Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Rechan 10-26-07, 01:59 PM	I am a DM, and I want to break the rules. And I feel kinda guilty about it. My players are stomping most things they come across. They're both lucky, and smart. I want to be able to pull things out of my hat that just aren't covered by the rules, or are just purely "Fudging" just to make the situation take longer/harder/more enjoyable. Case in point: the PCs are fighting a priest. The priest is 5th level. Due to a lucky roll by a PC, he disrupted the priest casting a 3rd level spell. However, because I want that spell to go off in a the fight, I want the priest to be able to retreat from the room and recast, or have a scroll he just happens to have and cast. Or maybe add another level to him on the spot because he's not putting a real dent in them. I want to add effects to the situation that aren't hard and fast covered. For instance, the Priest will summon a monster. But in addition to the monster itself, the area around it will be Entangling, and the monster will hold up a wall preventing missile fire from one direction. Is playing fast and loose with the rules, throwing down layers of effects, giving monsters more actions than they should have (an extra standard action to change shape or get a single power in an addition to an attack), and otherwise pulling things out of my butt okay? I usually rule in favor of the PCs when rolls go bad, when they try to do something inventive, or ignore an AoO they'd incur if it would really slow down play. So I don't think I'm overtly cruel. Yet, I can't help but think I'm intentionally cheating, and that little rules lawyer in my head is saying "Hey hey hey that's not fair."
MareltEkiran 10-26-07, 03:34 PM	Rule 0: Any rule can be altered, removed or introduced by the DM. Rule 0.5: Just because the DM can change the rules doesn't mean he should. Minor fudging of dice rolls is generally fine, as long as players don't notice it. Many DM's are probably guilty of having done this once or twice. Altering an enemy's hitpoints or spells in a minor degree is not too bad either, as long as you do it to keep the game interesting and not out of a sense that you have to win the game as a DM. If your PCs get lucky and annihilate an enemy cleric through a few lucky rolls, you should just suck up the loss and make sure that the next cleric is going to be 7th level, rather than 5th. Also, tactics make a huge difference... if you wanted the priest to get away, he should have had a few temple guards or summoned monsters to cover his retreat... and at the very least, he should be casting defensively. Having him behind some obstacles (church benches anyone?), can also ensure that the party can't charge him on round 1 and gives him some time to pull Cleric mojo. After a while, you should be able to tell what will or will not challenge your party as it is now and adjust accordingly.
Rechan 10-26-07, 03:43 PM	Also, tactics make a huge difference... if you wanted the priest to get away, he should have had a few temple guards or summoned monsters to cover his retreat... and at the very least, he should be casting defensively. Having him behind some obstacles (church benches anyone?), can also ensure that the party can't charge him on round 1 and gives him some time to pull Cleric mojo. In the scenario I mentioned above, he was using cover, had a trap and a field of silence between him and the PCs, and a guard monster came at the PCs from behind. One of the PCs managed a range touch spell and he failed the concentration check on his summons, and they managed to blow through the monster in several rounds. The cleric retreated into the next room and up some trapped stairs; he's still alive, at full hit points (he had temporary HP due to Aid), and has most of his spells. The session ended here.
Myers 10-26-07, 03:57 PM	It's perfectly legal and OK to swap out or change on the fly anything the players do not know, just do it transparent enough that they don't figure it out. Adding a level to an enemy between sessions, not always a good idea, must be taken with a grain of salt. But remember your the author of a story essentially, there's no harm in changing your direction half way through if you realize things work better that way, just be careful not to have any inconsistencies.
KillerGM 10-26-07, 03:58 PM	Is playing fast and loose with the rules, throwing down layers of effects, giving monsters more actions than they should have (an extra standard action to change shape or get a single power in an addition to an attack), and otherwise pulling things out of my butt okay? First things first: As always, if it works for your group, and everyone is having fun, then it's okay. I'm all for what works in your group and what makes you and your players go "COOL!" Now on to my bit (all IMO): HELL NO. Consistency is the hallmark of a good GM. Things shouldn't change on a whim just because you don't think the fight is cool enough - or that the PCs are either winning or losing too easily. When you suddenly change things in or out of favor for the PCs, you're eliminating their effect on the world. Suddenly, that attack doesn't count for anything, just because you really wanted that Cleric to cast that spell. Also, a bit of advice: Single combatants (especially PC-classed casters) of appropriate CR will tend to get rolled. This is because the PCs get 4 chances to affect him to his 1 chance to affect them. Try to give casters some low-level NPC Warriors or something, if only for the speed-bump factor. As a player, I really really really want consistency from my GM, even if that means killing us or having a really easy fight. As a GM, I'm the same way. And if NPC Cleric X can summon a creature who also entangles the area around them, PC Cleric Y damn well better be able to do the same thing. Now, this may involve the taking of extra feats, or certain spells, but the point is to have that already in place, not added to on the fly. If monster X gets a free standard action, just because you want it to, that's just wrong. Now, clever building and mechanical designing can get you the effect with it seeming to be that way, but once again, it's planned before and has rhyme and reason to it, not "just because". It really sucks when the NPCs get to do all the cool stuff. Also - Maybe your PCs are stomping things because you "rule in favor of the PCs when rolls go bad, when they try to do something inventive, or ignore an AoO they'd incur if it would really slow down play." I'm not saying it's the case, but it sounds like you have a 'safety bubble' around the PCs, and it's affecting the challenges of the game. Remove that bubble, be consistent. Hope it helps! :D
kardock 10-26-07, 03:58 PM	hi Rechan, if i found that the combat i'm running was badly planned, either too easy or too hard, i will usually adapt it on the fly, to be sure to give the players a good challenge. but what is important to me is that my players never suspected i was cheating :schemes:
LSMFT 10-26-07, 04:13 PM	Consistency is a big deal. You really shouldn’t have your bad guys be able to do anything they couldn’t do. (e.g. summon a monster. But in addition to the monster itself, the area around it will be Entangling [check out Cloudy Conjuration in CMag though.]) One trick I like for my bad guys is to have them liberally use potions to buff: I can boost them up to far better to deal with skilled characters intelligently run by experienced players without leaving too much treasure for the encounter level. Players will ask about BBEGs after it’s all done, and I’d rather explain all those extra hp with a potion of Bear’s Endurance and the high DC with a potion of Owl’s Wisdom then tell them I just arbitrarily made the guy stronger because the party was “too good.”
Moblin 10-26-07, 04:28 PM	I am a DM, and I want to break the rules. And I feel kinda guilty about it. Don't. You're the DM and you decides what happen. Technically you can't even cheat as what you say goes. It's even written in the DMG as rule zerro. BUT! Just because you can freely ignore the rules as written (RAW) doesn’t mean that you should do so. In fact you should not ignore the RAW with out very good reason and when you do be consistent about it. And most importantly: NEVER let the players know you're "cheating". You already decide everything in the world except the actions of the PC's. Cheating takes away what little power the players have by you deciding the outcome of their actions and thus making sure things happen the way you want. It reduces them to mere spectators to YOUR game of DnD and most players won't be part of it. My players are stomping most things they come across. They're both lucky, and smart. I want to be able to pull things out of my hat that just aren't covered by the rules, or are just purely "Fudging" just to make the situation take longer/harder/more enjoyable. Case in point: the PCs are fighting a priest. The priest is 5th level. Due to a lucky roll by a PC, he disrupted the priest casting a 3rd level spell. However, because I want that spell to go off in the fight, I want the priest to be able to retreat from the room and recast, or have a scroll he just happens to have and cast. Or maybe add another level to him on the spot because he's not putting a real dent in them. I want to add effects to the situation that aren't hard and fast covered. For instance, the Priest will summon a monster. But in addition to the monster itself, the area around it will be Entangling, and the monster will hold up a wall preventing missile fire from one direction. Everybody can make a mistake when planning an encounter as the CR-system is far from perfect (just take the CR for most NPC's as an example). Some time the creature is much stronger then you expected and some times it's just not strong enough. Fudging rolls is usually the best way for a DM to fix such a mistake (unless he rolls in the open). Fudging rolls means that the DM has some control over when a creature hits someone, what damage it does, if it makes it's saving throw, and whether or not it wins opposed checks or not. Tweaking the creatures "luck" can usually make up the difference between the challenge you wanted and what you got. Beware, however, of how often you use this. Players can quickly sense when things are starting to become one sided and there from deduct that you're cheating. Also a thing to remember is that if the players know that you'll fudge rolls to keep them alive they start acting reckless like charging into battle with the unarmored wizards and grappling the dragon with the halfling swash buckler because; hey the DM won't kill us (and then get mad once the wizard is impaled and the halfling is paste on the floor). Making stat changes is a bit more then fudging rolls but can still be done without the players ever finding out. Adding an item to his inventory (with in reason) is not that big a problem. The players won't know if he had one or two potions of cure X on him. Changing the spell list is also easily done and doesn’t effect the game big time. Same can be done with HP but be careful not ending up giving the wizard a barbarians hitpoints. Changing movement, AC, and other stats that can be directly observed is a big no no however. Cheating like this should not be done often and only because you as a DM made a mistake. Having lucky or smart players is however not a mistake and especially the last part should never be held against them. So the fighter played it smart and got close to the priest and wasted an action readying a strike (if not it's your own damn fault he lost that spell) don't punish him for being smart by making sure that his tactics doesn't work. This will make him default to just hitting things because; "Well the DM won't let the other stuff work". So you really wanted that spell to go off? Well that's to bad. No plan survives contact with the players and unless you want to railroad them always you have to accept that. Is playing fast and loose with the rules, throwing down layers of effects, giving monsters more actions than they should have (an extra standard action to change shape or get a single power in an addition to an attack), and otherwise pulling things out of my butt okay? NO! Don't pull things out of your arse! Whatever changes you make to the rules be consistent. You and your players should, as far as possible, play by the same rules. If the BBEG can make special summons then the PC's can learn that spell. If moving away from the fighter (with out using a withdraw action) doesn't provoke an AoO then it won't provoke an AoO when the fighter backs away from the dragon. Just pulling things from your behind because it would help in that situation undermines the rules in the long run. Don't give a creature an extra action in just a single round or two. Either it has that ability or it doesn't. Players will no that you cheat if you do it otherwise. I usually rule in favor of the PCs when rolls go bad, when they try to do something inventive, or ignore an AoO they'd incur if it would really slow down play. So I don't think I'm overtly cruel. Yet, I can't help but think I'm intentionally cheating, and that little rules lawyer in my head is saying "Hey hey hey that's not fair." I don't think that this is because you want to cheat your players in fact I think that you just want to improve their experience by challenging them to the best of their abilities but be careful you don't destroy more then you save by cheating. If the players find out they'll be discouraged from being creative as they figure that you as the DM will just negate what ever they come up with.
BW0222 10-26-07, 04:29 PM	Rechan, MareltEkiran is correct. You can cheat, but you typically shouldn't. IMO, you can cheat to save the PCs from your mistakes, but you don't cheat to make combats more exciting just because luck, planning, or tactics weren't up to snuff. If the combat is too easy, fine... the PCs win and you can correct it the next time. IMO, cheating to make a combat more exciting typically means that you aren't planning the combats terribly well. If the PCs are walking over your encounters, then maybe you need to check your EL and APL calculations. Numbers, point-buy number, classes, treasure, etc. may all need to be reviewed. Increasing the APL of the party if they aren't a classic 4 person party with a 25-point-buy, typical equipment/gold/magic, etc. You should next look at playing your monsters more intelligently. Any reason the cleric didn't realize that someone readied an attack against them -- and either took some other action or moved to a position where he could cast the spell with less chance of being disrupted - behind cover, around a corner, etc.? Any reason he didn't run, close a door, and then buff? Is there some reason he hangs out in a place which doesn't have guards, defenses (a glypth on the door), or at least locked doors?
LaserWolf 10-26-07, 04:34 PM	Encounters have a way of surprising DMs, usually in both directions. I've thrown some potentially tough encounters at my PCs that they've blown through, only to get mowed down by a trivial encounter (often as a result of going in completely unprepared or ignoring warnings). Once you've established an encounter, I would be very careful about changing it on the fly. As in, don't suddenly add new stats or abilities to your enemies in the middle of a battle. That's dangerous territory. Setting up a situation that favors the enemy is fine (a lair, for example, is likely to be well-protected), but be careful to not always negate your players' favorite abilities or they won't have fun. Your priest, realizing he was losing the fight, could run away to some inner sanctum. He could have yelled for help, bringing in reinforcements within 1d3 rounds (for example). If he was particularly paranoid he might have had a scroll of Dimension Door on him, although the rest of his possessions would have to be modified to accomodate the expense (and there's still a considerable chance it would fail). These are all things that one would normally do to try and change the tide of a battle. Suddenly gaining a level isn't - you wouldn't give the players that option if they were losing the battle. It sucks to see your painfully constructed encounters turn out trivial, or to watch the players completely bypass your intricate plot devices. As a DM you just have to suck it up sometimes and try and find other creative ways to accomplish your storytelling goals. It sounds like you might want to dial up the ELs of their future encounters for starters. Some rules can be gently bent. Just don't take it personally when the players trump you. If everything is meticulously scripted, it takes away some of what makes D&D so great.
Rechan 10-26-07, 04:46 PM	As a sidenote: I run online. Thus, everyone sees the rolls I make. But I don't announce opponents ACs, etc, so it would be harder to metagame. I also rampantly use creatures that Look like X but use Y's stats, or have new abilities (Dire ape + Mimic's Adhesive ability = brute who takes a beating and takes your sword). You should next look at playing your monsters more intelligently. Any reason the cleric didn't realize that someone readied an attack against them -- and either took some other action or moved to a position where he could cast the spell with less chance of being disrupted - behind cover, around a corner, etc.? Any reason he didn't run, close a door, and then buff? Is there some reason he hangs out in a place which doesn't have guards, defenses (a glypth on the door), or at least locked doors? Except that the place he is in has all of these. Glyphs, a silence spell and a trap between him and the party, he was warned when the PCs entered (and thus buffed), he was behind cover at the time, he had an ally on the field, he had a Spiritual Weapon in play, etc. The only thing that I did wrong was have him cast a summoning spell, which takes an entire round, and he was disrupted in the middle of it. The only reason he wasn't behind Total Cover was due to having the Spiritual Weapon in play (ergo, he needed line of sight). I don't see how I could have played it any more intelligently.
Disciple_of_Salsa 10-26-07, 04:49 PM	Only cheat if it will make the game funner for the players.
KillerGM 10-26-07, 04:50 PM	Except that the place he is in has all of these. Glyphs, a silence spell and a trap between him and the party, he was warned when the PCs entered (and thus buffed), he was behind cover at the time, he had an ally on the field, he had a Spiritual Weapon in play, etc. The only thing that I did wrong was have him cast a summoning spell, which takes an entire round, and he was disrupted in the middle of it. The only reason he wasn't behind Total Cover was due to having the Spiritual Weapon in play (ergo, he needed line of sight). Right, so one spell of his got disrupted. I don't see it being a game-altering occurrence that you need to cheat for.
Rechan 10-26-07, 04:53 PM	Right, so one spell of his got disrupted. I don't see it being a game-altering occurrence that you need to cheat for. Because I still want to bring it in regardless to make the next sequence more exciting? Because I want something more than it to simply be "Look, something to soak up two attacks and then we move forwards"? Because, as it's a horror heavy campaign, I want it to be something scary and tense that I know they've not seen before?
FarrenCronwing 10-26-07, 05:09 PM	While I personally would of let the PCs go on and steamroll the priest, then make sure to make my next climactic encounter more challenging, you've got every right to tamper with the rules as you see fit. Consistency IS important. I'd suggest that you give the Priest a feat that allows him to tie another affect on to his summoning, then introduce the feat to your game to have a nice, interesting new factor to spellcasting. Then the PCs would be able to do the exact same thing, and they'd even get an example of it. If you're deadset against that (I don't see why, but...), then perhaps just give that spellcaster the ability to do it x times per day. Hopefully the PCs are okay with this, but if they don't know, then there's no harm done. If they find out, then explain it to them, and if they argue, explain that it was to make the combat more challenging and interesting. Hopefully they'll be okay with this.
Rechan 10-26-07, 05:18 PM	While I personally would of let the PCs go on and steamroll the priest, then make sure to make my next climactic encounter more challenging, you've got every right to tamper with the rules as you see fit. Thing of it is, I've been building up this encounter for several sessions. He's not quite the BBEG, but he's the biggest non "I just hit you really hard" threat they're going to deal with for a while. So, I want to "make it count". Consistency IS important. I'd suggest that you give the Priest a feat that allows him to tie another affect on to his summoning, then introduce the feat to your game to have a nice, interesting new factor to spellcasting. Then the PCs would be able to do the exact same thing, and they'd even get an example of it. I could do that. I just don't see my PCs going after it, in all honesty. I was just going to pass it off as a unique creature - it's being summoned out of a unique component he has excessive access to (blood of a demon).
Voran 10-26-07, 05:30 PM	For me, I'd prefer to layer things so that it becomes more difficult to accidentally screw with 'cinematic' moments or 'plot hook' moments. That or make sure I roll behind my screen so if I have to flub things, its harder to tell. Besides, sometimes you don't want the PCs to know what sorta dice you're rolling: "Why's he rolling percentage dice? Whats with the d12s?!?!?!?!oneone
PhaedrusXY 10-26-07, 05:42 PM	Because I still want to bring it in regardless to make the next sequence more exciting? Because I want something more than it to simply be "Look, something to soak up two attacks and then we move forwards"? Because, as it's a horror heavy campaign, I want it to be something scary and tense that I know they've not seen before?Then say he had a scroll in his pocket. I don't see anything wrong with that. And next time, actually put it down on his sheet before hand, if it is something this important.
KillerGM 10-26-07, 06:07 PM	Because I still want to bring it in regardless to make the next sequence more exciting? Then you're eliminating the effects of the PCs on the world. If you wanted something to happen regardless of what the PCs did, then you shouldn't have given them the opportunity to affect it. Because I want something more than it to simply be "Look, something to soak up two attacks and then we move forwards"? That's an issue in description and player attitude, not dice rolls. Because, as it's a horror heavy campaign, I want it to be something scary and tense that I know they've not seen before? Then make it that way - within the rules. Once again, it's more in description than mechanics. I just don't see how not summoning something makes the game less. It's starting to seem that you just wanted to do it because it's what you think would be cool/challenging, regardless of what the players actually do. If that's the case, just write a text-box and move on. PS - The scroll idea provides the same problem - if you PCs disrupt *that* casting, what do you do?
Lokathor 10-26-07, 06:11 PM	Most monsters are arbitrary bags of numbers in the first place. They can look like anything, they can do anything. They get to have any kind of ability as any kind of action. They do not need feats and they can have as much as a racial bonus or stat modifier as they need to have whatever skill check is desired. They simply do not play by the same rules as the PC races. That's what makes them so frightening. That's why you're supposed to kill them all the time. If there weren't people out in the forests and caves killing them, they'd be in the city killing you. The PC races, however, should probably all play by the same set of rules that the players do. Unless you'd said before hand or decided when they first saw him "Ok, this guy is a mutant BBEG who can just do whatever he needs", then you should stick to the "Rules of the Group" (RAW + Houserules) that the rest of the party uses. Either way, always award treasure and EXP according to how much of a challenge it turned out to be after any on the fly modifications you might have made.