Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 nightmare_scenario Jul 01, 2009 23:23:30	My DM is making a lot of mistakes. He gets rules wrong, a lot. Ok, everyone makes mistakes, I can deal. He fixes it when I show him the book. I feel he competes with his players and looks for excuses to harm our characters instead of leading us through the plot. This is my opinion. Today, we're playing a boxed campaing (Keep on the shadowfell, I think) and freed an NPC (Devlin, Daevlin, or something similar) after killing his captors in a giant pit. We found a mirror and some loot, and the NPC wanted the mirror. I let him use it, and since I'm playing a forceful, ex-military, 10 charisma warlord, I start asking questions, which he refuses to answer. When I continue to talk to my party about when to NOT just trust whoever we find tied up in the woods with relics that may be campaign-lynchpins, the NPC steps back, holding the magic mirror, and vanishes into thin air. We called it a night there. The DM then says to me "Thanks to your lack of diplomacy, you cost your party a lot of sidequest EXP and a magic item you would have gotten if you'd been nicer." I did not roll a single dice during the conversation to make a diplomacy or intimidate check. I simply refused to outright trust a new NPC with an item we knew to be a relic. I feel that I've been penalized for roleplaying a forceful character. I suspect a vengeful DM. I'm considering leaving the campaign after this and other problems we've had. Does anyone else see a problem with removing major campaign items and sabatoging plotlines because a rough and tumble adventurer is rude and suspicious during a 45 second conversation with a brand new NPC? Please respond even if you agree with me, I'm looking for ammo.
#2 darquing Jul 01, 2009 23:30:02	I don't think you were. I probably would've left long before you, though. Have you considered talking to him? Or to the other players to get their take on the issue. If you can get the other players to back you up, you're more likely to get him to see your side of the issue. So far he doesn't sound like a real mature person, but if he's smart he'll change his attitude.
#3 humanmind Jul 01, 2009 23:40:33	OK now. As a DM, Taking away plots/items due to the actions of players is something a good DM will do. However, the lack of skill checks, and failures of said checks, and still removing the item, is something to be asking questions about. It sounds like your DM is inexperanced. How did you react to this situation? Did you talk to him? I would voice my opinion to him and make sure he is aware of this problem. If he refuses to budge, then yes I would leave. Hope this helps
#4 nightmare_scenario Jul 02, 2009 1:01:25	OK now. As a DM, Taking away plots/items due to the actions of players is something a good DM will do. However, the lack of skill checks, and failures of said checks, and still removing the item, is something to be asking questions about. It sounds like your DM is inexperanced. How did you react to this situation? Did you talk to him? I would voice my opinion to him and make sure he is aware of this problem. If he refuses to budge, then yes I would leave. Hope this helps That's exactly my problem. I have no problem with failing a challenge and not being rewarded for failure. I can understand that if I act stupid and/or roll badly I may not be able to get all the goodies available and I may even die occasionally. What I'm not ok with is the no-warning, "I don't like your attitude" punishment and then rubbing my face in it like it's my fault. My DM has played in a campaign I ran (D20 Modern) for about a year. He then played in a 4e campaign for about 3 months that I ran. I believe I treated him fairly throughout. He is definitely inexperienced, though I believe he's "RPGA certified" or some such and that gives him a feeling of empowerment. I'm fairly certain I'm going to not rejoin his games when the current campaigns end. Time to get some players I like and do my own thing...
#5 nightmare_scenario Jul 02, 2009 1:05:31	I don't think you were. I probably would've left long before you, though. Have you considered talking to him? Or to the other players to get their take on the issue. If you can get the other players to back you up, you're more likely to get him to see your side of the issue. So far he doesn't sound like a real mature person, but if he's smart he'll change his attitude. Talking with him might work or might not. I'm hardly going to change his entire outlook on the game with a single conversation. One of the players is his girlfriend, another is his best friend/home business partner, and another is the girlfriend's ex. Our fifth player is fairly neutral. I doubt I'll get much support from the group whether I'm right or not; I am cantankerous and tend to start arguments IRL. (t's almost always because I'm right, it just takes other people several months to realize it.)
#6 humanmind Jul 02, 2009 2:06:51	It does make it a bit hard when its friends. If your not having fun then just leave.
#7 subsistcyber Jul 02, 2009 3:07:43	Wow, his girlfriend and her ex-boyfriend are playing together. Wow... I think he may have issues beyond DnD. Bottom Line - You're not enjoying yourself and you don't agree with the DM's style. He has control over the game because he's a vital link to the players, as they're all connected to him in some way. You really only have two options that are viable. 1 - Stick around and bare with his DMing; 2 - Leave and hope to find another group. I joined a group in a gaming store when I was going to college. This was the most immature group I had ever played in. The first night I played with them, my character was captured by Cleric's of Sune, raped, and made to watch my animal companion raped. Pretty terrible gaming if you ask me. Thing is; I didn't wanna take the time to find a more mature group, so I kept playing. All ya gotta do is make that choice.
#8 slobo777a Jul 02, 2009 5:27:25	Probably this is a two-way inexperience issue. If you are playing in a campaign where this is the first time you've had to make simple judgement calls on an NPC, then the DM and you simply had different expectations and didn't communicate them well. It's quite fair to penalise a character if they are rude or aggressive towards an otherwise helpful NPC. There is no need for skill rolls, if the character's intention is very clear. PCs also tend to forget when they end up discussing whether or not to strip someone of their possessions, that they are actually having that discussion in front of their subject. This is often no different to the goblins playing dice to see who gets their gold, in the NPC's eyes. Usually you should get some kind of in-game warning about your character's behaviour though. And possibly some clues as to the trustworthiness of NPCs. Neither are necessary. In my mind, an NPC refusing to answer questions is generally the wrong approach, unless you were being very aggressive (I was not there of course!). A trustworthy NPC would tell you what they thought they could, and might cover up specific issues with a "sorry, I cannot tell you that, but I can take you to X who might know". An untrustworthy NPC would have a few lies ready. Clamming up is generally the response of prisoners to captors and torturers . . . as long as you were not obviously in either role, you should of got a two-way conversation. Of course if the NPC asks you a question in a quid-pro-quo way, and you don't respond, or carry on asking questions, then given the party's obvious strength, you have taken the role as "captors". So, if you were acting like a captor (debating whether or not to "let them go"), then no response from the NPC is OK. If you were not, then you could and should have expected a response. The meta-gaming on both sides (DM telling you about what you've missed out of in game terms, and your comments of whether or not an item was major "campaign lynchpin" with the implication that the players "obtain" it) is not great.
#9 humanmind Jul 02, 2009 6:30:15	He is definitely inexperienced, though I believe he's "RPGA certified" or some such and that gives him a feeling of empowerment. I've played with DMs like that befor. Feeling proud of your achievments is fine, but useing that as an excuse for bullying your players, No. If that is really his attitude toward gaming then I would defiently leave.
#10 DevoDog Jul 02, 2009 6:32:38	I let him use it, and since I'm playing a forceful, ex-military, 10 charisma warlord, I start asking questions, which he refuses to answer. When I continue to talk to my party about when to NOT just trust whoever we find tied up in the woods with relics that may be campaign-lynchpins, the NPC steps back, holding the magic mirror, and vanishes into thin air. We called it a night there. The DM then says to me "Thanks to your lack of diplomacy, you cost your party a lot of sidequest EXP and a magic item you would have gotten if you'd been nicer." We are only hearing one side of the story....but based on the post, I have a few points to make. 1. A CHA 10 is average. It seems like the NPC's flat-out refusal to cooperate was unjustified. Also, didn't your group already take out the NPC's captors? 2. The DMs comment to you afterwards was quite harsh. I hope he didn't say that around the other players. But that's a comment he never should have made. 3. He didn't give the other players a chance to step in. He based the reaction solely on one player.
#11 garisdacar Jul 02, 2009 6:41:23	making you miss out on a side quest is bad at DMing. rubbing your face in it is just bad at life.
#12 corvusdrake Jul 02, 2009 7:08:09	making you miss out on a side quest is bad at DMing. rubbing your face in it is just bad at life. No kidding. Do the one thing that your DM would hate more than you leaving. Stay and set the entire party up to die horribly before they ever reach the portions of the game that the DM spent hours of his time preparing. It's like letting someone show you their painting, then urinating on it.
#13 nightmare_scenario Jul 02, 2009 9:04:30	Probably this is a two-way inexperience issue. If you are playing in a campaign where this is the first time you've had to make simple judgement calls on an NPC, then the DM and you simply had different expectations and didn't communicate them well. I'm going to respond for the record: I am not an inexperienced player. It's quite fair to penalise a character if they are rude or aggressive towards an otherwise helpful NPC. There is no need for skill rolls, if the character's intention is very clear. PCs also tend to forget when they end up discussing whether or not to strip someone of their possessions, that they are actually having that discussion in front of their subject. This is often no different to the goblins playing dice to see who gets their gold, in the NPC's eyes. I had not made any threats, we had just saved the NPC's life, and had no conversation about his freedom or possessions. The conversation with him lasted less than two minutes, during which we discussed the Relic and asked the NPC what he was doing there. That's it. Usually you should get some kind of in-game warning about your character's behaviour though. And possibly some clues as to the trustworthiness of NPCs. Neither are necessary. In my mind, an NPC refusing to answer questions is generally the wrong approach, unless you were being very aggressive (I was not there of course!). A trustworthy NPC would tell you what they thought they could, and might cover up specific issues with a "sorry, I cannot tell you that, but I can take you to X who might know". An untrustworthy NPC would have a few lies ready. Clamming up is generally the response of prisoners to captors and torturers . . . as long as you were not obviously in either role, you should of got a two-way conversation. I asked after cutting his bonds "What are you interested in this area for?" The NPC's exact words were "I don't want to tell you that." Of course if the NPC asks you a question in a quid-pro-quo way, and you don't respond, or carry on asking questions, then given the party's obvious strength, you have taken the role as "captors". So, if you were acting like a captor (debating whether or not to "let them go"), then no response from the NPC is OK. He did not offer anything, he simply asked if he could see the relic, said "I'm on your side!" and then demanded to be allowed to keep the relic. We did not discuss whether to keep him captive. If you were not, then you could and should have expected a response. The meta-gaming on both sides (DM telling you about what you've missed out of in game terms, and your comments of whether or not an item was major "campaign lynchpin" with the implication that the players "obtain" it) is not great. I knew the item was a campaign lynchpin because of in-character discoveries. Something along the lines of a secret message we intercepted regarding using a mirror (the relic) to release Orcus into the world. It was not metagame knowledge. My character came to the reasonable conclusion that securing items related to this event (so he could keep them from being used to, ya know, destroy the country) would be wise. I did not metagame.
#14 nightmare_scenario Jul 02, 2009 9:12:25	We are only hearing one side of the story....but based on the post, I have a few points to make. 1. A CHA 10 is average. It seems like the NPC's flat-out refusal to cooperate was unjustified. Also, didn't your group already take out the NPC's captors? You're reading my mind. 2. The DMs comment to you afterwards was quite harsh. I hope he didn't say that around the other players. But that's a comment he never should have made. He said it with the entire group standing there. 3. He didn't give the other players a chance to step in. He based the reaction solely on one player. That's the weird part. One of the party members (the dm's girlfriend) threatened to shoot me with her bow if I tried to stop the NPC from taking the relic. The best friend/business partner told me to essentially let the NPC do whatever he wanted. It's almost like I missed something, which is why I brought it up here. It never got to blows because the NPC vanished before I even finished trying to figure out what was going on.
#15 Johnathan_Vagabond Jul 02, 2009 9:32:16	My DM is making a lot of mistakes. He gets rules wrong, a lot. Ok, everyone makes mistakes, I can deal. He fixes it when I show him the book. This bit isn't really relevant to your situation. Today, we're playing a boxed campaing (Keep on the shadowfell, I think) and freed an NPC (Devlin, Daevlin, or something similar) after killing his captors in a giant pit. We found a mirror and some loot, and the NPC wanted the mirror. I let him use it, and since I'm playing a forceful, ex-military, 10 charisma warlord, I start asking questions, which he refuses to answer. When I continue to talk to my party about when to NOT just trust whoever we find tied up in the woods with relics that may be campaign-lynchpins, the NPC steps back, holding the magic mirror, and vanishes into thin air. Well, first of all, if you don't up and trust the guy why did you hand the campaign lynchpin to him before you started asking questions? Always bargain from a position of power. We called it a night there. The DM then says to me "Thanks to your lack of diplomacy, you cost your party a lot of sidequest EXP and a magic item you would have gotten if you'd been nicer." The DM shouldn't have said this, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, it's metagame information. The PCs don't need to know why something happened from a D&D point of view. I once had a DM tell us everything we missed once we finished a dungeon, and it was maddening. Secondly, if the PCs didn't know why the DM made the man with the mirror disappear, it would allow them to create their own reasoning for his departure, which is good. It creates an very believable environment, rather than telling you that you no longer need to care about that NPC (because in the DM's mind, the NPCs involvement appears to have ended at the sidequest). Thirdly, it's rude. This sort of scolding is inappropriate. Although I think that you've got to live with the forceful PC's nature and how others would react to it, all it implies is that you're not playing the character he wants you to play, or is punishing the party for a character you've chosen to roleplay. I did not roll a single dice during the conversation to make a diplomacy or intimidate check. I simply refused to outright trust a new NPC with an item we knew to be a relic. I, among others (but not everyone), think that situations can be resolved without the rolling of dice for skill checks. After all, you weren't going out of your way to be polite (diplomacy), decieve (bluff), or frighten (intimidate) the NPC into telling you. If the NPC felt that his acquisition of the mirror was more important than garnering your trust, and he felt that you might try to take it away if you knew his motives, then your aggressive and forceful manner may have convinced the NPC to flee rather than risk his goals. I feel that I've been penalized for roleplaying a forceful character. I suspect a vengeful DM. I'm considering leaving the campaign after this and other problems we've had. I think you have. However, there will always be penalties for playing a character with a certain personality, just as there are penalties for being a real life person with a certain personality. So being penalized for roleplaying a forceful character isn't neccesarily a bad thing. After all, if your forceful then people with confrontation anxiety are going to naturally avoid you (and therefor, be less helpful and amenable) as would people with inferiority complexes and dominance issues. If the NPC was like this, it would be easy to see him fleeing when you didn't hold your tongue (as you roleplayed quite well). Does anyone else see a problem with removing major campaign items and sabatoging plotlines because a rough and tumble adventurer is rude and suspicious during a 45 second conversation with a brand new NPC? Please respond even if you agree with me, I'm looking for ammo. If it really is a major campaign item, then it's going to come back up, isn't it. If you can complete the campaign without it, then it's not a major campaign item. So: Situation A: The Mirror is a major campaign item, it is central and is or nearly is mandatory for a positive resolution to the plot. Because you cannot be expected to manage a positive resolution without the Mirror, the DM will have to introduce a method by which you can regain control of the Mirror. Thus the DM has really only removed an easy method by which you gain control of the Mirror. The next attempt will be difficult or different from the first. Situation A-1: The DM is a jerk, and screws over the entire campaign by never giving you a chance to reclaim the Mirror. Situation B: The Mirror is not a major campaign item, it is not central to nor is is mandatory or nearly mandatory for a positive resolution to the plot. Because it is unnecessary for a positive resolution, or because the positive resolution can be achieved in other equally difficult manners, the removal of the Mirror does not affect your party in any negative way save the loss of a side-quest. You need not worry, because it only seems that way at the moment. _________________________________________________________________________________________________ EDIT (for currentness): Let the girlfriend shoot you with a bow. Ask her character why it's so important that he get the mirror. Maybe you did miss something and everyone's kind of irritated with you for messing up something that would otherwise have been pretty obvious.
#16 FlashbackJon Jul 02, 2009 9:47:45	EDIT (for currentness): Let the girlfriend shoot you with a bow. Ask her character why it's so important that he get the mirror. Agreed. It sounds like the other players were in the metagaming "an NPC said it so we should do it" mode, rather than thinking rationally like their characters should - but maybe not. Maybe you did actually miss something.
#17 slobo777a Jul 02, 2009 11:16:12	I'm going to respond for the record: I am not an inexperienced player. Difficult to assess for me from your post, sorry I got it wrong. :embarrass I had not made any threats, we had just saved the NPC's life, and had no conversation about his freedom or possessions. The conversation with him lasted less than two minutes, during which we discussed the Relic and asked the NPC what he was doing there. That's it I asked after cutting his bonds "What are you interested in this area for?" The NPC's exact words were "I don't want to tell you that.". . . . I hope after some kind of introduction? Non-verbal cues are so important, that a full dialog would still only give half a clue as to what went wrong. However, "I don't want to tell you that." doesn't strike me as an endearing or trustful response. I must admit, I'd immediately think "a) Criminal, and not a bright one, OR b) Arrogant, why does he think he can backtalk me, he's the one that was hog-tied!" -- Reading from the other posts above, if you are new to this group (i.e. played only a few session), the DM taking you to task out-of-character like that is very poor. You are better off not playing with this group.
#18 lordmarek Jul 02, 2009 11:42:37	Talking with him might work or might not. I'm hardly going to change his entire outlook on the game with a single conversation. One of the players is his girlfriend, another is his best friend/home business partner, and another is the girlfriend's ex. Our fifth player is fairly neutral. I doubt I'll get much support from the group whether I'm right or not; I am cantankerous and tend to start arguments IRL. (t's almost always because I'm right, it just takes other people several months to realize it.) He gets rules wrong, a lot. Ok, everyone makes mistakes, I can deal. He fixes it when I show him the book. We called it a night there. The DM then says to me "Thanks to your lack of diplomacy, you cost your party a lot of sidequest EXP and a magic item you would have gotten if you'd been nicer." Judging from all this, I'm coming to two conclusions: One, your DM is inexperienced, rather clumsy, and is letting RL situations spill over into gaming. Two, him and the others of the group more than likely think you're an ass. This seems to be a clumsy attempt to punish you for being overbearing and pushy. The girlfriend was probably in on it, thus her reaction. As for advice, my guess would be to move on. You both sound as if you would be better off.
#19 zackblack Jul 02, 2009 11:55:48	I am cantankerous and tend to start arguments IRL. (t's almost always because I'm right, it just takes other people several months to realize it.) It sounds to me like you are a pompous ass and the DM doesn't like you very much. Ether deal or leave.
#20 mobar2008 Jul 02, 2009 13:19:13	Just a couple of questions as I REALLY don't want to spoil things for you cause I'm really confused. Have you finished Keep on The Shadowfell yet? If so I've got some comments on how he was running the encounter. (I'm VERY familar with it as I've taken Douven and turned him into a major NPC in my own game). If not are you planning on finishing it? As I said, I don't want to spoil anything with any comments I might make.
#21 nightmare_scenario Jul 02, 2009 18:40:26	I don't think I'm a pompous ass, but I'm hardly in a position to judge ;). When I say I'm almost always right, it's because I keep track. When I say it takes people months to realize it, it's because old friends have literally told me "You were right, and thanks for being there 18 months ago when I was being a complete jerk." More than once recently. Maybe I'm having a good run. I talked to the DM today. He told me that if I'm pushy, arrogant, or rude to NPC's I can't expect their help or cooperation. This is apparently regardless of circumstance, like freeing someone from people that were going to kill him. He also passive-aggressively told me I'm great at roleplaying and I did exactly what I should have, and oh yeah, that I rock when playing a character who is "an arrogant ass". This is a guy who's played in my campaigns for well over a year. However, "I don't want to tell you that." doesn't strike me as an endearing or trustful response. I must admit, I'd immediately think "a) Criminal, and not a bright one, OR b) Arrogant, why does he think he can backtalk me, he's the one that was hog-tied!" QFT. Meh, I'll check next time we play and if it still doesn't look right to me, I'm just going to call it and move on. And if I run into Douven again, I'll show him what happens to people who steal things I've won in battle. Or maybe I'll die because he's a high-level NPC who somehow got captured by a couple of human rabble and a gnome rogue. We'll see. Feel free to tell me, Mobar, I'm really not all that invested into the plotline anymore. Difficult to assess for me from your post, sorry I got it wrong. Twenty lashes and a keel-hauling, then we'll call you even :P
#22 mobar2008 Jul 02, 2009 19:09:37	Ok, I don't know what you're DM is smokeing but he made ALOT of changes apparently just to rub your nose in it, imo. The mirror, just a mirror, nothing magical about it at all. The sidequest he was refering to is called the missing mentor, basically Douven has taught at least one member of the party and he's gone missing, or the party had been commisioned to find him by his wife. The NPC has NOTHING to hide from the PC's ( again this is based on the adventure as written) and is grateful for being rescued and would give you a +1 amulet of Health as a thank you. Your DM has really changed things, I don't deny him the right TO change things, but I am having trouble to see what the point is of the changes are, at least at this point.
#23 navar100 Jul 02, 2009 19:32:53	I'm not saying the OP is one, but I am getting the impression the DM (or more likely the DM's girlfriend playing the girlfriend card) think's the OP is a Real Jerk and wanted to punish you for it. By purposely having and putting a spotlight on a negative consequence of the OP's roleplay, the DM (girlfriend) is telling the OP to change how he's playing. I wouldn't quit over this one incident. The question you need to ask yourself is "Am I having fun playing this game?" For as long as you can honestly answer "yes", keep playing.
#24 erendor Jul 02, 2009 19:59:55	Ok, I don't know what you're DM is smokeing but he made ALOT of changes apparently just to rub your nose in it, imo. The mirror, just a mirror, nothing magical about it at all. The sidequest he was refering to is called the missing mentor, basically Douven has taught at least one member of the party and he's gone missing, or the party had been commisioned to find him by his wife. The NPC has NOTHING to hide from the PC's ( again this is based on the adventure as written) and is grateful for being rescued and would give you a +1 amulet of Health as a thank you. Your DM has really changed things, I don't deny him the right TO change things, but I am having trouble to see what the point is of the changes are, at least at this point. Well, since the OP has given permission for the secrets to be divulged, I'll go ahead and add to this the following: The mirror is unmagical and unimportant (or nonexistent) in the H1 adventure and the official adaptions, but it is worth a good 500 gold. If the mirror is, as your DM says, a sidequest-related magic item, that's entirely his own invention. The missing mentor thing isn't a sidequest so much as a plot hook - a reason to go to Winterhaven in the first place. You'd only get the XP for it if you'd gone there to look for Douven. Actually, now that I think about it, this could be the cause of the confusion. A 'sidequest and magic item' could very well refer to the experience from the missing mentor plot hook + the amulet of health +1. The DM might not have been referring to the mirror at all (I know you called it a 'magic mirror', but did he?). The NPC has a reason to want the mirror (although not in such a strange way), since he's an archaeologist looking for relics in the site. He lets you have it, in the module as written, but I could see him asking for it as something to make up for his imprisonment for so long. Not quite demanding it and then teleporting away, though.
#25 1red13 Jul 02, 2009 21:02:38	Seems most conflict stems from personal friction between yourself and at least the other dm if not with more than just the dm in the group. It does make me think that the op may be a little provocative if his thoughts run along the lines that he is most often right and others just need time to realize he was right. If the dm is making mistakes and the op is pointing out errors and is a self esteemed expert it likely is rubbing the dm wrong and quite likely not just the dm. It seems the dm has subsequently layed out his opinion and i'm betting everyone involved would be much better served if they went their own ways.
#26 navar100 Jul 02, 2009 23:42:42	Wait a minute. This is 4E, right? How did the NPC just "vanish into thin air"?
#27 CCS Jul 03, 2009 13:48:54	Does anyone else see a problem with removing major campaign items and sabatoging plotlines because a rough and tumble adventurer is rude and suspicious during a 45 second conversation with a brand new NPC? Please respond even if you agree with me, I'm looking for ammo. Sorry, you won't get any ammo from me. So the NPC took a disliking to you sans any type of dice roll, so what? Continue playing your character as you see fit. And as for all those "lost" XPs? Don't worry, you'll get them anyways. Maybe not through whatever encounters the NPC & his mirror would have led to, but you'll never be able to point to your character sheet & show any deficiency. 4th lv or whatever still equels ___xp regardless of when/how they were earned. Being told that you've lost out on an important item? Again, oh well. You didn't have it before.... Will it be needed later? I don't know. But if it is a crucial item & the DM wants the plot to turn out however written then you'll probably see it (or a replacement Mcguffin) at some point. If failure based on lack of said item IS an option? Well then, I guess you'll just have to come to terms with the fact that your actions (wether or not tied to a dice roll) really do influance things.
#28 CCS Jul 03, 2009 13:56:26	Wow, his girlfriend and her ex-boyfriend are playing together. Wow... I think he may have issues beyond DnD. Believe it or not, people CAN remain friends with ex's.
#29 CCS Jul 03, 2009 14:10:57	I'm going to respond for the record: I am not an inexperienced player. So you say. But you sure come off sounding like one. And you you're whinning about how an inexperienced DM handles things doesn't help. Given that you've Dm'd before, you'd think you'd realize nobody starts off as a great DM.....
#30 AaronOfBarbaria Jul 03, 2009 15:01:10	you'd think you'd realize nobody starts off as a great DM..... ...well, yeah... except that AaronOfBarbaria guy ;) seriously - ask any of the 12 people that were involved with the absolute first session of D&D I ever ran back in Prineville, Oregon 13 years ago... almost everyone played a Dwarf, but all had a good time - despite me having owned the AD&D 2nd Edition PHB for less than 48 hours, and having only just arrived at home with the DMG, MM, and some dice 2 hours before the of the players were portraying their characters chatting on a porch while smoking from their pipes. Like with all things - natural talent does exist.
#31 drackthor Jul 03, 2009 15:17:51	...well, yeah... except that AaronOfBarbaria guy ;) seriously - ask any of the 12 people that were involved with the absolute first session of D&D I ever ran back in Prineville, Oregon 13 years ago... almost everyone played a Dwarf, but all had a good time - despite me having owned the AD&D 2nd Edition PHB for less than 48 hours, and having only just arrived at home with the DMG, MM, and some dice 2 hours before the of the players were portraying their characters chatting on a porch while smoking from their pipes. Like with all things - natural talent does exist. Y'know how, even if you make a TV smaller, you can still watch it? If you make text smaller, it can still hold just as much ego in it, it just won't have as much leg room. :P But seriously, very simple problem, very simple solution. Talk to the DM, express your feelings and any problems you had with the adventure and have with his style of DMing at present, and if he is willing to work on it, stick around and see if things get better. If he is unwilling to change or doesn't actually change, tell your friends that you enjoy playing with them, but that you're not enjoying the DM's campaign, and leave.
#32 tequila_sunrise Jul 03, 2009 16:31:46	It's almost like I missed something, which is why I brought it up here. Were you present and attentive during the first game session? I ask because the module suggests that the DM use Douven (that's the NPC's name) as the adventure's hook. Assuming your DM is running KotS as written, Douven is your party's mentor, who you all came to Winterhaven to look for. So if you rescued Douven and then acted suspiciously toward him, your DM could easily have seen it as a bad case of metagaming, and then had Douven act appropriately. Or, your DM might be an immature prig.
#33 warlawk Jul 03, 2009 17:56:19	Ok, first thing I want to say is that from the information provided it seems like your DM is taking his personal irritations with you and bringing them in game. Bad DMing. That said, you come off as an arrogant jackass. You know what, I'm right most of the time too. I inherited my mothers near photographic memory, learn quickly and rarely forget details. However... I don't keep track of being right, I don't rub my friends noses in it and act superior about it. A small dose of humility and tact goes a very long way. Perhaps if you stop treating people like you are superior you'll stop getting that kind of backlash. Just keep in mind I do not know any of you and can only base this on the way you post and the information you have put forth here. Not trying to insult you, just calling it as I see it.
#34 alric Jul 04, 2009 0:56:21	Like the others said, he is just screwing with you. The campaign as written, has the mirror as a fancy 200 gold mirror, with no magical properties at all. And the reward you get from the guy is like +1 amulet of protection or something.
#35 AaronOfBarbaria Jul 04, 2009 7:10:47	Y'know how, even if you make a TV smaller, you can still watch it? If you make text smaller, it can still hold just as much ego in it, it just won't have as much leg room. :P I know... I just couldn't really help myself - and the smaller text was just to make it (a tiny bit) less likely that people read it as being pompous considering that smaller text is (occasional) recieved as if it were the internet equivalent of muttering under your breath. I have no problems admitting that my ego (where D&D is concerned) is extraordinarily inflamed... but I (for better or worse) feel justified due to player feedback I have received consistently over the years. So... *tips his beer* here's to hoping I haven't only DMed for liars.
#36 erendor Jul 04, 2009 16:10:16	Were you present and attentive during the first game session? I ask because the module suggests that the DM use Douven (that's the NPC's name) as the adventure's hook. Assuming your DM is running KotS as written, Douven is your party's mentor, who you all came to Winterhaven to look for. So if you rescued Douven and then acted suspiciously toward him, your DM could easily have seen it as a bad case of metagaming, and then had Douven act appropriately. Or, your DM might be an immature prig. The 'mentor' adventure hook is one of several, the others don't even require you to go to the burial site ever. Wait a minute. This is 4E, right? How did the NPC just "vanish into thin air"? 4E monsters have whatever abilities the DM gives them (although 'designs them with' is more fair on the players, so you're not pulling 'vanishment' out of thin air), they're not restricted to what is possible via regular classes as in 3e. This can include 'plot' abilities that do things that aren't technically rules-possible, but it's still kinda unfair if the only purpose is to evade them automatically, with no chance for them to fight back.
#37 navar100 Jul 04, 2009 21:24:30	The 'mentor' adventure hook is one of several, the others don't even require you to go to the burial site ever. 4E monsters have whatever abilities the DM gives them (although 'designs them with' is more fair on the players, so you're not pulling 'vanishment' out of thin air), they're not restricted to what is possible via regular classes as in 3e. This can include 'plot' abilities that do things that aren't technically rules-possible, but it's still kinda unfair if the only purpose is to evade them automatically, with no chance for them to fight back. In other words, 4E returns to the days of DM cheating to screw over players because they can do whatever the heck they want without regard to any rules whatsoever, and the players can't say feces because the DM is god so suck it up you whiny baby. No wonder I don't like 4E.
#38 green_girl Jul 04, 2009 22:20:57	In other words, 4E returns to the days of DM cheating to screw over players because they can do whatever the heck they want without regard to any rules whatsoever, and the players can't say feces because the DM is god so suck it up you whiny baby. No wonder I don't like 4E. But DM cheating is not just inherent in 4e. I'm playing 3.5 and I can still make NPCs vanish like crazy: he suddenly has an item that can make him vanish, he is a wizard who can cast a quickened invisibility, whatever. Even if he's just a commoner I can make him into something far less common if I want it, when I want it. The DMs can still do what they want to do. The question is "should they do it?".
#39 corvusdrake Jul 05, 2009 10:41:58	In other words, 4E returns to the days of DM cheating to screw over players because they can do whatever the heck they want without regard to any rules whatsoever, and the players can't say feces because the DM is god so suck it up you whiny baby. No wonder I don't like 4E. No, this has always been a problem. Where your issue comes in is that 4e takes away the players' ability to retaliate, such as acts of great evil in response to acts of great patheticness.
#40 nightmare_scenario Jul 05, 2009 12:32:54	So you say. But you sure come off sounding like one. And you you're whinning about how an inexperienced DM handles things doesn't help. Given that you've Dm'd before, you'd think you'd realize nobody starts off as a great DM..... It wasn't my intent to whine, only to get some contrasting opinions. The comment about the DM being less than extremely competant was for background into the situation. If I came across as whiney, please accept my apologies. I thought the mirror was a major campaign item. We had reason to believe a mirror was important. Or maybe I misread something. Who knows. My problem is that the DM would rather us metagame than play in character and rewards people for playing in a way I consider "wrong." My second problem is him publicly pointing out that the character I'd chosen to play was hurting the party because he (the DM) didn't like him (the PC). You all seem to agree that causing an NPC with rewards to vanish into thin air in response to my rudeness was overdoing it and seems to point toward spitefulness or bad DMing. The fact that this thread seems to be mutating into a discussion about DM railroading and cheating might be evidence of that. In short, I was rude to a suspicious character I'd just met, so he: 1) Deprived the party of XP. 2) Deprived the party of a magic amulet. 3) Modified an NPC to punish me. 4) Pointed out my "mistake" to the party and used metagame information to do so.
#41 nightmare_scenario Jul 05, 2009 12:34:53	Y'know how, even if you make a TV smaller, you can still watch it? If you make text smaller, it can still hold just as much ego in it, it just won't have as much leg room. :P But seriously, very simple problem, very simple solution. Talk to the DM, express your feelings and any problems you had with the adventure and have with his style of DMing at present, and if he is willing to work on it, stick around and see if things get better. If he is unwilling to change or doesn't actually change, tell your friends that you enjoy playing with them, but that you're not enjoying the DM's campaign, and leave. I think I'll do that. I'll see him tommorrow and we'll chat. Thanks for the perspective.
#42 navar100 Jul 05, 2009 19:52:52	A DM can always "cheat", true, but game design in 3E has it less so because the bad guys follow roughly the same rules. NPCs with classes use the same feats and classes as PCs, just different choices and paths taken. In theory it would be possible for a PC to have made his character that NPC in game mechanics. Even without the same exact build, it is possible for a PC to "vanish in thin air" just like a DM would have an NPC do. With the possible exception of certain things being NPC-only (such as Evil stuff), as long as a PC could have done it as an NPC did it, it's fair and not a cheat. Monsters always use a different build method, but even they have set rules that mimic PCs. When a classed-bad guy does something by DM fiat that doesn't follow established rules and no PC could possibly do it in any build, then the DM is doing "Rocks fall, everyone dies" on a lesser scale. This was common in 2E and bugged me to no end. 3E discouraged it by it not even being necessary. The comeback to a power PC is "If the PCs can do it, so can the NPCs." The reverse is also true. If an NPC does it, it is possible for a PC to do it, even if no one in the party can currently do it or will do it in the future. As long as it's possible, that's enough for the DM to be playing fair. DMs have to follow rules too.