"Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:26 am

Someone just sent me a link I really like. It's so goofily D&D...

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88885

But this brings up an issue. Why do some DMs punish players for throwing the DM a curveball?

Virgileso and Cynic have that DM who got pissed over the party doing stuff like using magic arrows as improvised daggers.

I know someone I demonstrated Damocles' Ingot to, and he went on about how the DMG says spells cannot be used for something other than their intended effects so creating a big lump of gold for the purpose of dropping it through a building's roof would be impossible and how he'd ban a player who tried it.

Oh, I suppose people can contribute their own unusual rules bits.

I've already mentioned the Insightful Strikers and Damocles' Ingot.

Now I'll say this: The Boomstick Murderizing.

Koumei's Golem Knight has the bigass shotgun, one of the loads does 3d6 damage with a x4 critical.

The Golem Knight can also make his weapons effectively magic weapons, including with properties instead of points of bonus.

So do that, and give up a point for that Collision property that does +5 damage.

Assuming you make it level 16, both Sniper and Zen Archery mean that shotgun will do pretty damn good damage for a ranged attack.

12d6 + 36 damage reliably (the options to make it an auto-critical threat also add a +20 bonus to hit) isn't too bad.

TOZ · Post by **TOZ** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:01 am

Closed minds incapable of anything outside of their preset railroad?

Ganbare Gincun · Post by **Ganbare Gincun** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:15 am

Maxus wrote:But this brings up an issue. Why do some DMs punish players for throwing the DM a curveball?

Because they are power-tripping attention whores with fragile egos that go into a foaming berserker rage whenever someone gets the better of them.

Maxus wrote:Virgileso and Cynic have that DM who got pissed over the party doing stuff like using magic arrows as improvised daggers.

I know someone I demonstrated Damocles' Ingot to, and he went on about how the DMG says spells cannot be used for something other than their intended effects so creating a big lump of gold for the purpose of dropping it through a building's roof would be impossible and how he'd ban a player who tried it.

That's because he wants to play an E6 game instead of D&D 3.5. And I don't blame him for that - that's the game that most of the people that step up to D&D think they are actually signing up for. But when you show someone that thinks they are the smartest person in the room how fucked up 3.5 really is, they don't see it as a valuable learning experience - they see it as a personal attack on their intellect.

And regrettably, you see a lot of these people on the Paizo forums. *shrug*

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:17 am

There WAS actually an article somewhere about how you shouldn't/can't use spells to cause effects above the intended power level of a spell. Instead of giving actual real examples, they gave the hypothetical situation:

"What if there was a cantrip that let you make a dot of colour, like a paint-splash, on any object. Harmless enough, magical graffiti or marking your way through a maze. But then a player decides to cast it on someone's face, effectively blinding them. Blindness/Deafness is a level 2 spell, so it should not be able to do this."

Anyway, as a DM I like players to do surprising things. It keeps me on my toes and keeps the game interesting for me. But there probably does come a point somewhere where you think something is just stupid. Like ending time with IHS.

Sunwitch · Post by **Sunwitch** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:33 am

It might be necessary at times to draw a line as to where "inventive" ends and "bullshit" begins, however. A player and DM that I deal with frequently tends to MacGuyver complete BS tools involving ten-foot poles and gimmicky magic items. He also tends to come up with crap rules on the spot when it would prove advantageous (can I use orb of cold on the kolyarut to inflict slow because it freezes its joints?), and meanwhile complains about his players being "not creative enough" because they don't think using the same backwards logic as he does when he DMs. Meanwhile when I tell him how chain-binding works he gets all "that's when the DM has to step in and say hlafkblegfuhbbksdj" when it should be a given that rules exploits may not be appropriate for certain games; apparently discussing creativity through actual use of the rules is a no-go. Strikes me that he tries to actively spite the rules and calls that "creativity".

Anyway, aside from stream-of-consciousness rambling, yeah, a lot of DMs have trouble with creative use of the rules largely because it goes against their idea of how the game is supposed to work. A lot of the time when you make creative use of the rules people will perceive it as "powergaming" immediately since it seems more powerful than other options that they are aware of, or as if you're trying to manipulate the game to your advantage. If this happens I guess the best thing to do is sit them down and make sure they're aware of just how screwed up D&D is if you really look at the nuances of the game and just how it actually plays out. And if they don't like it, introduce them to E6 or some other system entirely.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:44 am

I'm not even going to try to contemplate why some DMs hate creativity... I'm still wondering why my last group decided that rogues inflicting sneak attack on a target they flank didn't make sense...

Judging__Eagle · Post by **Judging__Eagle** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:24 am

Prak.... that group is made of so much fail, that I wouldn't even waste the time pissing on them. Heck, I wouldn't waste the forced piss that drinking too many pitchers of beer enforcres upon an affected creature on such people.

I might press a button that dumps a factory slaughterhouses shit and blood tanks onto such people. Yeah... I'm willing to say that right now, I'd press such a button.

People who break the rules because they are too stupid deserve to have several thousand litres of blood, and several thousand litres of pig shit poured onto them at maximum force. Hopefully they'll die, and no one will care about their stupid rules breaking ideas.

They can take their stupid rules breaking of 3.X D&D and GTFO. Tell them to play Hackmaster, or 2e D&D. Where PCs are small piles of poo, and who can't really do anything important or useful ever.

Take this with a grain of salt, I'm angry since my several threads for eaten, and I've drunk a few pitchers of ... I think it was Foster's in the last two hours.

No, drunkeness doesn't make me any incoherent, I just ramble a lot more.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:57 am

To be fair, a lot of people think we here treat the RAW as LAW. That's why we're so hated, it seems. Someone was explaining that "Yeah, the Candle and Wishing for Wishes thing is the kind of bullshit they accept as normal on the Den. Like, if a player decides to do anything at all, the other players and the DM have to sit there and take it."

I sort of feel he missed the point: the articles on that say "RAW says it works like this. You can just agree not to, or you can take it to a logical conclusion and do this... note that X Y and Z problems also go away when you do this, and it improves the game."

Sometimes, weird shit crops up in the rules where the group should sit down and say "Do we run with it and accept that this isn't Bored of the Rings? Or do we agree not to touch that?"

But most of us love it when PCs pull a fast one and make you re-think your strategy as a DM.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 7:17 am

My favorite part of that story, The actual text of the Bag of holding entry:

"If a bag of holding is placed within a portable hole a rift to the Astral Plane is torn in the space: Bag and hole alike are sucked into the void and forever lost. If a portable hole is placed within a bag of holding, it opens a gate to the Astral Plane: The hole, the bag, and any creatures within a 10-foot radius are drawn there, destroying the portable hole and bag of holding in the process."

1) The thing wasn't a portable hole.

2) Even if it was, it doesn't result in death or anything. It just transports you to the Astral Plane. It destroys the component sure. But that's not party death.

I've used that trick before to screw with a DM who was a "I kill you" type, but was also a stupid "no you can't do anything fun, follow my plot that isn't even remotely related to what you agreed to play."

So we stood together, and took a trip, he though he was killing us and we'd all have to roll up new characters. Then our caster/gish party ran around the astral with quickened everything. Fun times.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 7:24 am

I tend to reward creativity myself as I like to see it. I think that is part of the reason I prefer to DM than play because most DMs somehow limit my creativity and at times my ability to role play my character. For the record I don't consider looking online for certain builds and ways to break my game being creative. I enjoy moments in the game where player's come up with truly surprising actions and elegant though unexpected ways around obstacles I set up.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 12:53 pm

Maxus wrote: But this brings up an issue. Why do some DMs punish players for throwing the DM a curveball?

Well there's two instances that can cause anger.

Sometimes the PCs ideas take the game in a direction the DM doesn't want to go or doesn't want to deal with. For instance, your DM may not want to deal with PCs running a business. The quest is about adventurers and honestly your DM likely doesn't want to worry about playing the numbers game of figuring out how much income you can get without breaking the WBL guidelines. That sounds like it is the case in the board posting you cited. The DM just doesn't really want to get into the PCs having brothels and smithies and crap, because it means the DM has to make weird judgment calls about how much money they make, and doing that math just isn't fun. In a game like Vampire where wealth is vague, DMs are much more apt to say "Ok, you can have business" or whatever, because you're not counting every coin and it just becomes a flavor thing. In D&D when you have to worry about WBL and crap, it's a total pain in the ass.

The other scenario that annoys DMs is the idea that the PC is just trying to blindside them. As a DM, I pretty much tell PCs to inform me of any kind of fringe uses of spells or abilities they may try to make sure they're okay with me beforehand. So if there's some ridiculously powerful loophole you've found and you're trying to keep it as an ace in the hole to break a major encounter, that just doesn't fly in my games. A creature use that you came up with on the spot is cool, one that you're deliberately saving to blindside the DM is not.

The goal of the game isn't to just deceive the DM and try to gain advantages by sneaking broken stuff past him, and if that's someone's style of play, they're gonna get punished for it. The game should not be about if you can pull the wool over the DM's eyes at character creation.

mean_liar · Post by **mean_liar** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 12:54 pm

GMs tend to not like "creativity" when it screws with their crafted plot, and I understand the frustration that comes from developing a story progression and then having it tanked.

It sucks to be told, "no", and it also sucks to watch the next six hours of your game get set on fire because you didn't consider an oddball outsider use for a spell that the designers probably didn't even consider either. That doesn't excuse it carte blanche, but it could reasonably, conceivably lead to some houserules about the spells in question in order to keep the game between the lines.

Another option the GM has is to admit that he didn't consider that use and instantly retrofit some rationale in as to why it didn't work ("your supergenius opponent is smarter than me, and he would have...") or just throw up your hands and admit you've got nothing in light of the plot going off the rails and you need time to work it through.

...

Prestidigitation explicitly can't do anything another spell can do, so blinding someone is right out.

tzor · Post by **tzor** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:55 pm

Maxus wrote:Someone just sent me a link I really like. It's so goofily D&D...

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88885

But this brings up an issue. Why do some DMs punish players for throwing the DM a curveball?

To be fair, the DM planted the seeds that bore the curve ball he got. I can only sigh and guess the age of the players from the ideas they are comming up with.

Aside from the problems with the DM's logic there seems to be a certain problem with what the DM has created and what the players think has been created.

"I decided that his meant that the hatch in his chest which once held a modified bag of holding now held a gate to the Astral Plane."

They want to do what now? I'm not sure they realize how tough the neighborhood is (the fricking astral plane). I'm not sure they realize how valuable a portable portal is either.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:08 pm

It'd be awesome when a githyanki war party busts the hatch and pops through his chest.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:02 pm

tzor wrote:
To be fair, the DM planted the seeds that bore the curve ball he got. I can only sigh and guess the age of the players from the ideas they are comming up with.

Aside from the problems with the DM's logic there seems to be a certain problem with what the DM has created and what the players think has been created.

"I decided that his meant that the hatch in his chest which once held a modified bag of holding now held a gate to the Astral Plane."

They want to do what now? I'm not sure they realize how tough the neighborhood is (the fricking astral plane). I'm not sure they realize how valuable a portable portal is either.

Yeah, leaving shit on the astral isn't exactly a safe thing to do.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:49 pm

Maxus wrote:Why do some DMs punish players for throwing the DM a curveball?

The most common reason I've experienced is that the curveball goes against the DMs intended plot (ie: the DM can't railroad the players).

But more often than not, my regular DM rewards the group for curveballs. So we didn't get nicked by the swinging razors as we ran across the catwalk. Maybe next time...

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:24 pm

an amusing thread that is full of fun stupid -- the giant thread that is.

At least, the dm is being nice about it.

My ex-dm has joined the peace corp apparently and is currently out somewhere in the world haunting poverty-starved kids by telling them that using the food wrappers as wallpaper is not what it was intended for. so they get no more food!
---

violence in the media · Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:12 pm

Maxus wrote: But this brings up an issue. Why do some DMs punish players for throwing the DM a curveball?

It might also be the fear of setting a bad precedent.

One of the guys that I game with now was telling me a story about how a different DM in another game let him use a Feather Token: Tree on a dragon in flight and kill it. Now, I'm not exactly clear on the specifics of this story, but I presume the ~65000 lbs. of tree that the token creates caused the dragon to crash and the crushing/falling damage did it in.

Pretty awesome, right? Well, the story ended there, so I don't know what happens next. Does he get to Feather Token everything he can plant a tree on? What if there isn't enough space for the tree? Does it fail to grow, partially grow, or burst enclosures? Is there some sort of check involved? What if an NPC plants one on him? How much damage does this tree do, anyway? Is there any limit to where you can activate it?

I'm envisioning this hilarious caber-tossing culture springing up around this discovery, as rival groups maneuver around trying to tree each other and battlefields become forests in the process.

Anyway, I don't even know how I'd handle all those additional situations, and I think the original use is pretty funny. So I can see how a DM that might be afraid of a flask rogue could become terrified of the Copse-maker rogue.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 1:25 am

I had seen something similar. A player in my game used one to end a fight he had gotten himself into with a dragon. He was going to lose but used a token (treasure I had rolled at random earlier) after planting it in the dragon's mouth to kill it. For that instance I let it pass but outlawed all tokens thereafter to save myself the headache.

Meikle641 · Post by **Meikle641** » Thu Dec 24, 2009 12:57 am

Maxus wrote: So do that, and give up a point for that Collision property that does +5 damage.

Collision is a +2 ability, btw.

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Thu Dec 24, 2009 3:31 am

Meikle641 wrote:
Maxus wrote: So do that, and give up a point for that Collision property that does +5 damage.
Collision is a +2 ability, btw.

Thanks. It's been a while since I really looked at it.

Still, pretty awesome, considering Zen Archery you get both +20 to hit and an auto-crit. So if you've got that big a boost to hit, you might as well max out damage. Especially with the Boomstick, which has a x4 multiplier for that solid shot option...

A Man In Black · Post by **A Man In Black** » Thu Dec 24, 2009 7:44 am

violence in the media wrote:Pretty awesome, right? Well, the story ended there, so I don't know what happens next. Does he get to Feather Token everything he can plant a tree on? What if there isn't enough space for the tree? Does it fail to grow, partially grow, or burst enclosures? Is there some sort of check involved? What if an NPC plants one on him? How much damage does this tree do, anyway? Is there any limit to where you can activate it?

My wife, reading over my shoulder: "Trees fall, everybody dies."

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:12 am

I'm going to have to agree with VitM. It's up to the player to handle the situation properly. Killing a dragon with a giant tree once is an awesome part to a story. Carrying around a pack of feather tokens and trying to use them every fight? Not so hot.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 4:22 am

Psychic Robot wrote:I'm going to have to agree with VitM. It's up to the player to handle the situation properly. Killing a dragon with a giant tree once is an awesome part to a story. Carrying around a pack of feather tokens and trying to use them every fight? Not so hot.

Yeah, really I feel like D&D should have some kind of Stunt system for original stuff like that. Basically it'd allow the move to be highly powerful the first time you use it, but after that, it becomes pretty much typical or weak.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 5:12 am

I like how DMs tend to set the precedent for their own demise with crazy rules, though. Whether it's the Knights of the Dinner Table "Turnip farming" thing, or the tale where a wall of Immovable Rods were used to destroy a castle.

The Gaming Den

"Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?

"Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?

Re: "Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?

Re: "Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?

Re: "Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?

Re: "Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?

Re: "Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?

Re: "Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?

Re: "Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?

Re: "Didn't see that coming" Reward or punish?