind the scenes to keep the game running smoothly.  Can this be abused or used improperly?  Of course!  But if it's not being abused or used improperly, I can't call it cheating.D&D is a game, but it's not like Monopoly.  If the banker gives themselves "interest-free loans", that's cheating. The DM, however, is not competing against or the opponent of the players (at least, not supposed to be, irregardless of some of Gary Gygax's more hyperbolic statements about those "dirty, dirty player characters").  You are a game developer, trying to make sure the game keeps running in real time.In computer games, if there's a bug, exploit, or badly balanced encounter, the developer issues a patch, changing the parameters of the game  Is this cheating?During the Lich King boss fight in World of Warcraft, developers who wanted the encounter to be suitably epic were lurking invisibly when the first raid groups knocked down the door to his inner sanctum, making adjustments to the battle in real time, to ensure that their promise of a legendary battle was kept.  Was this cheating?The DM is tasked with creating an enjoyable game for their players.  If doing so requires them to use somewhat shady methods to keep that game enjoyable for the players, I may not like it, but out and out calling it analogous to a player using a loaded die?  Yeah, I don't agree.Consider the lowly goblin archer.  He's given a bow.  His stat block does not say he has arrows.  Is it cheating to give him arrows?  Is it cheating to say he has 10, 20, or 60 arrows?  Is it cheating to say the goblin has enough arrows to last the encounter?  Is it cheating to say "oh, the goblin ran out of arrows, he's dropping his bow now"?</blockquote>

Verification