D&D 5E Would you change a monster's hit points mid-fight?

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Games tend to bore me. I can only play video games or any game for so long before I become bored. RPG games tend to be a bunch of numbers and fiddly bits that attempt to create some semblance of balance that some find fun. The only appeal RPGs ever had was developing a character and being part of a story with everything that entails.

I've been playing for years. I have found few DMs that do story games well. It's not surprising that isn't the standard. Most folks run things "by the numbers" as I call it. Very little engaging role-play. Not much added politics or non-combat elements that are interesting, especially a lack of romance or friendship development that ties a character to a world. I add all those elements. It's fun to see how a person will react when having to play a character that an entire town including children look to for protection. You get some odd reactions when you force that element to be played out and some character investment when they are successful.

The key to a good story game is getting the individual to feel like he is in a given situation.

Nobody in my group is really into that. People role play as in "well my PC wouldn't do that since he's LG, etc" but its not like we are trying to get a theater troupe together, and we will have sessions where there isn't much combat, but we aren't playing to examine ethical situations or things like that, exploration of ancient tombs with loot and glory is what we are into. Everyone got into RPG in the late 70's early 80's and we enjoy the game for its gaminess. If I tried to get a narrative type game going I'd probably be asked if we need to wear puffy shirts and talk in funny voices. Different strokes.

As for the DM angle, if I was adjusting things behind the screen to keep the players on a path I want them to be on rather than adapting to what they are doing, even if its killing the big bad in the first encounter when he is "supposed to be" a reoccurring foe, I feel like I've cheated the players of their rightful victory and ruined the game to be honest. They aren't there to stick to my story ideas, my scenario idea or module is just a springboard for what they want to do. Sometimes they come up with a plan that just totally throws off what I thought was going to happen and I just have to handle it on the fly. Granted I have limits, if they want to play a CE campaign I'd decline, and if they wanted to play a type of campaign that differed enough from what I like I'd just decline to run the game. But I'm pretty much the main DM and they seem to like playing in my games.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I sort of do this, but I also throw in a bunch of stuff that's going to happen in the background unless the PCs do something about it (i.e. I have a few current campaign exceptions to what you posted here). If the PCs want to ignore the Cult of the Dragon, ok. That doesn't mean that the Cult of the Dragon then fails to raise Tiamat, it just means that the PCs have to face the consequences of Tiamat entering the prime material plane at some point in the future. Typically, I have about 5 or so major things going on in the background, some from the campaign, some introduced from the PC backgrounds. So the game tends to lean in the direction of my storylines, but easily veers off into other directions quite a bit.

I'm running, and really not enjoying that much, HotDQ and they are getting ready to jump off the rails totally thinking they have done what they need to do and time to turn it over to someone else and go back and explore some stuff they came across while traveling north. Which I'm fine with, since I can get off this mediocre adventure, and down the line they can deal with the fallout.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

You know, that reminds me of something: non-combat fudging. In particular, direct DM-to-player communication. How many of us have occasionally called for Int checks purely for the sake of communicating clues to the player. "Dude! You've looking all over for the treasure. I've told you there's nothing interesting in the palace except the throne room with an altar. Just look at the altar already!" I'm sure there are better ways to do it, but my point is that combat is so well-defined that it probably needs less "help" to work out right than either of the other pillars.

I admit to having done that kind of fudging at least once. I'm not proud of it, and I aspire to hopefully never do it again.

I think the game should challenge the players as much as the character sheet so I try not to give them cheap answers to things they should be able to think through. But I've found myself in that situation myself, sometimes it warranted but sometimes I feel cheap and dirty after.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

First, I don't modify encounters once they are made.

My players have a lot of trust and respect for me as a DM. They know I'm going to make the adventure fun and give them a hell of a ride from beginning to end. They like me to design a story. Why? Same reason a person likes to read a story: to find out what happens next. In my experience, players like to be surprised. This railroading talk is utter garbage. What do you think a movie is? A railroad experience. A book? A railroad experience. A video game? A railroad experience.

I don't play D&D for the same reasons I read a book or watch a movie. I expect plot immunity in books and films, but I despise it in a RPG like D&D.

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm running, and really not enjoying that much, HotDQ and they are getting ready to jump off the rails totally thinking they have done what they need to do and time to turn it over to someone else and go back and explore some stuff they came across while traveling north. Which I'm fine with, since I can get off this mediocre adventure, and down the line they can deal with the fallout.

I had them go off into UnderMountain to find Dragonscale Armor and an Orb of Dragonkind. They fought a red dragon down there (and creamed it) and got the Dragonscale armor. The overall plan is to pick up at the end of the module where they will eventually find out that the Cult of the Dragon is the one who tricked them into going into UnderMountain in the first place (i.e. if adventurers succeed, then CotD go take Dragon items from them, if they fail, then they will not be a thorn in CotD's side, win win for the CotD). I like a few tiny bits of HotDQ, but most of it I think is basically lame.

 

[Umbran]

Merriam Webster: Whim - a sudden wish, desire, decision, etc. (other sources have similar definitions, e.g. an impulsive idea).

Your attempt to cherry-pick a definition to fit what you want will not avail you, sir. If for no other reason that *you* don't get to tell me what *he* actually meant.

But, even more...

The key aspect of this is "sudden".

No. I reject that as the key element of "arbitrary", and the rest of your post relies on this. When you look at other definitions, you will find that the "not reasoned out" or "without real basis" aspects are more key.

Consider that Merriam-Webster.com says (among several other definitions):

": not planned or chosen for a particular reason

: not based on reason or evidence

: done without concern for what is fair or right"

Consider: Someone points a gun at you. You duck. You actually want to claim that was an "arbitrary" decision? It seems both chosen for a particular reason, and is based on evidence, a clear choice based on conditions, not at all arbitrary. Man sees a child about to get run over by a car, and leaps in to grab the kid out. Arbitrary? No.

So, really, just no. I don't mind you choosing not to like fudging at your table, but your attempt to dismiss it as personal whim ain't cutting it, and is kind of insulting. I suggest you stop.

 

[KingsRule77]

I've adjusted HPs when it's clear that I screwed up the encounter and the party is going to die solely because of my miscalculation.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

In my experience, players like to be surprised. This railroading talk is utter garbage. What do you think a movie is? A railroad experience. A book? A railroad experience. A video game? A railroad experience. Yet millions and billions of people love to read books, watch movies, and play video games because they want to be surprised and entertained by someone that is taking them on some kind of adventure, so that is what I do.

This seems like a false analogy to me. Railroading is the illusion of choice. Books and movies don't offer that illusion.

I'll give you video games though: they tend to be railroadey, and yet there exist people who enjoy them (and people who hate them). The same seems to be true of RPGs.

I do however submit that people who dislike railroads will gravitate to RPGs over video games, since live RPGs are the only way to get a true off-the-rails experience. Even then it's not guaranteed, it depends on your DM's style.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I do think, however, that there is a certain amount of confirmation bias for these types of things. The DM remembers when his on the fly changes made the game great and forgets when it flushed it down the toilet

IMX, a DM recalls and obsesses over dismal failures more than over spectacular successes. Maybe it's just me.

I opine that by following the rules, it can unexpectedly lead to some great gaming moments as well.

Depends on the rules. If the rules are solid, you can get consistent results, which can, indeed, lead to some great moments - narrow victory or defeat in an even-odds fight, for instance. If the rules aren't so well done, they can lead to some unexpected moments, indeed, which you may or may not find all that great. A DM can work with the former to make entertaining, close/fair/tough challenges and referee their resolution - he can work with the latter by tweaking things when the consistent system leads to something unexpectedly awful instead of awesome.

Yup. I'm a firm believer in moderation as well. Something in the middle tends to work best in most circumstances

Oh, I'm not saying 'middle path between the two' - though, I'm sure, with good judgement, that's perfectly effective, as well, I just don't think it's in need of a spirited defense ATM. I'm saying go all-in on one style or the other, depending on the system you're running and the group you're running for.
Call me a radical.

If I tried to get a narrative type game going I'd probably be asked if we need to wear puffy shirts and talk in funny voices.

Might help.

 

[KarinsDad]

Call me a radical.

You're a radical.