Give and take : rpgmemes

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I mean, the Monk being immune to poison doesn't save anyone else in the breath attack.

Part of D&D is building synergy between the classes and operating as a team. At the same time, it's the group's biggest vulnerability.

Mind-splort the meat shield, gum up the support, grapple the damage dealer, or backstab the controller. Suddenly, the team is scrambling as their game plan falls apart.

And green dragons have so many tricks up their sleeves! The last thing I'm worried about is the breath weapon. It's our horny bard falling for her damned come-hither smile that keeps me up at night.

[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Let your players do cool shit. Let them be good at what they built their character for. You can challenge them while still giving them opportunities to be awesome.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I'll say that it's less of an issue, 9 times out of 10, because what they're going to be good at is weathering repeated encounters.

There's so many monsters that do poison damage - especially in the mid levels - that you'd be hard pressed to run a campaign where they just stop showing up. Are you just not going to send anyone through the Underdark because a Monk is in the party? Stop using half the demons, aberrations, and magical beasts in the MM?

But for climatic fights, it can add to the drama when the encounter is on disadvantagous terms. Sometimes the cool shit is overcoming the seeming impossible.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 133 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Look, they're the main characters of the story, they're supposed to look badass sometimes..

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 99 points 2 days ago

Plus it's just far more fun when players get to actually use the character building decisions they made. I think it's much more fun to base enemy actions on what they can reasonably perceive. If someone has innate fire resistance, let the enemy sorcerer cast burning hands on them once to figure that out. If it's a fabled and well-known Robe of Fire Resistance that they're wearing, any half-intelligent spellcaster will know not to use fire spells on them, but the goblins with flaming arrows might not be so savvy.

[–] XM34@feddit.org 18 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (7 children)

But you see, that's not how 5e works. 5e just throws an endless amount of instant problem solving abilities at your players to the point where there are no problems left except for "How do I deal even more damage?". It still kind of works with characters up to level 7ish, but everything after is just cool™ character moments without any problem left to overcome. I mean, there's a reason why almost no one plays double digit levels in DnD.

I just finished my last DnD campaign and am now enjoying my life with systems that allow me as the DM to actually challenge my players without the need to spend several days of preparation to make sure my encounters won't just be solved by a single "Um actshually..." sentence.

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago (5 children)

I don’t want to sit here defending 5e but 80% of the complaints I hear about always seem to boil down to “why isn’t the system creative for me?!”. It’s a lot of people self-limiting and then being mad.

You can instantly create a harder, thoughtful encounter by simply introducing more enemies than just one they can beat on, and/or by doing WHAT THE BOOK SAYS and get the players used to multiple encounters per day so they need to manage their resources. My DM wanted to make fights harder and I simply mentioned that a stronger enemy is cool and all but what would be better is making us have to make choices. I was a stupid accurate fighter and focused on range, and while feats and stuff made me a dangerous close-quarters fighter I was also the only one who could reliably down other ranged enemies. We played up to level 13 in that campaign and there were a lot of fights that were pretty stressful and fun. We even had a tournament arc and that was wild.

Your inability to create complex encounters is not the fault of the system, especially when the system literally tells you how to make it work and you ignore what’s in the book. But, of course, not reading the material is pretty standard procedure for D&D players.

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 11 points 2 days ago

I’ve run campaigns all the way up the level 20. It’s still possible that to challenge the PCs, just increasingly difficult. Eventually it gets to be so much work on the DM that it’s not really worth it anymore.

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] BloodBrandy@ttrpg.network 26 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I managed to work up an immunity to Poison, so our DM had a drow princess get one last action when she got to 0 hp to attack me with her only attack spell as I had severely pissed her off, and it was cast at 5th level

But her only attack spell was Ray of Sickness

[–] Tbird83ii@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How long did you have to spend to become immune to Iocane powder?

[–] I_am_10_squirrels@beehaw.org 2 points 1 day ago

But you know that I know that you know that I know!

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 days ago

Now this is how you make a player feel like a badass.

[–] Rakonat@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago

Last campaign I ran the paladin was so proud of herself for smiting down a couple lesser demons and gushed about it for the rest of the week. So for the next 3 arcs of that campaign I snuck in a cambion who was hounding the party and got his lights clocked in multiple times just knowing the dopamine release it gave that player even when every 'challenging' encounter crafter for that group was done in about 5 terms and took me nearly and hour to craft ahead of time.

To me as the DM it's your job to learn what quirks or functionality of the players particularly enjoy about their characters and find a way to sneak in encounters, puzzles or situations that give that player time to shine and enjoy it. Even and especially if it trivializes the challenge you put into it.

[–] RedFrank24@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I tailor my encounters to what my players like, not what's going to challenge their dice and IRL luck. If my players are finding themselves having to cheese their build and pick the optimum feats and talents just so they can stand a chance, then I've failed as a DM.

If you're cheesing your build because you want to feel powerful, just tell me, and I'll do a campaign where you can feel powerful without needing to cheese your build. You should be able to make the character you want to roleplay as without feeling like you're inadvertently gimping yourself.

It's why I like Genesys and Powered by the Apocalypse, because those are RP heavy systems that don't require you to spend ages messing with stats in order to play the character you want to play.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Some people like to cheese their build to feel clever. But then again, solving riddles has a similar effect.

Tbh, I don't really get why this is an issue. As a DM I balance the game however feels good for everyone. My main strategy is that being more powerful shouldn't make the game easier but should give you more freedom and options.

And the game should never be too hard. To most people, losing a character sucks really hard, so character deaths should always be consentual.

[–] MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I'm that weird exception about character death, partly because I like building new characters, and partly because I like seeing characters get cool ends. Like my low-mid level bard who, while the party was on its last legs in a boss battle, leapt at the dragon's face from an elevated position to attack at its face, mouth, throat, whatever he could get. IIRC, that bard and the dragon both died from that choice.

Edit: The campaign was at that point based in a small-medium town in a cold region. I remember the town had like 4 notable families, ones whose names meant something to folks in the area, and my bard was of one of the upper couple ones. So his death was definitely storied, crazy Uncle Artanis who died saving his friends and the region from a dragon.

My replacement character was a half-orc cleric who had trouble figuring out how to respect both halves of his heritage, and, in a big BSOD moment, rather than execute the defeated members of an orc tribe who refused to change their ways, he cast off his magic gear (armor, weapons, rings, whatever he had) and just walked off into the snowy forest, never to be played again. Which was just the only action I could imagine for him; he had "life" inside my head, and it was what "he" chose (I do not have DID).

That was 15+ years ago, and I only recently decided that he ended up forming a community of outcasts, people who couldn't find a place in the world, and sponsored conscientious adventurers. I like to think that tribe of orcs, if they survived, at least respected his community and didn't try to raid it.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago

That's totally ok, and that's also quite consentual.

I'm just against killing characters just because of bad dice rolls or stuff like that.

[–] djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone 61 points 2 days ago

It's honestly really funny to me how frequently some DMs forget basic writing principles. If something is set-up, either by yourself or your players, you should find a way to pay it off. It's a really lame story if your monk has developed an immunity to poison and it never comes up a single time. Chekov's gun was made to be fired!

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 2 days ago

Did that and when the monk was engulfed in the cloud of poison taking no damage he felt like quite the badass going for a flurry of blows with advantage (I told him with advantage because the dragon wasn't expecting him to be unfazed and he kept himself concealed in the cloud on his approach).

That's also when the rest of the party found out the monk was immune to poison.

10/10 would do that again

[–] becausechemistry@lemy.lol 50 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Your monk can catch arrows now? Don’t stop shooting them. Shoot them more.

[–] runner_g@lemmy.blahaj.zone 40 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Monk - burns reaction catching arrow

Dm - "and now they turn the balista on you"

Monk - O_O

[–] ArsonButCute@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 2 days ago (1 children)

DM- "Catch this, monk boy"

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

Even better, just have that inscribed on the ballista bolt/arrow/the flying tree.

[–] Canadian_Cabinet@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'd like to imagine the monk catching the ballista projectile and getting whisked away by it

[–] runner_g@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 2 days ago

In a comedically Looney Toons style

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] hedgehogging_the_bed@lemmy.world 20 points 2 days ago

Yes! Shoot your Monk is standard GM advice! they took those powers to look badass, just give them one useless archer per combat and they will shine! And throw arrows!

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

I once let our monk deflect a ballista bolt because he said he was going to do the redirecting with his flying kick instead of his hands, so I had him roll acrobatics with disadvantage since his reaction time would have to be through the roof to pull it off.

rolled two nat 20's. Not only did that ballista go sailing right back at the machine that fired it, it utterly destroyed it and the three dudes manning it, because after kicking half a telephone pole back at your enemies, you've earned the right to walk away from an explosion without looking at it.

I also made him roll to see if he hurt himself landing and he did, so he had to deal with a bad ankle the rest of the encounter (-3 dex, I am a jealous god)

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 2 days ago (2 children)

You also don't need to make every enemy an idiot like a videogame. Monk catches an arrow? Archer wastes a turn figuring that out, calls it out to his teammates start of next turn and targets someone else.

A green dragon, depending on your source books, should be more than smart enough to notice its breath attack didn't work on someone and change tactics.

It doesn't work in every situation, like with enemies that shouldn't be smart enough to figure it out, but there's some great room for fun reminding your players that the enemies aren't always braindead.

It also can add an extra layer to combat. Take out the commander that's noticing this stuff to prevent it. Kill the archer before he can call out the monk caught his arrow, so another archer wastes a turn.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Talking is a free action. He'd say it right away.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 6 points 2 days ago

I dunno if the new books do this, but when I started DMing, I was surprised that actually the NPCs are like a video game. They have rules for their behavior that dictates what they will attempt to do, and will be fairly stupid if you just do things by the book.

[–] Derpykat5@ttrpg.network 23 points 2 days ago (2 children)

But by no longer utilizing poison against the party because of the monk, the monk has effectively made the entire party immune to poison by virtue of it no longer being present in encounters! Hah!

But seriously though, cutting out stuff you know the party will hard-counter is just going to make the party not feel as cool. A balance of both is important. Believe me, as the guy in the party who could cast Silence, I know; hard-countering every boss encounter kind of makes the boss feel lame instead of fun.

[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I feel like too many DMs play against the players instead of with them

The goal is not for the DM to win and feel cool

The goal is to let the players win and feel cool

[–] Cabbage_Pout61@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

The goal is to let the players win and feel cool

I wouldn't use "win" here because that's not always the case. I'd say'

"The goal is to acknowledge players decisions and show that their actions matter, regardless of the final result."

[–] SuperNovaStar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 days ago

I prefer the BLeeM method: try to kill them and then be amazed at how they, like cockroaches, survive anyways

[–] Rakonat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

The number of online dms I hear complaining about flight speed races and flight spell boggles my mind. You just got licence to make 3d puzzles and encounters. And also show those players why spiders in magic the gathering had the ability to defend against flying creatures through out the 90s

[–] zakobjoa@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

I'm somewhat glad that Pathfinder doesn't have silence in the same way that dnd has and nerfed the shit out of counterspell as well. The second one makes it so much more satisfying when you get to do it.

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

First, hell yes.

Second, if you like being an adversarial DM, just let them know that's the type of game you like to run. They don't have to play and you will have to find some players that like that style.

[–] RebekahWSD@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

This was always frustrating. One particular dm did that a lot. Oh, x was showing up so someone took y ability to deal with it? X no longer shows up ever again. Cool. Feels bad.

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No party is immune to 100 twig blights in close proximity.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I have a character in a campaign DM'd by my buddy, and they're a pretty weak build, as he was giving powerups to the party I asked for a much weaker change to my character that would let me make an attack while staying hidden.

Literally, the first time I got to try out the strategy, it was immediately invalidated, and I wanted to quit on the spot. The one cool thing my character could do I wasn't allowed to do...

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Reminds me of the time my GM buddy wanted lunch at school and offered me 3 capital ships in our SW RPG game if I bought him a taco salad. So I did and then promptly lost two of them in a battle that was more of a cutscene than anything else.

I was pissed but whatever the one ship ended up being fun.

So later, in another game, I did the same for a submarine. Again, same session, we found the enemy on land after searching around in the sub. So we get out and have this epic battle where our characters take out a goblin army or something. Then we go to get back in the sub. "You never said you turned it off, so it's gone." So what we breached the surface and all tuck and rolled to get off of it, no roll to avoid getting sucked in to the propellers or anything?

I think that's about when I just went back to playing magic most of the time at lunch at school.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

My favorite dragon encounter was a dragon that I still don't know the species of. The damn thing was puce. My DM didn't want us to have any meta knowledge.

It was fun though because of how we got to, and dealt with, said dragon. Dragon was in a mountain lair that, when scryed upon it was revealed, was full of traps and minions.

My wizard figured out that she had just enough 8th and 9th level spell slots to cast Xorn Movement, and Improved Invisibility on the entire party (no invisibility on herself though), and still have 2 casts of Unfailing Missiles (9th level spell she created). We successfully snuck into the dragons lair, and took positions. Our monk was ready to grapple its tail, our rogue was ready to backstab, and was flying because he had a magic item, our cleric was prepping Harm,and our fighter was annoyed that I put her behind myself.

I tapped said sleeping dragon on the nose, and said in Draconic, "Wakey wakey." The dragon opened its mouth to use whatever breath weapon it had, and I said, "That's not a good idea, that will just make me and my friends angry."

The dragon then realized I was speaking draconic and parlayed with us. We explained that we didn't even want to be there, but the gods had tasked us with the eviction of the few dragons that weren't supposed to be on this particular prime material plane in the first place. We also explained that we had brought with us 20 empty bags of holding, and would prefer to relocate them off the plane to a plane of their choice. Thankfully that dragon took the deal. The other three ended up with their souls in rather large black diamonds, that the God of Knowledge had provided us.

[–] dumples@midwest.social 9 points 2 days ago

I have started to balance the game less and less and its getting more and more fun.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Honestly, why do DMs feel the need to try and wipe the party? DMs should be hoping the party succeeds because the party is usually going to find a way to wipe without their assistance.

load more comments (1 replies)

RPGMemes