Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Whitey01 02-13-07, 11:11 AM	Hello all, I'm new here. Just started to play again, but not sure I'll continue playing because I have a problem with our DM. I think it is because the DM has a me vs. the players mentality and the DM is willing to bend the rules (or cheat) in his favor in every situation. We've had 3 sessions so far and this is what the DM has done to **** me and a couple other players off. 1. Had plant non-intellegent plant creatures (I looked in the monster manual afterwards) performing advanced tactics. When we outmanuevered the non-intellegent plant creatures, so the DM got annoyed and had the plant creatures TUMBLE through a square occupied by a fallen comrade. I'm sure he cheated on the tumble roll. 2. Seems like he cheats on "to hit" rolls. Two guys 17-18 AC at level 1 and level 2, the DM always rolls high. Even the tougher monsters with an attack bonus of +3 should hit about 1/4 of the time. Players get hit more 1/2 the time or more. 3. DM picks on one guy. He's been unconcious 8 times in 3 sessions. At first it was kinda funny, but it's really not anymore. The last session, the guy sat around and watched TV most of the time because he was unconcious the majority of the time. 4. Doesn't like diplomacy, but says he wants more role-playing. We are playing a modual and he said there was a slim chance of negotiation. I'm sure he was lying because there is no way 5 first level characters can defeat 6 2 HD elite kobolds, a kobold shaman (level 3-5) and the rest of there guards...10-20 1 HD kobolds. 5. During the hopeless battle that ensued, the DM allowed the kobolds to fire at PC's (a couple of Dwarfs) surrounded by players with no chance of hitting the other kobolds because "he doesn't play that way". 6. Tried to find loopholes in the rules in order to take attacks of opportunity vs. 2 invisible players. We wouldn't let the DM get away with that, but there was really no avenue of escape anyway. Too many kobolds blocking the exit. In the end, he didn't kill us off because he figured that he would quit. We might just do so anyway. I've known the DM for 5 years or so, I like the guy and he really wants to continue his campaign. So what do I do? Do I confront the DM and share my concerns with him him? --I'm sure he'll take it as criticism and get ******...or do I just say screw it and quit?--which will probably **** him off as well.
Some_call_me_Tim 02-13-07, 11:53 AM	I'm new here. Just started to play again, but not sure I'll continue playing because I have a problem with our DM. I think it is because the DM has a me vs. the players mentality and the DM is willing to bend the rules (or cheat) in his favor in every situation. We've had 3 sessions so far and this is what the DM has done to **** me and a couple other players off.To me the worst kind of DM is one that is adversarial. The DM should be an impartial judge of how the players interact with the world he created. 1. Had plant non-intellegent plant creatures (I looked in the monster manual afterwards) performing advanced tactics. When we outmanuevered the non-intellegent plant creatures, so the DM got annoyed and had the plant creatures TUMBLE through a square occupied by a fallen comrade. I'm sure he cheated on the tumble roll.While I tend to play non-intelligent creatures that way, some feel that 'instinct' is as good as intelligence. Usually this is apply to flanking wolves and not fungi and plants, however. 2. Seems like he cheats on "to hit" rolls. Two guys 17-18 AC at level 1 and level 2, the DM always rolls high. Even the tougher monsters with an attack bonus of +3 should hit about 1/4 of the time. Players get hit more 1/2 the time or more.Just as any DM should feel free to request that rolls be made in the open, so should a player. There are very few rolls that a DM needs to hide from his players. This also ensures that the DM isn't soft-balling an adventure as well. 3. DM picks on one guy. He's been unconcious 8 times in 3 sessions. At first it was kinda funny, but it's really not anymore. The last session, the guy sat around and watched TV most of the time because he was unconcious the majority of the time.Again a DM needs to be impartial. That also may mean that a weak PC or one with bad tactics gets knocked around. 4. Doesn't like diplomacy, but says he wants more role-playing. We are playing a modual and he said there was a slim chance of negotiation. I'm sure he was lying because there is no way 5 first level characters can defeat 6 2 HD elite kobolds, a kobold shaman (level 3-5) and the rest of there guards...10-20 1 HD kobolds.I don't know the specifics of the module but you may be able to defeat them piecemeal. Does he dislike any attempts at negotiations or merely dislike the diplomacy rules (I know quite a few DMs that don't like them as written). Some DMs have trouble with role-playing negotiations because there are no hard and fast rules like combat. 5. During the hopeless battle that ensued, the DM allowed the kobolds to fire at PC's (a couple of Dwarfs) surrounded by players with no chance of hitting the other kobolds because "he doesn't play that way".A DM should be allowed to use house rules, but he must let you know ahead of time and they need to work the same for both PCs and monsters. In this case, the rules agree with him, you no longer have a chance to hit 'soft cover' as was the case in 3.0. 6. Tried to find loopholes in the rules in order to take attacks of opportunity vs. 2 invisible players. We wouldn't let the DM get away with that, but there was really no avenue of escape anyway. Too many kobolds blocking the exit.Once again the DM needs to learn that his is an impartial arbiter of the action not out to 'win' vs. the PC. Any DM can win any time he wants to. The trick is to challenge the players and leave them wanting more. In the end, he didn't kill us off because he figured that he would quit. We might just do so anyway. I've known the DM for 5 years or so, I like the guy and he really wants to continue his campaign. So what do I do? Do I confront the DM and share my concerns with him him? --I'm sure he'll take it as criticism and get ******...or do I just say screw it and quit?--which will probably **** him off as well.You should definitely talk with him, but you need to approach it giving only constructive criticism, which is why I tried to give you an objective outlook above. Don't say things like "I think you cheat," or "You are out to get so-and-so." Be objective and let him know what you do like about the game he runs but what he should do to improve it. Say you want rolls in the open so that your fate rests with the dice. I find it more fun and entertaining to watch the DM roll when things start going bad. Ask that any house rules be written down so you know what they are. Remember that good DMs just don't happen, it takes work and feedback (good or bad); you can either give up on him or try and help him. If he gets mad, that is his problem--you tried.
RobbyPants 02-13-07, 12:15 PM	Yeah, in general I agree with about everything Some_Call_Me_Tim said. Just to reitterate: Talk to the DM about it. Try not to be rude in any way. What you want to avoid is passive-aggressive behavior. I've seen it and heard about it countless times: there is some minor conflict, and rather than talk about it, the other players find ways to "punish" the offender, which often makes the situation worse. And of course, because this guy is your DM, if you try and beat him at his own game, he will always win. The last thing you want is to anger him, or to make this personal.
Bruunwald 02-13-07, 12:30 PM	Actually, there could be very reasonable explanations for a great many of these complaints. However, I think there's enough here that it seems clear the DM is sub par and something of a nerfer. That said, you have also hinted at the cardinal sin responsible for so many player/DM misunderstandings: you have been sneaking peeks at things you shouldn't have, with no idea of how the DM might have legally altered them. The great "Verbal" Kent once said, "If you're a cop and you got a body and you think the brother did it, you're gonna find out that you're right." Translation: Players who decide beforehand that the DM is cheating, and then go looking at source books and modules they shouldn't be looking at, in order to prove it, but who also are totally ignorant of the rules that allow a DM to advance or change creatures and don't have access to the DM's notes, are going to think they are right, even if they are totally wrong. My advice? Bring your concerns to the DM. Explain your observations to him calmly and reasonably. If he cannot explain himself in a way that seems fair and reasonable (without giving away secrets in the game that would ruin it in so doing), thank him for his time and get a new DM. As for you, STOP SNEAKING AROUND READING UP ON THINGS YOU SHOULDN'T. The more you spy on the DM, the more trouble YOU ARE CREATING. There's nothing more annoying and game wrecking than a paranoid player who can't imagine anything beyond the stat blocks he sees on his minis cards, and who tries to force that rigidity onto the creative spark of a campaign.
Renvale999 02-13-07, 01:32 PM	Actually, there could be very reasonable explanations for a great many of these complaints. However, I think there's enough here that it seems clear the DM is sub par and something of a nerfer. That said, you have also hinted at the cardinal sin responsible for so many player/DM misunderstandings: you have been sneaking peeks at things you shouldn't have, with no idea of how the DM might have legally altered them. The great "Verbal" Kent once said, "If you're a cop and you got a body and you think the brother did it, you're gonna find out that you're right." Translation: Players who decide beforehand that the DM is cheating, and then go looking at source books and modules they shouldn't be looking at, in order to prove it, but who also are totally ignorant of the rules that allow a DM to advance or change creatures and don't have access to the DM's notes, are going to think they are right, even if they are totally wrong. My advice? Bring your concerns to the DM. Explain your observations to him calmly and reasonably. If he cannot explain himself in a way that seems fair and reasonable (without giving away secrets in the game that would ruin it in so doing), thank him for his time and get a new DM. As for you, STOP SNEAKING AROUND READING UP ON THINGS YOU SHOULDN'T. The more you spy on the DM, the more trouble YOU ARE CREATING. There's nothing more annoying and game wrecking than a paranoid player who can't imagine anything beyond the stat blocks he sees on his minis cards, and who tries to force that rigidity onto the creative spark of a campaign. I disagree, there is a difference between creative DMing and outright changing crap to beat the players, which is what this DM is doing. Besides the players looked "after the fact" which isn't really cheating since the encounter is no longer relevant. Now, if you "know" you're going to fight Illithids and then go in the MM and look them up, then yeah, it's wrong. But there's nothing wrong with looking afterwards. Just my two cents.
SneakyPetey 02-13-07, 02:56 PM	I disagree, there is a difference between creative DMing and outright changing crap to beat the players, which is what this DM is doing. After looking at #1 and #6, it seems that Whitey01 has a very adversarial DM, who's only crime is failure to understand his role in the game. It could be that he's just needs more time to learn. Discuss your issues with him calmly. Request open attack rolls if you must. You're going to have a tough road ahead of you if the DM doesn't begin to understand that he doesn't lose when the players win... On the other hand, there's no reason to go checking up on him after the fact. :nonono: Besides the players looked "after the fact" which isn't really cheating since the encounter is no longer relevant. Now, if you "know" you're going to fight Illithids and then go in the MM and look them up, then yeah, it's wrong. But there's nothing wrong with looking afterwards. Is it cheating? No, but it's not a good thing either. It reeks of mistrust and it's bound to invoke further adversarial feelings from the DM. And it's a sign that something in the group dynamic is broken. If a player cried "foul" because they went out and read the adventure material afterwards and said "No fair, you changed everything," my first inclination would be to get my hammer gun and aim for crotch... :eek: There are all kinds of reasons to change a pre-fab module. I very rarely run them as is. Whether I'm trying to fit something into our campaign, or just trying to make things more interesting for the players, that's my call. Your group should get together and discuss your concerns and see if you can work through them rather than sneaking around behind each other's backs (or the DM screen)... I hope this helps, have good gaming! :)
Whitey01 02-13-07, 03:05 PM	As for you, STOP SNEAKING AROUND READING UP ON THINGS YOU SHOULDN'T. The more you spy on the DM, the more trouble YOU ARE CREATING. There's nothing more annoying and game wrecking than a paranoid player who can't imagine anything beyond the stat blocks he sees on his minis cards, and who tries to force that rigidity onto the creative spark of a campaign. I take it that you have issues with some of your players. Perhaps you should take it up with them. There is nothing wrong with creativity. If you as a DM want to occasionally make an elite squad of kobold berserkers with some magical abilities, go right ahead. Or if you want to fudge a roll in either direction to advance a plot for RP reasons, no problem. Or maybe a somewhat comely elven female digs loud, offensive, no charisma, obnoxious dwarves. It happens in real life, so why not in roleplaying. But if a DM is going to fudge rolls in the favor of *his* monsters during every meaningless random encounter and give every monster special abilities or tactics they shouldn't have is annoying. It's not realistic and destroys the roleplaying experience. It's also very annoying to hear the DM "complain" that he has to save the players asses again, otherwise they will quit. It's bad enough that he says that at all, but it makes it much worse that the DM is the cause of these no win situations for players. If your players feel like they might want to quit, they you are not succeeding as a DM and have to adjust accordingly.
Renvale999 02-13-07, 03:12 PM	It's okay to change things in a module, but changing a monsters abilities just to stop a player using their own ablities available to them is retarded at best. All my players are former/current DM's. This very little I can throw at them that they haven't used/faced off against before. The trick is having mature enough players not to use out of character knowledge and using different tactics, not changing abilities. I find that ALOT of players aren't mature enough to distinguish between player and character knowledge. All my guys have the monster manual...I can't stop them from reading their own books.
FntsyWlkr 02-13-07, 03:29 PM	ENDPOINT: Yes, talk to him. Be honest not inflammatory. The major reason is not to force the outcome you want, but for your own sanity. You will regret not having said anything, and at least you took some steps forward. "It is better to regret what I have done, as opposed to what I haven't done."
Bruunwald 02-13-07, 03:41 PM	I disagree, there is a difference between creative DMing and outright changing crap to beat the players, which is what this DM is doing. Besides the players looked "after the fact" which isn't really cheating since the encounter is no longer relevant. Now, if you "know" you're going to fight Illithids and then go in the MM and look them up, then yeah, it's wrong. But there's nothing wrong with looking afterwards. Just my two cents. I never said the difference didn't exist. In fact, I said that there seemed to be enough evidence to support that the DM was a nerfer. (Please, please read posts before you respond to them.) What I said was that, despite this, there are ways that a DM can have altered creatures legally, that might make them seem strange to the players. Looking them up after the fact in-and-of-itself might not be a bad thing. But pretending to know what the DM did merely by looking in the Monster Manual is not enough. It disregards whatever notes the DM might have scibbled A KOSHER BUILD ONTO. Making a judgment merely from a sourcebook is likely (and I bet you money it did) to cause more trouble than it clears up. Again, as I said (and again, PLEASE READ POSTS BEFORE YOU RESPOND TO THEM), talking to the DM is the only way to know if he altered something legally. Anything else is just some dude poking around and making up his mind without all the evidence in. It's no better than gossip. Look, there are possible real answers to some (as I said, NOT ALL) of the OP's complaints. You and I don't know. We only have the word of an angry fellow who has admitted to sneaking peeks to back up his case. Sorry, but I don't think that's enough.
Bruunwald 02-13-07, 03:56 PM	I take it that you have issues with some of your players. You're right, in the sense that I have had some experience with this from the other side. I had a player for a long time who was paranoid and who also thought it was funny to start trouble. This fellow would occasionally sneak peeks at my notes. Now, if he found something, like say, a timeline I had sketched out, concerning future events, he would begin an argument as to whether I was intending to railroad the party into following it. Nothing could be further from the truth. I happen to like to map things out in detail so that I know what the weather will be like, who is power at what time, get a general feel for events in the world, etc. My timelines changed after every single session, based on what the PCs had done in the world. Another thing I like to do is to build and advance monsters. This fellow, and another fellow, tended to balk if the monster they were fighting did not fall after a certain number of hit points. Neither could be convinced that I was building them fairly, with rules out of the book. Their reference material? The Monster Manual, of course. If it didn't say a creature could do a thing, then as far as they were concerned, I was cheating. Nevermind advancement by Hit Dice, XP awards, etc. These guys were using bad evidence to "prove" something that didn't need to be proven. Now, no offense, but I don't need a lecture on DMing. I've been doing it for twenty-six years. In that time, I have seen a lot of disagreements and misunderstandings from people sneaking peeks behind the screen, pointing to a MM and insisting it is law, and flat out being paranoid. I agreed that your DM sounded like a nerf. All I am saying is that there are, indeed, possible game-legal answers to some of the complaints in your original post, and until you talk to your DM, you won't know which is which. Meanwhile, you know an awful lot about what your DM is running, which tells me you are peeking. You might not want to hear this, but you will save yourself a lot of grief in the future, if you resist the urge to do so. It's like looking in your girlfriend's diary. There are just certain things you don't want to learn out of context. If you have a real gripe, you need to talk to people about it. If they remain jerks, kick 'em.
SneakyPetey 02-13-07, 04:13 PM	...I agreed that your DM sounded like a nerf. All I am saying is that there are, indeed, possible game-legal answers to some of the complaints in your original post... I agree with Bruunwald. Only points 1 and 6 seem to have no real explanation other than the DM is "out to get the players." And it is a phase that many DMs work through. So help your DM out by talking to him, rather than checking up on him and tattling on the message boards. ;) ...It's like looking in your girlfriend's diary. There are just certain things you don't want to learn out of context. Well said! And a much better analogy than my hammer gun comment! :) But the spirit of the two comments is the same. Checking up on a DM like that just seems to be a violation of the unwritten DM-Player contract.