My group is currently playing the Scales of War Campaign setting and we just completed Bordin's Watch, part 2 of the Campaign. The party level is 4 with 5 players and along with the difficulty of dealing with Orcs that spawn on their turn, a BBEG and a Dark Pack Warlock enemy, our DM decided to have us fight an enemy that was clearly way to powerful for the encounter and had items that had gave an unfair advantage against lvl 4 PCs.
A Gnome Artful Dodger Rogue which I can assume is higher than lvl 7 because he used Cloud of Steel against the party and is equipped with Winged Boots (lvl 13), Amulet of Attenuation (lvl 14), Ring of Fireblazing (lvl 14) and an array of items to bring his AC on opportunity attacks to above 30 and a to-hit of +14 without combat advantage.
As a DM I actually did all the calculations and I know for a fact that there is no possible way for an Elite Solo level NPC (created using PC rules) to have an AC against OoA higher than 30, even with Defensive Mobility (which the DM said off-hand it didn't have). Following PC rules, at level 8 with a magic crossbow of appropriate level cannot equal to +14 without combat advantage meaning he had a +3 or +4 crossbow in its possession. And it really ticked me off when he he gave our party only 1750 xp for the enemy when he should have classified the enemy by the average level between magic items it possessed.
I plan to actually ask to see that NPCs character sheet the next time I see him and to go over it myself. I don't want to call the guy a cheater because I know he's not really like that. However, I feel that it is unfair for both myself and the rest of the party if he decides to throw in a magically beefed up NPC against a party that lacks magic items to stand a real chance.
What is your opinion on this?
What is your thoughts on an enemy with so many magic items?
You won, didn't you? get over it. NPCs get to cheat.
Especially now that all of his gear is yours. Kinda hard to see the negative on a victory + magic item haul.
How are other encounters going? Is the party steamrolling through everything in their path or encounters a mixture of challenges? How experienced is the DM? If encounter are going too easily or he is inexperienced then he may be trying to overcompensate in finding a challenge for the group or is misjudging the appropriate challenge level.
My advice, don't focus on the NPC and don't demand to see the stat sheet, at least not right away. Instead, tell him what you thought about the encounter, that you felt the level of challenge of the NPC may have been inappropriate for your party. Express your concern that even though you won the fight, it could have been a disaster and that future encounters of this nature might not go in the party's favor. You might also mention that having defeated this NPC, the party now has items that are inappropriate to your level and, barring him having a plan to steal them from the party, there is a risk of power imbalance in the group.
I plan to actually ask to see that NPCs character sheet the next time I see him and to go over it myself. I don't want to call the guy a cheater because I know he's not really like that. However, I feel that it is unfair for both myself and the rest of the party if he decides to throw in a magically beefed up NPC against a party that lacks magic items to stand a real chance.
So you claim you're not trying to call your DM a cheater - yet you're going to ask to see his notes anyways. Thus merely implying it.....
And what pray tell will you do if:
A) He says no?
B) He says ok & you find your proof of "cheating" or "errors" etc?
Personally I know the response I'd give you. It'd start off with me politely declining.
Things'd escalate. And, in the end, you wouldn't be playing at my table anymore.
You'd still not have seen my notes btw.
As for an NPC with this many magic items? What of it? It was clearly designed to serve some purpose other than simply dying & providing the players with loot. Ooh, I sense a mystery.... Maybe you should just continue playing & find out what that purpose is. You know, rather than calling your DM out & causing actual problems.
a.) loot his dead body
or
b.) realize the plot hook for what it is and track this bugger down
It irks me to no end when players think that just because it's put in front of them, they're supposed to be able to kill it easily. If adventuring was so easy, there wouldn't be any merchants or commoners.
If you're dead, then you might have a minor gripe (although maybe you should have played your character a little less brazenly).
However, a 7th level NPC with 13th and 14th level magic items is absurd and was almost definately something the DM threw in for some bizaare eason only he fathoms. ANd now that he has given such high level magic items to his 4th level party, he will be staring down the barrel of his own handiwork soon and will only be able to equilize things by giving future NPCs even bigger things. Which the PCs will also likely get their hands on and continue the cycle. And thus a Monty Haul campaign is born.
I wouldn't demand to see the sheets next time, it would **** me off if someone did that to me as DM under any circumstances. But I would talk to the DM and tell him that he is going WAY overboard on magic items.
Show
The BBEG (a big Orog with a falchion, right?), the Dark Pact Warlock and the 'respawning' (they just keep entering the room) orcs are all as written.
If the artful dodger rogue was involved in the same fight, he was indeed an addition your DM came up with. (I hope he wasn't in the same fight though, if he was a solo.)
Otherwise, there's a foe a bit earlier on (accompanied by some orcs) that might fit the bill. AC is 20 base, +4 vs OA plus shift as a minor action to get concealment -2 to attack rolls, which already gives an AC of 26. To hit of +12 too, with CA, which he should about always have. 4 lower each time that what you quote, but already close to it.
I think your DM eliminated the backup, advanced him a few levels (3 in fact, making him lvl8, AC29), then added the rogue part (explaining cloud of steel), then turned him into a solo (AC31).
That would also explain his attack bonus (+12+3 level, with CA) even without taking the magic items into account.
I guess the only thing that's off is the magic items - and those should be a boon to you, no? ;)
If the artful dodger rogue was involved in the same fight, he was indeed an addition your DM came up with. (I hope he wasn't in the same fight though, if he was a solo.)
Otherwise, there's a foe a bit earlier on (accompanied by some orcs) that might fit the bill. AC is 20 base, +4 vs OA plus shift as a minor action to get concealment -2 to attack rolls, which already gives an AC of 26. To hit of +12 too, with CA, which he should about always have. 4 lower each time that what you quote, but already close to it.
I think your DM eliminated the backup, advanced him a few levels (3 in fact, making him lvl8, AC29), then added the rogue part (explaining cloud of steel), then turned him into a solo (AC31).
That would also explain his attack bonus (+12+3 level, with CA) even without taking the magic items into account.
I guess the only thing that's off is the magic items - and those should be a boon to you, no? ;)
Seriously, if a battle was over and the NPC was dead and not coming back and someone wanted to see the sheet, I'd hand it to them, as long as I hadn't written any storyline details on his sheet.
I just don't see why someone would be so offended by asking. I mean, if someone was asking because they thought I was cheating, that might annoy me a bit, but if they just casually asked if they could see it, I'd hand it right over. And actually, I have handed whole stacks of notes from a previous adventure over to a player before. He wanted to see how I designed an adventure. Hell if he was going to start running a game, no way am I going to deny him the resource of learning my methods.
Why would you need to be so secretive?
Why would you need to be so secretive?
Assuming the NPC is dead. I wholly agree with you.
In regards to your question, my answer:
Because you're a crappy DM. (not you as in the quoted individual, meaning the general "you")
Wow... are people really that picky about someone seeing the mechanics of a DEAD npc.
Seriously, if a battle was over and the NPC was dead and not coming back and someone wanted to see the sheet, I'd hand it to them, as long as I hadn't written any storyline details on his sheet.
I just don't see why someone would be so offended by asking. I mean, if someone was asking because they thought I was cheating, that might annoy me a bit, but if they just casually asked if they could see it, I'd hand it right over. And actually, I have handed whole stacks of notes from a previous adventure over to a player before. He wanted to see how I designed an adventure. Hell if he was going to start running a game, no way am I going to deny him the resource of learning my methods.
Why would you need to be so secretive?
BEcause in this case it sounds like he would be asking "they thought I was cheating" rather than just casually asking. And that would annoy me, just as it would you.
Wow... are people really that picky about someone seeing the mechanics of a DEAD npc.
Seriously, if a battle was over and the NPC was dead and not coming back and someone wanted to see the sheet, I'd hand it to them, as long as I hadn't written any storyline details on his sheet.
I just don't see why someone would be so offended by asking. I mean, if someone was asking because they thought I was cheating, that might annoy me a bit, but if they just casually asked if they could see it, I'd hand it right over. And actually, I have handed whole stacks of notes from a previous adventure over to a player before. He wanted to see how I designed an adventure. Hell if he was going to start running a game, no way am I going to deny him the resource of learning my methods.
Why would you need to be so secretive?
1) It actually has very little, almost nothing, to do with being secretive. (although if you were to see my notes on x you'd also likely tend to gleen other info you shouldn't be getting {yet}).
2) It has a whole lot to do with the tone of the question.
By being p****ed off at what I threw at you (for whatever reason) & then asking/demanding to see the notes/stats/etc you imply that I've somehow cheated.
Guess what, I'm the DM. I can't "cheat" - because I control the horizontal & vertical here. I make the reality. That's right, I get to decide what I think will be a sutable challenge for you. Thus, if I decide to change something (and most especially in a pre-made adventure wich you've obviously read) I don't need anyone else's approval.
Wich leads to #3....
3) If you don't like how I DM, just quit.
Or step up to the plate & make your own share of errors.
What you don't get to do is backseat DM me.
and then have there monsters act with 100% perfect knowledge of the PCs.
And this is different than the PCs having read the MMs, memorized adventure paths, etc how?
You won, didn't you? get over it. NPCs get to cheat.
We won but the NPC "escaped" which is why I throw the cheating part in. According to our DM the enemy crawled from a prone position his full half-speed, then activated his Winged Boots Daily power to fly to an escape hatch (which was suppose to be used by the PCs to escape boiler water that fills the chamber). Then the NPC opened the hatch and climbed out to escape.
Two move actions to get to the hatch. Minor action to open. He already blew out all his action points so there is no way he should have climbed out in the same round and escaped. My character was right under him when he did so along with three others from the party, all with ranged attacks and we were all next on initiative order.
My advice, don't focus on the NPC and don't demand to see the stat sheet, at least not right away. Instead, tell him what you thought about the encounter, that you felt the level of challenge of the NPC may have been inappropriate for your party. Express your concern that even though you won the fight, it could have been a disaster and that future encounters of this nature might not go in the party's favor. You might also mention that having defeated this NPC, the party now has items that are inappropriate to your level and, barring him having a plan to steal them from the party, there is a risk of power imbalance in the group.
We were almost TPKed in one turn. Does that help?
So you claim you're not trying to call your DM a cheater - yet you're going to ask to see his notes anyways. Thus merely implying it.....
And what pray tell will you do if:
A) He says no?
B) He says ok & you find your proof of "cheating" or "errors" etc?
Personally I know the response I'd give you. It'd start off with me politely declining.
Things'd escalate. And, in the end, you wouldn't be playing at my table anymore.
You'd still not have seen my notes btw.
As for an NPC with this many magic items? What of it? It was clearly designed to serve some purpose other than simply dying & providing the players with loot. Ooh, I sense a mystery.... Maybe you should just continue playing & find out what that purpose is. You know, rather than calling your DM out & causing actual problems.
Refer to above.
Also, the reason why such an NPC is around isn't a mystery. It's actually a reference to "The Gamers" movies and an inside joke from a previous campaign that he decided to escalate into a full blow character. However what we as a party found annoying is that there is no way a lvl 4 Gnome Skulk can become an Artful Dodger Rogue and find such high level items in a span of 2 weeks game time.
To the other issue: DMs have different styles. Some run things straight out of adventures. Some make their own adventures and monsters. Some modify whatever they feel is needed to make things fun on the fly. Some make things up entirely as they go along. Most DMs probably try all, at least once or twice.
Asking to see notes in anything other than the first case seems pointless and possibly detrimental to your future enjoyment of games.
A DM who runs an adventure exactly as written isn't doing his job any better than one who makes up a storyline as he goes along, pulling random monsters from the MM (as long as they sort of fit the story). Different styles.
If all PCs are specifically suited to one thing, you might alter an adventure to either fit or go against their strengths somewhat. If you think a monster's tactics don't make a lick of sense, you can change them. If you want to adapt the adventure to your ongoing campaign, you can swap or change monsters and alter the storyline. Loot is pretty much always DM-determined in 4th even on published adventures.
Modifying an adventure is part of a DM's prerogative of trying to make things fun and interesting. Apparently he failed this time; but it should be a learning experience for everyone rather than a reason to get angry and fight with him.
If he wanted to spite you or your character he could kill him at any time with fudging rolls or deny him any good loot at all by not placing it or allowing it to be purchased. Those would be reasons to take issue.
From what I can tell, this was just a poorly-designed and poorly run encounter that was supposed to make a recurring villain. You just kicked his butt a little too hard and the DM couldn't find a graceful escape I imagine. He's probably as frustrated with the events as you guys are.
(Note: I don't condone artificial recurring villains that are much stronger than PCs but somehow let them live and just escape through sheer DM fiat despite the rules).
We were almost TPKed in one turn. Does that help?
No because it doesn't really address any of the questions I had (experience, habit, player vs. DM).
Maybe he was trying to insert a recurring villain. Maybe he was trying something new and misjudged the power of the NPC. Maybe he wanted to be an a-hole and TPK the party. Asking him to see his NPC stat sheet is the same thing as calling him a cheater.
I still think your best bet is to tell him that the challenge was inappropriate and you didn't like that the fight could have easily killed the party. There are ways to tell someone you are unhappy with an aspect of a game without resorting to fact checking his NPCs and backhandedly calling him a cheater.
I agree with you, the encounter sounds obviously unfair. It's something I have done in the past before I knew better than to pull that kind of crap on players, which is why I wonder about the motivations and experience of your DM. I want to see you resolve this matter with your DM in an agreeable manner. As a DM I know that feedback is helpful and can help with tailoring a game to fit the party as well as help avoid mistakes in the future, but having a player jump on me for trying something that didn't work and all but accusing me of being a cheater isn't exactly going to make me want to listen to that person, regardless if they have a legitimate complaint or not.
If he only took 2 move actions and a minor, then that is perfectly legal. You are allowed to trade your standard for a move, or really any downgrade.
I'm quite aware of the rules in terms of actions and trading down. However, two move actions got him to the escape hatch. One minor action to open. No action points so he stays right there on the ladder with three PCs aiming right for him.
No because it doesn't really address any of the questions I had (experience, habit, player vs. DM).
Maybe he was trying to insert a recurring villain. Maybe he was trying something new and misjudged the power of the NPC. Maybe he wanted to be an a-hole and TPK the party. Asking him to see his NPC stat sheet is the same thing as calling him a cheater.
I still think your best bet is to tell him that the challenge was inappropriate and you didn't like that the fight could have easily killed the party. There are ways to tell someone you are unhappy with an aspect of a game without resorting to fact checking his NPCs and backhandedly calling him a cheater.
I agree with you, the encounter sounds obviously unfair. It's something I have done in the past before I knew better than to pull that kind of crap on players, which is why I wonder about the motivations and experience of your DM. I want to see you resolve this matter with your DM in an agreeable manner. As a DM I know that feedback is helpful and can help with tailoring a game to fit the party as well as help avoid mistakes in the future, but having a player jump on me for trying something that didn't work and all but accusing me of being a cheater isn't exactly going to make me want to listen to that person, regardless if they have a legitimate complaint or not.
I understand quite well what you are trying to get at.
Let me explain a little about my DM that lately I've been getting annoyed with, especially others in our party. He's played D&D and many other RPGs for over 15 years and he's played mostly 3.0-3.5 until 4E came out which he embraced. One thing I like about him is his ability to tell a story and his knack for giving NPCs a life of their own. He's also good at making things up on the fly.
Despite that this is the same DM I had a problem with before. You might remember a few weeks ago I posted a thread about my DM "rolling" dice unfairly which resulted in non-randomized rolls, or rolls that were predictable. Same guy. There are times when he would just completely skip other players in initiative order and say that he didn't when the entire group says he did. No arguments or he would roll to see if it's true or not just to shut us up. Then when our PCs turns come up we sometimes accidently say we are going to attack with a certain at-will, but then realize that we better do something else and he says it's too late. But when he has the enemies do something he didn't or shouldn't do he tries to mulligan. In fact, he did that in the same session three times, both which would of lead to the death of the NPC. Nope, he wasn't having none of it.
I'm fairly certain it was just a panicked move to try to end the situation before you killed the NPC. He shouldn't do that more than once in his career ;)
This was the 3rd time. The last two times were in a previous campaign before the NPC had super items and everyone was lvl 2. However that was involved with skill challenges and hostage situations which we had to let it go due to priorities.
No matter how much you want it, you can't make your storytelling DM change his personality to fit storytelling PLUS accurate rules.
For him to come to that point, it's up to him. Likewise, his attempts to have you ease up (if he's tried) have met in failure.
Come to an agreement that you'll play in his game, if he goes by the rules, or bail.
Those are your choices as I see it, based on what you've shared.
P.S. as a DM, If a player in my game second guessed me as a player, to DM, i.e. demanding to see my DM notes, for the inherent "Accuracy", to 'Catch' Me at 'cheating' I'd fire them from the group, no offense to anyone personally, for being disruptive.
The person in the court only goes into the Judge's chambers when invited. That's why Bailiffs were invented. That's just how I was taught to DM.
Let him run his game, his way, or argue with him, if it gets anywhere, or better yet, bail, because you know you want to, anyway.
Good luck.
I play with friends. These are FRIENDS. Just because I'm the DM doesn't make the game MINE. If they have a problem with something, they bring it up, we work through it like adults. If they really want to see my notes, as long as it doesn't effect something further in the campaign, I would let them see them.
I would then justify anything they didn't like.
This whole attitude of, YOU DON'T LIKE IT HIT THE ROAD, its so adversarial. As the DM, I control the game, but also as the DM, it is my responsibility to make sure the players are happy with the game. It is not my job to tell "My awesome epic story", its my job to help tell "OUR awesome epic story."
If I threw something out, and they have a problem with it, I am failing as a DM, and I want them to tell me, so that I can adjust.
I understand situations where its just too far different, but kicking people from games over minor problems like this just seems kind of egotistical to me.
My group consist of two complete newbies and two experienced players who have not played in a long time, not including myself. When a player ask him a question if they can do this or if this and that is allowed, he says yes. Then when they do it he denies them saying that they can't in a particular situation. He doesn't explain properly the rules to the newer players and the older players (who are rusty in D&D in general) who are still trying to adapt to the new format.
If anyone gets booted it would most likely be our DM. However, that isn't an option I am allowing. If he leaves that's his own decision.
And this is different than the PCs having read the MMs, memorized adventure paths, etc how?
Because DMs seem to think it's wrong to metagame monster stats, but they metagame player's stats all the time and think they are within there rights to do so.
I do not believe that asking for the NPC character sheet will serve any purpose really. You already have proof in front of all players that the DM is being unfair. The skipping of players' turns is so blatant that even he cannot deny.
This DM seems to be able to weave a good story, but does not follow the rules to your liking. I think you really need to speak with the DM and explain to him your concerns that taking away advantages that your group has fairly gain makes the game not fun for you. Let him know that your expectation is that you are unhappy that you feel railroaded in those situations. Also, let him explain why he does that. There may be good reason.
It seems like something needs to change. Perhaps you need to change some your expectations on how a game should be run or the DM should change how he runs the game or a bit of both. Hopefully, you can reach a resolution that everyone can accept. Good luck.
Because DMs seem to think it's wrong to metagame monster stats, but they metagame player's stats all the time and think they are within there rights to do so.
Those DMs are in the wrong.
I can understand the DM trying to keep an NPC alive. If it enhances the game or story, I may just let stuff like that go. If it happens too often, then I would have concerns. It sounds like it is happening too often for your group. Your players through good tactics and/or rolls manage to get into a situation that can potentially kill an NPC. It sounds like the DM bent the rules too often to change outcome of things and it is really getting to annoy you.
I think thats the truth. Dms have to be flexible enough to allow players to come out on top even if it wasn't entirely in the dms concept
I mean, you didn't know for certain how many HP he had left. Had you got one more turn, at best you might have been able to hit him for a good chunk more damage. The GM was in no way obligated to be up-front about how many HP the NPC had left, and could just as easily have let him escape that way.
The difference is that one way is both more dramatic and saves more time, while the other way just makes you feel a little more impotent.
If the DM is generally as good a storyteller as you imply, give him a bit of a break. Not all storylines take off like one expects, and we all have our off days. Maybe he expected you to take the NPC more seriously, or less seriously. Either way he almost certainly did not plan this to be a TPK, more of a warning to your party or something like that. Roll with it, shrug off the one mistake, and go on.
On the other hand, you are having other issues with the DM. I would discuss those with the other players first and make sure they agree. If they do, mail him about it -- that saves him the confrontation and lets you bring it right to his attention. Maybe jokingly do something like get poker chips, and agree that every time a player catches him doing something he'd never let a player do, that player gets a chip, redeemable for one "cheat with dice like the DM".
I'm not quite clear on why the NPC running away when he didn't have quite enough actions to do so was such a problem.
I mean, you didn't know for certain how many HP he had left. Had you got one more turn, at best you might have been able to hit him for a good chunk more damage. The GM was in no way obligated to be up-front about how many HP the NPC had left, and could just as easily have let him escape that way.
The difference is that one way is both more dramatic and saves more time, while the other way just makes you feel a little more impotent.
If the DM is generally as good a storyteller as you imply, give him a bit of a break. Not all storylines take off like one expects, and we all have our off days. Maybe he expected you to take the NPC more seriously, or less seriously. Either way he almost certainly did not plan this to be a TPK, more of a warning to your party or something like that. Roll with it, shrug off the one mistake, and go on.
On the other hand, you are having other issues with the DM. I would discuss those with the other players first and make sure they agree. If they do, mail him about it -- that saves him the confrontation and lets you bring it right to his attention. Maybe jokingly do something like get poker chips, and agree that every time a player catches him doing something he'd never let a player do, that player gets a chip, redeemable for one "cheat with dice like the DM".
Goggles of Aura Sight.
The only reason why I complain about that particular NPC was mostly due to the unfair amount of magic items it had that gave our party a major disadvantage in terms of being able to hit. And when you can TPK an entire party in one turn (which almost came close), as a DM you should understand that maybe this particular character is too powerful for the current party level.
Goggles of Aura Sight.
And when you can TPK an entire party in one turn (which almost came close), as a DM you should understand that maybe this particular character is too powerful for the current party level.
Assuming that trying to fight it was an appropriate response to the encounter.
You can face foes that are way beyond your level with the only tactical decision is to retreat or surrender. Not sure what the DM was trying to accomplish with only a level 7 (assuming). Seems more like the mechanics do cause issue with his stories and he also has problems when things don't go as he "plans".
In cases where the DM is wonky on the rules, I tend to concentrate on roleplay. I get more out of the game that way (unless I'm railroaded).
If this is a issue for you then you vote with your feet. I understand your frustration. A heavy combat game need to have consistent rules. How will you ever pick the right powers and feats if the rules keep changing on you? It pretty much throws the leveling system out the window and you might as well play make believe with free form rules.
Goggles of Aura Sight.
The only reason why I complain about that particular NPC was mostly due to the unfair amount of magic items it had that gave our party a major disadvantage in terms of being able to hit. And when you can TPK an entire party in one turn (which almost came close), as a DM you should understand that maybe this particular character is too powerful for the current party level.
Can you give some context regarding this particular NPC? Do you feel you can take out any NPC you encounter? It is quite possible that you can run into NPC's that are out of your league should you decide to fight him. Not all NPC's are meant to be defeated and looted by the party. Perhaps your DM was trying to portray the fact that he is not to be messed with and for whatever reason, your party did not get the message. If this is the case, then having the NPC run away may be a better alternative than a TPK.
It may also be that the DM has fallen into the trap of trying to model D&D villains on computer game "bosses", who are typically made arbitrarily immune to anything that might actually be effective against them. It's cheesy yet sometimes necessary in a computer game context, but it really isn't something that should be imported into a pen and paper RPG.
If the NPC was simply tough then that would've been one thing, but when the rationale becomes, "He's got all these powerful magical items that protect him from your attacks!" then it starts to look questionable, and it *really* looks questionable if each new attack turns up a new magic item that just happens to protect from it.
That'a exactly my point! At lvl 7-8 this particular NPC has no chance against our party in a solo 5 on 1 (with a few minor enemies), but the addition of magic items giving it high defenses (lowest defense as Will at 22) and daily powers that help in both defense and attacks places this enemy at a difficulty level that should be reserved for when we are lvl 6-7.
Add in respawning Orcs and even I can see that this was too much for us.
Add in respawning Orcs and even I can see that this was too much for us.
But you chased him off with his tails between his legs didn't you? I don't think a bit of chip stacking is that bad when you can still win as a group.
The problem though is I guess your DM is more concerned with telling his story than being the DM for the players. That happens a ridiculous amount.
You can talk to him about his style, or let it slide and he will stay the same way forever until you all or he quits.
Personally speaking the DM can screw around with whatever small rules he wants, it just shouldn't be apparent to the players. If it is plausible that an NPC does something and it all looks legit, and everyone has fun, then players can generally overlook small inconsistencies with the rules. Nobody cares if you bump a creature's AC by 2 points if you describe him as being "heavily armored" or really quick at dodging. It's fairly understood by most players now that NPCs in 4th edition have their own rules.
It's a huge problem though when the DM is doing things in front of you that you all know are not allowed by your own characters (because he randomly tells you you can't do something NPCs can do with no reasons). It's just too blatant to disregard and damages the players' belief in the world. If he could tell his story without it being obvious he was cheating there wouldn't be a problem. He can't manage though, so maybe he should just stick to following the rules entirely and working his story around them like most DMs do most of the time.
Try to not be aggressive about confronting him because he seems like he may panic and get defensive again. Just tell him what your preferences for a game are, that you would rather have the story where all enemies follow the rules just like PCs.
Honestly he may not be cut out to DM, but he has no chance to improve if nobody tells him what's wrong.
I'm posting this up to see what non-biased opinions are from others not involved in my group.
My group is currently playing the Scales of War Campaign setting and we just completed Bordin's Watch, part 2 of the Campaign. The party level is 4 with 5 players and along with the difficulty of dealing with Orcs that spawn on their turn, a BBEG and a Dark Pack Warlock enemy, our DM decided to have us fight an enemy that was clearly way to powerful for the encounter and had items that had gave an unfair advantage against lvl 4 PCs.
A Gnome Artful Dodger Rogue which I can assume is higher than lvl 7 because he used Cloud of Steel against the party and is equipped with Winged Boots (lvl 13), Amulet of Attenuation (lvl 14), Ring of Fireblazing (lvl 14) and an array of items to bring his AC on opportunity attacks to above 30 and a to-hit of +14 without combat advantage.
As a DM I actually did all the calculations and I know for a fact that there is no possible way for an Elite Solo level NPC (created using PC rules) to have an AC against OoA higher than 30, even with Defensive Mobility (which the DM said off-hand it didn't have). Following PC rules, at level 8 with a magic crossbow of appropriate level cannot equal to +14 without combat advantage meaning he had a +3 or +4 crossbow in its possession. And it really ticked me off when he he gave our party only 1750 xp for the enemy when he should have classified the enemy by the average level between magic items it possessed.
I plan to actually ask to see that NPCs character sheet the next time I see him and to go over it myself. I don't want to call the guy a cheater because I know he's not really like that. However, I feel that it is unfair for both myself and the rest of the party if he decides to throw in a magically beefed up NPC against a party that lacks magic items to stand a real chance.
What is your opinion on this?
What is your thoughts on an enemy with so many magic items?
It's a DM's job to challenge the players, which is what your DM did.
Secondly, pitting the PCs agianst dangerous foes isn't cheating. Your DM could have had you face off against an Ancient Red dragon at level 1 and it wouldn't be cheating. It would be stupid, but not cheating.
The DM should not have given the creature those inappropriate magic items - that was bad DMing.
He should have simply modified the creatures stats to what he thought was appropriate and not used magic items to do it (except for those items he thought appropriate for the group).
As for the escape:
First: I am sure he arranged for the escape because he realized he had screwed up and didn't want those items getting into your hands.
Second: Why no action points? If he is a solo, he has at least one action point and can use that for his escape.
I suspect that the DM felt that the original creature was too weak (and it sounds like he was correct) and mistakenly tried to use magic items to beef him up.
Carl
One - A long time ago I had this very same thread virtually, about how DMs CAN CHEAT. The second you put something down stats wise as a DM and start a session, you're agreeing to play by the same rules as the players. That is why you sit down and play a Role Playing Game. Game is a big part of that idea. If you simply don't, you're just Role playing, and as a player I'd sure as hell like to know about that beforehand.
Two - Rule 0 was designed solely as an idea so that way DMs and players are not slaves to the rules and that you can change them. but it does not give you a free ticket to ignore everything that your convenience because you're the DM. as I said above, you generally agree to let the dice fall as they are.
Three- if you do have to cheat, cheat for the PLAYERS. Don't cut down their sense of accomplishment because they actually manage to outsmart you and drop someone critical to the story suddenly, or get the amulet of badassery +3, something for a 12th level character at level 6.
Four - Hope for the best, plan for the worst. I have once lost an NPC to a very silly scythe wielding character taking a free shot at someone far superior. two 20's and a natural 1, and many bluff, intimidate and diplomacy checks later, the Party found themselves a dead planned BBEG, a tremendous amount of wealth, and a firmly dedicated army now terrified of them that their great leader was cut down in a single blow
If nobody thinks it was a fun encounter, then maybe he will change his ways.
But if the encounter was fun, then that is the entire point of D&D anyway right?
That'a exactly my point! At lvl 7-8 this particular NPC has no chance against our party in a solo 5 on 1 (with a few minor enemies), but the addition of magic items giving it high defenses (lowest defense as Will at 22) and daily powers that help in both defense and attacks places this enemy at a difficulty level that should be reserved for when we are lvl 6-7.
Add in respawning Orcs and even I can see that this was too much for us.
Hibiki54, have you considered that you are probably ruining this game for you DM?
It seems like all you care about is that the DM gives you encounters that your party can beat. You don't care about where the encounters are leading, you don't care about why he may have just handed you these awesome items (probably because he wanted ot let you play with cool toys in one specific upcoming ecnounter), you don't care why he felt like he needed this guy to get away. All you care about is whether or not the encounter was tactically fair to the party.
Try putting yourself in the DM's shoes, exactly why do you think that'd be fun for him? I mean he's building this adventure for you guys to run, but all that you care about is, well, you. Are you having fun, can your PC handle the encounter, our villains are too tough... You don't seem to give a rat's *** about the story that the DM's working hard on.
Man, as a DM, I'll tell you that is horrible to deal with. When a player thinks that the only thing that should matter in D&D is that he's having fun in every single encounter, it's like DMing in hell. And it's not fair to the DM.
The whole "DM runs the world" thing gets twisted into a power trip whenever it comes up, but that's a misunderstanding. He signed up to run the world, you signed up to run a heroic main character in it. You getting this upset about an encounter that's building to the next phase in the story is like him getting upset at you picking a good paragon path.
Now if every session is completely unfun, yeah, the DM has to make some adjustments or leave the group. But to me this sounds like you really just want him to be there to ref the game and let the party look cool. And I don't see how you can imagine that's a fun role for the DM to play. If you were the DM, how would you find that fun?
But when he has the enemies do something he didn't or shouldn't do he tries to mulligan. In fact, he did that in the same session three times, both which would of lead to the death of the NPC. Nope, he wasn't having none of it.
I'm actually in favor of DM mulligans. You, as a player, have one character to run (and which you are very familiar with), and four or so friends who can give you advice. The DM has five or so monsters to run, and he probably isn't as familiar with them.
Now, I understand that a DM has a tremendous responsibility to run a game and involve everyone, but if you're playing -with- your players you should be trying to obey the same rules and agreements. Now maybe his DM -did- tell all his players at the beginning of the campaign that he'd be bending rules to make the game more immersive or interesting, but that doesn't sound like the case.
It sounds like this is just another story of how the Player feels his DM isn't playing by the same rules as everyone else, and he never saw fit to tell them that.
Asking to see a DM's notes on an NPC, as long as they don't have information for the campaign, shouldn't be a bad thing. -Unless- the DM really -was- cheating. In that case the DM should be telling his Players that he might cheat from time to time, but it'll be in the interest of telling a good story.
I don't think the DM did this here. I think from the sounds of things he had creative ideas and made an NPC he wanted to achieve something, then bended the rules so it would work. This isn't something all DM's should do unless they do so with the knowledge that it's what their players signed up for.
I know I'd be angry if I was a Player and my DM constantly cheated to make his NPC's live or his monsters redo actions yet never let me do these things. Especially if the DM never told me it would be that kind of game.
The D&D rulebooks exist for a reason, they aren't just there as "guidelines" unless everyone agrees they are.
Rule 0 or no, the DM only has so much leeway to change things, and he should do so to make the game more fun for his players. If he's cheating for his NPC's but not letting his Player's do equally awesome things well then...
It sounds like he's failing them as a DM.