Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Harmor 07-19-04, 10:41 PM	I try to organize my party members but it really never happens. Almost always everyone is doing whatever they want to do going this way and that way doing whatever. Example: We come into a non-symetrical large room (I'll tell you why in a moment) with many enemy standing with reach weapons and tower shields enterlocked. Behind them is a fire giant and a Bard who is clinging his weapons together (they are his instruments) and basically buffing the guys up. Along the side wall is a camouflaged archer and the other is a mage hinding behind an illusionary wall. Anyhow the barbarian and ranger run upto the shield wall and start taking them out...but getting damaged pretty heavily. The rogue is hiding and looking around for the mage (behind the illusionary wall), but is unsuccessful (does this for 7 rounds). The mage goes down the cooridor and casts Wall of Stone as an NPC party approaches him. During this time the mage behind the illusionary wall is pelting the party with spells. The archer with a high hide ability manyshots the mage and puts him negative. The barbarian and ranger are getting their arses handed to them...and the rogue is running around like a chicken with his head cut-off. How do you organize a party who always trys to do their own thing? Do you all agree that one person is the 'party leader'? Do you have a 'battlefield commander'? Is there always someone who usually ends up being the leader no matter what character they play?
Enslaved DM 07-19-04, 10:57 PM	Unfortunately, I don't have good news for you. These considerations depend on the inter-person dynamic of the players. Since no one is stepping up to do it, you are probably going to have to take up that task. The good news is that you probably won't have much opposition. But if no one else is willing to do it, you will have to do it yourself. You will probably end up leading the party by defalt and distributing responsability as best as you can. Good Luck. I am usually in your shoes when I'm not DMing.
TheSilentF 07-19-04, 11:22 PM	That awlays happens when i play. I was playing for a good 4 years before i moved to my new town, and before i taught everyone else how to play. So im 4 years ahead of everyone. Im a rogue, and my friends always bullrush straight into battle. The best thing you can do for this is just to hope that your players are strong enough to damage the enemy mostly then sweep up the rest of it (This depends on what class you are). Theres another thing thats really fun doing. Just schedule a game but dont play, sit in and monitor what everyone is doing and see how badly they screw up, and correct them. Most likely they will do it again so every time they do you need to get on the back like litereally in game him them for subduel damage after a fight if they were stupid or littles things like that. Its hard playing with newbies (or people who you play with) so just bare with them. and you have to remember every player has his or her own was of playing. I like to just sit things out and just let everyone else doing stuff until something important comes up and do it so i get al the credit, but my friends like to rush right into things, so you just have to be compatable.
Mitchell 07-19-04, 11:31 PM	What about you? Are you one of the above characters or a fifth? I'm in the same boat, but usually the other players follow my lead. This is your job, to be the leader. If they don't follow, then so be it. You can't expect everyone to play or think like you, but you should see some changes if you prove to be an effective leader. If the group finds that they are getting beaten upon less if they follow your lead, they will probably follow your lead more often. If they find that they are getting beaten just as much following your lead as they are when doing their own thing, they will do their own thing.
Harmor 07-19-04, 11:39 PM	I wasn't there, but if I was there I would had not entered the room, had the mage and archer pelt them with spells/arrows from range. If there was a spellcaster in the room I would had told the mage to cast a spell to idenify them and then focus on him. The range attackers on our side should had focused on the enemy's Bard/commander, because it was obivous that he was buffing the troops. If the shield wall entered the cooridor we would only have to fight a few at a time AND the giant couldn't had reached us!!! Oh, the barbarian died in the process as he was overrun.
TheSilentF 07-19-04, 11:44 PM	Yeah but. the only problem with that is unless you ALWAYS play the leader, you have no idea of knowing your a good leader until you try it. If you are, the better, go for it. However, depends on what class you play. I play rogue as i mentioned before, but everoyne i play with wont listen to me (Even though im a much better leader than any of them) cause im a rogue and they dont think i have good ideas when its usually my ideas that end up leading us in the right direction. As both of us mentioned before, everyone as a different style of gameplay and your cant change that. Eventually they will all come through and change their tactics... hopefully.... if not, you better stock up on some true ressurestion and heal scrolls pretty quickly...
Enslaved DM 07-20-04, 12:08 AM	My sympathies SilentF. It reminds me of Loki from Norse myths. There's a problem, Loki thinks of a solution, the other gods agree, it goes sour, everyone blames Loki (although they all agreed and nobody had a better idea), and Loki has to think of another plan. In these situations, someone has to bite the bullet and take charge. In my group we have two people who lead (myself and the other occassional GM), another who can but won't do it unless he must, and several others who can't/won't but who do contribute. I wish you the best.
TheDarkLord 07-20-04, 12:59 AM	I feel for you man. I once had to take ranks as a wizard in Knowledge (Tactics) because a DM (he was new at the time) said that i wouldn't know how to organize and lead a party into skirmishes. Since I was the one playing DnD for the longest period of time I always had to step up, no matter what class i was playing (int 6, Cha 6 Barbarian, heh fun...). As we began to play more and more I DMed a very high powered, High Magic campain (level 16-20). That's where my players (with me helping of course) learned the need for tactics and a battlefield commander. And thats what i suggest for you. Play a High Powered, High Magic Campaign, throw ton's of Npc's and monster mixed in groups at them. You might have to fudge some rolls every now and then, but if you explain that in certain circumstances that hit and run works better, get them to try it. Who knows, some, and i say this lightly, genius might get the gist of it and step up to the plate. I only suggest this if you are intimately familiar with the rules yourself.
Yuffie 07-20-04, 03:55 AM	There's a fine line between a DM creating intelligent opponents and a well laid ambush... and just flat out creating a literal deathtrap. More often than not, a DM who's trying to be clever and set up a truly nefarious ambush winds up overstepping his or her bounds and... instead of portraying a pack of assassins / monsters / etc, instead portrays a single entity with the control of several bodies. In other words, a DM can make that many creatures work in perfect synch because they all quite literally share the same mind, whereas the players do not. A DM has to account for the monsters / assassins / whatever not being in perfect harmony. Ever try to coordinate with a lot of other people in the middle of chaos? It doesn't work too well.
JuanCudz 07-20-04, 05:16 AM	Yuffie is absolutely right. Monsters and enemy npcs are not part of a telapathic hive mind. DM's have to learn that enemies can make just as many stupid mistakes as players. Especially when battlemats and minatures encourage a warhammeresque attitude to combat. I'm playing a 9th level fighter type all the way from 3rd and do you know how many times I've dished out an attack of opportunity? FOUR! As far as party cohesion in combat I can offer little advice. Adventuring parties are made up of individuals often with their own agendas. Many players favour chaotic alignments and would relish an opportunity to role-play with someone trying to impose order on them. Try buddying up with one or two players who seem the most likely to respond favourably to a little coordination. Also realise one reason some people don't like positions of authority. With command comes responsibility and you must be prepared to accept that another character following your orders may die. It happened to me and I didn't like it one bit.
Tony Vargas 07-20-04, 04:12 PM	It's a minor point, but the initiative system seems to encourage coordianted monsters and disorganized PCs. Why? Because PCs each roll initiative individually, while many DMs roll for the opposition once. That means it can be very hard for players to get off a coordinated tactic, because they have to wait for eachother (and if one is going before the monsters and one after, then that wait effectively means forfieting a round of action). Often, it doesn't matter, but, sometimes it does. In one early game, after getting mauled a few times as the party started to 'string out' from people moving in initiative order, creating openings for the enemy, we finally just rolled initiative, then all delayed to the last character's initiative and moved as a unit. It was a somewhat unusual situation that demanded it, but it did work very well. That illustrates a problem, though: if you do try to coordinate like that, you're virtually gauranteed to lose initiative, as at least one player craps out. ... Anyway, in general, when things are getting too chaotic, you can RP it. You can call for another player to abandon a fruitless action or to change targets or to help with something. It's good to make such requests in-character, and not too specific, so it doesn't seem like metagaming, and the player still feels he's controlling his own character, not ceding it to you.
Simetrical 07-20-04, 04:37 PM	During this time the mage behind the illusionary wall is pelting the party with spells. ~Harmor What sort of spells? Things like magic missile and fireball would allow anyone looking right at the wall to disbelieve the illusion (maybe not automatically, but with a huge bonus). More often than not, a DM who's trying to be clever and set up a truly nefarious ambush winds up overstepping his or her bounds and... instead of portraying a pack of assassins / monsters / etc, instead portrays a single entity with the control of several bodies. ~Yuffie That can be justified in some cases. Some random ogres or goblins you stumble across aren't going to be well-coordinated (unless they're soldiers), but a group of well-trained creatures will probably be (depending on whether they're trained for this kind of situation), and a group of well-trained, intelligent, disciplined creatures that are specifically prepared to fight the party are likely going to act in perfect tandem.
Ironballz 07-20-04, 05:33 PM	We have a similar problem in my gaming group. A lot of times it involves people rushing into combat instead of waiting for the wizard to launch a fireball at the enemy first. We've also had serious problem with not protecting our spell casters and flanks. The best way to solve this problem (and this can be a major sacrifice) is let someone die. If your barbarian refuses to do anything but rush ahead, let him go off and die alone. That player will soon realize that sometimes it's a good idea to coordinate with others. If that approach sounds too harsh, tell the player, in or out of character, that if he keeps not working with the group very well he won't be supported by the group, ie with spells, cover, or the like. If it continues to be a problem, let them know that it's causing problems with the group as a whole and more teamwork needs to be used. It also helps if you cover things ahead of time, both for basic tactics (stay somewhat close to each to each other, try not to jump into the middle of the enemy formation, etc) and specific plans ahead of time. Use those crappy little football diagrams and what not to break down a battle and how it could have been played better. It might sound silly, but if your teammates haven't figured out tactics yet... teach them. It is also very hard as a DM to not play a monster as smart as yourself. It takes a concious effort to do that, and often a DM doesn't realize that. Even an experienced one.
Mauther 07-20-04, 05:50 PM	Originally posted by Simetrical That can be justified in some cases. Some random ogres or goblins you stumble across aren't going to be well-coordinated (unless they're soldiers), but a group of well-trained creatures will probably be (depending on whether they're trained for this kind of situation), and a group of well-trained, intelligent, disciplined creatures that are specifically prepared to fight the party are likely going to act in perfect tandem. [/B] I have no problem with prepared enemies or enemies using tactics. But I have occasionally run into cases where every encounter is like storming Omaha beach on D-Day: entrenched enemies, overlapping fields of fire, close coordination, with supporting avenues of attack and fall back positions that take advantage of interior lines. It begins to feel less like D&D and more like Ghost Recon on elite level. Its just that sometimes, it appears that (some) DMs make the mistake of not running engagements as PCs against the NPCs, but as players against DMs. Its a bad sign when you hear the phrase, "I think I figured out how to stop you." Just once, I want an enemy scattered, unprepared and surprised (without the benefit of a 2 mile early warning system).
primemover003 07-20-04, 06:52 PM	That's why most DM's should roll for each "unit" or for different Monsters. In your example the Shield wall would have to go at the same inititative (most likely readying an action), the Giant & maybe the bard would have go, the archer, & the Wizard...
Yuffie 07-21-04, 01:54 AM	Originally posted by Mauther Its just that sometimes, it appears that (some) DMs make the mistake of not running engagements as PCs against the NPCs, but as players against DMs. Its a bad sign when you hear the phrase, "I think I figured out how to stop you." Just once, I want an enemy scattered, unprepared and surprised (without the benefit of a 2 mile early warning system). Amen.
Astanphaeus 07-21-04, 03:34 AM	Originally posted by primemover003 That's why most DM's should roll for each "unit" or for different Monsters. In your example the Shield wall would have to go at the same inititative (most likely readying an action), the Giant & maybe the bard would have go, the archer, & the Wizard... That's pretty much how I would've done it. I tend to roll one initiative for grunts. If there are a lot of grunts, I'll split them into groups and roll a seperate initiative for each group. Singular characters (like the wizard, bard, giant, and archer above) and commander types each get their own initiative. My favorite stupid moster to run is the troll. I think it's a good example of a creature that can be a hazard to campaign longevity if the DM doesn't handle it appropriately. If a troll operates intelligently, it becomes much, much more dangerous... more so, I think, than its CR indicates. A troll is not too bright. That's one of its weaknesses. PCs should be able to exploit that. I recently ran a scenario involving two trolls. Had they not been morons obsessed with eating their opponents, they wouldn't have been defeated. ~ A.