Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="spinozajack" data-source="post: 6596098" data-attributes="member: 6794198">Ok, I'll explain.Changing a current monster's HP on the fly makes every action leading up to that point meaningless.Adding more new monsters to a scene doesn't re-write history, it changes the future.Retconning should happen only in rare circumstances, such as a mistake by the DM or players who misinterpreted the scene and the DM feels the way it went down wouldn't be fair in light of this. It happens.I also take mild exception to the idea that 5th edition is focused around "encounters" with some kind of pre-set, static, difficulty level that can't change in response to events dynamically. It's the job of the DM to not be a dick, or try to force PCs to do certain things, but having new monsters start coming in is a standard tool in the DM's toolbox. My example was a way to give PCs a choice in the matter, stay one more round to finish off the boss in light of his allies showing up, or risk getting overwhelmed. That's totally fair.I should also say there's a wide grey area for Deus Ex Machine type events that a DM can drop in mid-fight or mid-adventure. Some like "rocks fall, you die" are so heavyhanded they would probably result in players quitting. But others like, the sounds of your combat alert others and the dragon's roar has brought his draconian minions rushing in to his rescue. As a DM I don't like static adventures, the fact that you can react to events in real-time is what makes D&D great. DMs do have Deus Ex Machina powers, it's a question of how sutbly they use or abuse that power. I just think altering HP on the fly is a cheap way to DM, it's lazy and there are better ways. It's not just lazy, but actually cheating. Where does it say a DM can't alter the difficulty or challenge or a combat after it's begun? Who ever told you life was fair? Dynamic combats are way more interesting than those that have a guaranteed outcome and fixed pieces. I like the fact that I can add more pawns or conversely have some run away on a whim. It's what makes being a DM great. But you don't do these things to be mean to players, you do it to give them an exciting adventure. If there is no real danger, or players are crushing enemies, it's not only recommended but a good DM's duty to react to changing circumstances. Within reason. Hard and fast rules don't always apply, and DMing isn't a science, it's an art. But there are lessons you learn over the years, and one of them is that players who know the DM will fudge in their favor or roll behind the curtain are being deprived of the benefit of that attachment to their characters that can only come as a result of playing fairly and by the rules for both sides.Changing a monster's HP on the fly is not a "ruling", it's cheating. The current HP of a creature is not something that requires a "ruling", because if it did then player's dice rolls and actions are retconned and erased from history. That is a violation of trust. Adding more monsters in, or having some run away, is not a violation of trust, because there is no, and there shouldn't be, any expectation from the players that combats have static difficulty ratings. Leave that to simpler games. If D&D isn't being played dynamically, it's not approaching its true potential, and I think you are better off playing something else.Static combats are lame.</blockquote>

Verification