Adventures in annoyance and frustration land!

[Parakirby]

Alt. title: Why you don't send out rust monsters.

So I'm playing an intelligent, lawful good half-orc warrior, who despite being strong and having a common charisma, is actually a noble (technically) on the human side, but was swept under the rug, basically. I started off in bad leather armor, and since my dex bonus was nothing to write home about (A whopping -1 from my 9 in the stat) I instantly had a geas to go buy better armor.

Talking about it over and over again was probably my first mistake.

We soon get chain shirts and begin adventuring. I go from level 1 to 3 before we finally get to a town, where I purchase some banded armor. My teammates are earning money like crazy, but because of my alignment, I can't do the shady, stupid things they do.

Being the only good-aligned party member is awesome. (The rest were neutral and 'neutral')

Anyway, I finally get my armor. I lock my gauntlets (A crit fail, in our game, meant dropping your weapon. Two ones means it breaks.) and spike my armor before we head out on adventure!

The fifth fight we face takes place in a roundish cave with a wooden cage in the center. We hear something scurrying that doesn't respond to speech and I suggest setting the cage on fire, but the rest of the party says 'no, what if it's sentient but mute?'

So the party cleric (I **** you not) goes in front of the cage to see what's inside. (It was blocked off on all but one side)

The large beetle bursts from the cage and attacks her, while me and the other fighter do what comes naturally. I roll a 1 to hit and then a 3 to confirm, and grow a puzzled look when I see a case of the smiling DM. The beetle bites me, I take two and think nothing of it.

Then the other fighter rolls a 20.
And then again another 20 to confirm.

Instead of doing max damage, his bastard sword disintegrates.

I run like hell but NOPE my armor disintegrates after a certain amount of time, or something.

The other fighter throws his D20 against his desk so hard we couldn't find it for about an hour. I'm just annoyed, but I don't have a hissy fit. (For comparison's sake, while he specialized in the bastard sword, he had an axe with the same stats, just with two less to hit. The bastard sword in question costs about 50g. My armor, on the other hand, cost about 550g, +50 for spikes and ~+20 for the locked gauntlets)

I figure I'd bitch and moan here about my own personal games here rather than to my DM.

Another **** scenario is that because I'm good and the rest are neutral they tend to steal **** before I get my fair share of the loot. So far EVERYONE but myself in the party has gotten a magical item of protection. (The party consisting of a psionic, a cleric, a rogue, a mage (Who rolled a new monk with a vow of poverty. We didn't get her stuff.) and a second fighter.

I just needed to vent. Thanks for reading.

[Tempest Fennac]

Why did the other guy's sword disintigrate? Also, why did you suggest setting the cage on fire? (I can see the rest of the party's point about how a mute person could have been inside it).

[Artanis]

I figure I'd bitch and moan here about my own personal games here rather than to my DM.
If you don't bring it up with the DM, it's just going to keep happening.



Another **** scenario is that because I'm good and the rest are neutral they tend to steal **** before I get my fair share of the loot. So far EVERYONE but myself in the party has gotten a magical item of protection. (The party consisting of a psionic, a cleric, a rogue, a mage (Who rolled a new monk with a vow of poverty. We didn't get her stuff.) and a second fighter.

I just needed to vent. Thanks for reading.
Yet another reason to talk to the DM. If you aren't getting your fair share of the loot, then you need to talk to the DM and the other players and tell them that being screwed like that is bringing the game down for you.

This goes double if you're a Paladin: if stealing "offends your moral code", then by RAW you are not allowed to associate with them. You even risk Falling if you stay with them anyways.

[Greengiant]

Alt. title: Why you don't send out rust monsters.

Hmmm, an idea springs to mind, tugged forth from my head by a stroke of my marvelous goatee. Sounds like you just got the motivation for an alignment shift, or! a character inspiration based on alignment. Think to yourself, how would your character feel, surrounded by non-lawful, mostly non-good characters, getting whatever they want, whenever they want, not caring about the cost.

Maybe your character feels this might be a better way to handle things, or maybe he now is compelled to find ways a good character can out-do those miscreants.

You could, for example: Your half-orc gets so pissed at always following the rules, and then getting his hard-earned armor rusted off his body, he gets pissed, goes to the armorsmith, and threatens death upon him unless he can get new armor, or, he goes to the local armory and steals some.

That's just the chaotic way to do it, I'd say.

Or, you can get the mayor to give you money on loan or something, resting on your lawful good alignment, you could even say that you'll get a paladin to detect alignment on you, to be sure. Then, buy another set of armor, maybe even better armor, and eventually repay him, slaying the rust monster for profit, or other things.

Good has benefits, but they're not as easy to get, and usually take longer.

That's my take on the situation, I hope it helped.

[Kol Korran]

i just wanted to send my sympathies. **** happens, sometime because of DMs, and rust monsters are amongst the most annoying and game stopping monsters to throw out there.

as to the players and the looting, just talk to them, and make them understand it hurts your fun of the game. they should find some out game and in game solution to the problem. it shouldn't just continue like this.

again, my sympathies.
Kol

[Tengu_temp]

So you have a jerk DM who loves screwing his players over and jerk party members who steal your share of loot and use their characters' alignment as an excuse?
Talk with them. Seriously. And, depending on the results, you might consider looking for another group.

[Starbuck_II]

Anyway, I finally get my armor. I lock my gauntlets (A crit fail, in our game, meant dropping your weapon. Two ones means it breaks.) and spike my armor before we head out on adventure!

And this is why I hate that houserule: it makes little sense.

Think about Fighters at higher levels they get multiple attacks: they have a higher chance of breaking their weapon every time by then.



Then the other fighter rolls a 20.
And then again another 20 to confirm.

Wait, shouldn't it have been both?

Creature is killed but sword desolves?.


I run like hell but NOPE my armor disintegrates after a certain amount of time, or something.

You should have beaten it to death with your fists: it can't dissolve that and it isn't that strong.

It'd be epic looking: you take all your anger, all your frustration, all your love, Shining Finger!

[Farlion]

Short answer: Find yourself a new DM or start DMing yourself.

Long answer:

Your DM seems to feel childish joy whend harassing players who take roleplaying serious and don't mind having a disadvantage due to alignment/codex etc. Your DM still has to learn that the game only makes fun, if the DM and the characters work together to make the game fun. If your DM enjoys destroying hard earned items without giving replacement, he should rethink if DMing is really what he likes doing. I found that it's far more appealing to gameplay to reward good RP than to punish people that take it seriously. This does not mean, my players do not sweat blood time after time, but the destruction of player equipment always has a reason other than simple sadism.

Cheers,
Farlion

[Assassin89]

Then the other fighter rolls a 20.
And then again another 20 to confirm.

Instead of doing max damage, his bastard sword disintegrates.



Rust Monsters do not work that way. As the monster manual entry clearly states, a rust monster must make a successful touch attack in order to cause an object to rust.

[Vexxation]

You should have beaten it to death with your fists: it can't dissolve that and it isn't that strong.

It'd be epic looking: you take all your anger, all your frustration, all your love, Shining Finger!

Not only would it be epic, but you never know: Maybe the RP and awesome would net some XP to put you a bit ahead. Then as soon as you get more loot/level/whatever, buy Bluesteel armor to make sure it never happens again.

[Calinero]

I've never fought a rust monster, and from the sound of it, I never want to...I would definitely have a talk with the rest of the party about some rules for looting.

[chiasaur11]

What everyone else said.

You have a group that fails to understand one of the basic rules of adventuring (If Problem use fire). If they don't shape up, well, you're all gonna die, and you die worst.

[Kylarra]

Rust Monsters do not work that way. As the monster manual entry clearly states, a rust monster must make a successful touch attack in order to cause an object to rust.
Nah. The sword was validly gone (armor not so much), but it should've killed the little buggger.


A metal weapon that deals damage to a rust monster corrodes immediately. Wooden, stone, and other nonmetallic weapons are unaffected. emphasis mine.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/rustMonster.htm

[Parakirby]

Why did the other guy's sword disintigrate? Also, why did you suggest setting the cage on fire? (I can see the rest of the party's point about how a mute person could have been inside it).

I dunno, actually, that's kinda bothering me. I think the DM thought he had some sort of aura of rustification. Or something.


If you aren't getting your fair share of the loot, then you need to talk to the DM and the other players and tell them that being screwed like that is bringing the game down for you.

This goes double if you're a Paladin: if stealing "offends your moral code", then by RAW you are not allowed to associate with them. You even risk Falling if you stay with them anyways.

It's not really the DM's fault - It's the other player's. (Players'?) They go off to steal and whatnot on their own side adventures.

One such example was that our guide died of a poison the healer forgot to cure. We couldn't decide on the way to bury him (Since we'd seen wendigos, which are basically men who'd been turned into cannibals) way up in the rocky mountains. Dragging him back down was out of the picture, so we decide funeral pyre would be best. I go with the now good-aligned monk to go get wood, even though I say it'd give away our position.

Aaand they loot the body while we're away and find an amulet and ring, each one enchanted with protection.

Then they behead the corpse and throw it off a cliff.


You should have beaten it to death with your fists: it can't dissolve that and it isn't that strong.

It'd be epic looking: you take all your anger, all your frustration, all your love, Shining Finger!

I'd tried cool moves before and they hadn't ended well. It's about a 50/50 chance he'll let it happen. For example, I've punted a tiny enemy. Strength 18, the thing goes flying away. Another example was I tried to climb an undead dire wolf and stab at it from it's back. I fail, and it gets an AOO.


Not only would it be epic, but you never know: Maybe the RP and awesome would net some XP to put you a bit ahead. Then as soon as you get more loot/level/whatever, buy Bluesteel armor to make sure it never happens again.

As far as I can tell, we don't get any RP XP.


What everyone else said.

You have a group that fails to understand one of the basic rules of adventuring (If Problem use fire). If they don't shape up, well, you're all gonna die, and you die worst.

Oh yeah, I've been telling the entire group to buy seemingly useless items. I actually used a grappling hook to tug an archer off a cliff. THAT was pretty awesome.

This group is comprised of my friends, and calling bull**** and stopping would be kinda lame of me... I'd prefer not to.

[Tiki Snakes]

There's only one thing for it. Keep quiet, smile, nod, and take advice from the most evil of character optimising boards to make your unasuming rp heavy half orc a combat monster of the ilk that makes grown deities cry.

(Preferably as fairly as possible, with no controversial stuff or items, so no shenanigans can be called.)

[Person_Man]

There's a cheap magic item in the Complete Adventurer called the Amulet of Aberrant Empathy. It let's you use Handle Animal in place of Diplomacy to influence the attitude of aberrations with a low Int. I think your PC should be motivated to go out and buy one. Why fight a Rust Monster, when you can make him your friend and ride him as a mount!



Rust Monsters do not work that way. As the monster manual entry clearly states, a rust monster must make a successful touch attack in order to cause an object to rust.

Maybe it's a Rust Monster that took a Vow of Peace? That would make weapons break against him.

[Katrascythe]

My sympathies... having all of your stuff dissolve really blows. The one and only time I had to deal with a rust monster I was a wizard with nothing metal on me. There were several rust monsters in that fight, we killed all but one, and they other one became tame. I wanted to take it with us but the fighter and paladin had some objections...

[Yakk]

Look: in D&D, you cannot 'beat the DM'. The DM can beat you.

If you play the game as a tactical 'beat the DM' game, the DM can cheat.

---

If other players are making their characters do things like "decapitate the fallen guide and throw the corpse over the cliff", have an in-player discussion with both them and the GM. In real-life, that kind of behaviour would lead your character to leaving the party, and wouldn't promote party harmony.

Similarly, your character has to be able to bend to the group's needs. You need to help other party members _just because they are members of your party_.

There is a game convention that 'your player party are allies'. In order for this to happen in-character, the players of those characters should _work at making it happen_.

You can approach this with a bit of player detachment from your character. Your character, a paladin, is willing to have bad things happen. He is willing to help out others who don't help him. Your character's gold pieces isn't your score, or even what equipment your paladin has: it is how much _good_ your paladin can try to do is your score.

When your paladin loses equipment, view it as a challenge to doing more good.

And ask if the padding under your armor can count as padded armor. :-)

It is a different approach to the problem.

[Eldariel]

Look: in D&D, you cannot 'beat the DM'. The DM can beat you.

If you play the game as a tactical 'beat the DM' game, the DM can cheat.

Disclaimer: What follows is purely theoretical and should not be attempted or endorsed in any D&D game ever.
Now, this is not technically true. A fight between DM and a character can be won. Yes, your DM is omnipotent and can cheat, but he does not have infinite skill and insight to implement that power. I've played a lot of rigged Starcraft UMS maps and won because my opponent just didn't have the skill to use his infinite money/abilities in a way that would allow him to stop himself from dying. Same can be applied to D&D. In other words, it's possible to play him into pulling punches and win within the rules of the game as long as you do so discreetly and have good enough Diplomacy/Charisma IRL.

The trick is, of course, to con him into allowing you to ascend into Pun-Punhood - it's possible as long as you go the slow way and don't involve Pazuzu (which would probably ring the alarm bells). Once you reach that point, it's completely impossible for him to kill you, including saying that "you lose your powers" because you can come up with the ability "you're immune to losing your powers" (and you can give yourself the ability to take infinite actions of any type whenever) and so on - basically, you can match anything he does in-game with an in-game effect that means it doesn't affect you. At that point it become a duel of imagination and provided you're more imaginative than your DM, you can defeat him by simply becoming the sole entity in the campaign world.

[Olo Demonsbane]

Disclaimer: What follows is purely theoretical and should not be attempted or endorsed in any D&D game ever.

Oh, man, Ive done this with out even creating pun-pun. Of course, my DM isn't a total jerk and neither am I, so...

I created a necromancer character, same level as the other guys. DM gets annoyed at my circle magic cheese and sends Saz Tham after me. ...He was at least 20 levels higher than me and immune to my most powerful spells aside. Epic duel ensures, after which my victorious character agrees to step aside and let my minion-ish character play.

@OP: Here's my solution: take levels in the Greyguard prestige class. Then, whenever your fellow players try to steal/whatever, beat them up and take their money. Tell them that they're lucky you are in a good mood :smallcool:

[Yakk]

That (you can beat the DM) presumes the DM is using a set of consistent rules you can rules-lawyer around. That isn't a safe assumption.

By the social contract, you can get up and leave -- and the DM can set the rules by fiat.

"No, it doesn't work" or "your trick stops working" is a valid 'move' by the DM. As is you getting up and leaving.

[ocato]

That sucks, I too have had the immense displeasure of being the only good guy in a group where everyone (DM included) seems to be pro-evil.

Also, this reminds me of a funny story. I was playing in a 2 PC game (this is pretty much my first year or two of D&D experience. We didn't have fancy 'groups' full of 'people'. We had a DM and two PCs) and we were in a sewer. I was a Wizard and my friend was a Cleric with a dabble of Paladin. He was always going on about how nearly impossible it was for him to get killed and how strong and powerful he was with his big thick armor, his awesome shield, and his big strong sword (he was pretty cocky, he often called for me to shoot area spells at the back of his head in order to clear out monsters).

So, Holy McHubris and I were searching this sewer, and we find a few skeletons and a makeshift stone door. The skeleton's journal explains how to operate the door and that it was constructed haphazardly to contain "the beast". Best we could tell, the door was a round chunk of stone that could be pushed/pulled along a groove to the side of the door. Apparently the people who made it had exceptional stone working skills and ample time to work with, despite their hastily written "oh god here it comes" journal entry.

So the Clericadin shoves this hunk of stone to the side, lifts his sword... and then grabs me by the collar. He gives me the moon-eyed stare of a crazy person and thrusts me into the room, shutting the door behind me. I am told that I can hear "It's all you buddy!" followed by hushed sobs coming from his side of the door.

You can probably guess what was in the room.

[Starbuck_II]

That sucks, I too have had the immense displeasure of being the only good guy in a group where everyone (DM included) seems to be pro-evil.

Also, this reminds me of a funny story. I was playing in a 2 PC game (this is pretty much my first year or two of D&D experience. We didn't have fancy 'groups' full of 'people'. We had a DM and two PCs) and we were in a sewer. I was a Wizard and my friend was a Cleric with a dabble of Paladin. He was always going on about how nearly impossible it was for him to get killed and how strong and powerful he was with his big thick armor, his awesome shield, and his big strong sword (he was pretty cocky, he often called for me to shoot area spells at the back of his head in order to clear out monsters).

So, Holy McHubris and I were searching this sewer, and we find a few skeletons and a makeshift stone door. The skeleton's journal explains how to operate the door and that it was constructed haphazardly to contain "the beast". Best we could tell, the door was a round chunk of stone that could be pushed/pulled along a groove to the side of the door. Apparently the people who made it had exceptional stone working skills and ample time to work with, despite their hastily written "oh god here it comes" journal entry.

So the Clericadin shoves this hunk of stone to the side, lifts his sword... and then grabs me by the collar. He gives me the moon-eyed stare of a crazy person and thrusts me into the room, shutting the door behind me. I am told that I can hear "It's all you buddy!" followed by hushed sobs coming from his side of the door.

You can probably guess what was in the room.

Nothing but hundreds of rubies and gold piles? (anticlimatic I know)

[Rhiannon87]

@OP: Here's my solution: take levels in the Greyguard prestige class. Then, whenever your fellow players try to steal/whatever, beat them up and take their money. Tell them that they're lucky you are in a good mood :smallcool:

Amen. This actually could make a lot of sense for a character, too. You're a righteous paladin surrounded by people with no moral compass, you're trying to do your best and get nothing for it... you decide the best way to do good is to bend the rules a bit. You get to rough up evildoers (which may or may not include your party at times) in the name of goodness and justice.

The pre-reqs are easy enough... you've already got 2 as a pally (must be LG and have lay on hands ability). You need 8 ranks in knowledge (religion) and 4 in sense motive, and you're all set. It's page 40 of Complete Scoundrel. Check it out.

[chiasaur11]

Seven hundred and sixty one armless and legless corpses?

[Parakirby]

Um... He's a level 3 fighter, not a paladin?

Also, I lost the 'lawful' alignment by starting ONE bar fight. (Low wisdom; the character wanted to go talk to some elves (I forget why) and a local got in his way and pretty much said no. ...To a large, muscular half-orc. I push him out of the way to continue my business aaand bar fight. To this day they won't drop that.) I still play him as fairly lawful good, however.

[Glyde]

I don't think that qualifies as falling from Lawful...

The problem here is that your DM is a maniac :\

[Eldariel]

That (you can beat the DM) presumes the DM is using a set of consistent rules you can rules-lawyer around. That isn't a safe assumption.

By the social contract, you can get up and leave -- and the DM can set the rules by fiat.

"No, it doesn't work" or "your trick stops working" is a valid 'move' by the DM. As is you getting up and leaving.

Meh, it presumes that he doesn't realize what you just did - once it's done, it's too late to go back and once you have the power to do whatever you want in game, there's nothing he can do provided that you keep using those infinite powers to circumvent everything he says. He can parch his throat, he can never cover every one of the infinite options in existence. :P

[Rhiannon87]

Um... He's a level 3 fighter, not a paladin?

Also, I lost the 'lawful' alignment by starting ONE bar fight. (Low wisdom; the character wanted to go talk to some elves (I forget why) and a local got in his way and pretty much said no. ...To a large, muscular half-orc. I push him out of the way to continue my business aaand bar fight. To this day they won't drop that.) I still play him as fairly lawful good, however.

... My bad. Totally could've sworn I read pally somewhere in the first post. :smalleek:

And yeah, I'm starting to get the sense that you've got, no offense to your friend, a rather bad DM. One non-lawful action doesn't drop you from LG. Plus I have some rather serious problems with a DM unilaterally declaring a PC's alignment shift. And if your DM isn't working to give you some opportunities to make up the difference in loot between yourself and your less-than-good party members, that's more or less punishing you for playing someone ethical. You really should have a talk with your DM about some of this stuff, it seems pretty unreasonable and un-fun to me.

[Gamebird]

The problem is that you expect the game world to conform to your expectations of good and proper gaming. It's not going to, because the DM is running the game, not you. Look at the other players and what they're doing. Think about what they're doing that's getting rewarded. If you want the rewards the other players are getting, then act in a way that will gain those rewards.

Your moral code is ridiculous because obviously it is not a code that "works" in that game world. It's like being egalitarian in a world where the DM has decreed that the lower classes really are worthless scum and no amount of helping them out ever turns out well. In such a case, no degree of taking the high road will make the lower classes better. Instead, you must change your character so his worldview and morals match that of the DM's world.

If you can handle it, have your character begin acting like the other PCs (and any successful NPCs the DM has illustrated). You're in a group. Act like a member of the group and stop pretending you're better than the rest of them. Get down in the mud with them and start grabbing for that gold (or whatever else seems valuable).

Or find a new group.

[Tengu_temp]

The problem is that you expect the game world to conform to your expectations of good and proper gaming. It's not going to, because the DM is running the game, not you. Look at the other players and what they're doing. Think about what they're doing that's getting rewarded. If you want the rewards the other players are getting, then act in a way that will gain those rewards.

Your moral code is ridiculous because obviously it is not a code that "works" in that game world. It's like being egalitarian in a world where the DM has decreed that the lower classes really are worthless scum and no amount of helping them out ever turns out well. In such a case, no degree of taking the high road will make the lower classes better. Instead, you must change your character so his worldview and morals match that of the DM's world.

If you can handle it, have your character begin acting like the other PCs (and any successful NPCs the DM has illustrated). You're in a group. Act like a member of the group and stop pretending you're better than the rest of them. Get down in the mud with them and start grabbing for that gold (or whatever else seems valuable).

Or find a new group.

Actually, this doesn't seem to be the case at all - from my perspective, it's not that the DM wants to run a gritty and cynical campaign, it's just that he enjoys screwing his players over - note that his rust monster antics frustrated everyone involved (on top of the fact that RUST MONSTERS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY). And similarily, the other characters use their characters' alignments as an excuse to act like d*cks and steal loot from each other.

[KillianHawkeye]

RUST MONSTERS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY

Rust Monsters totally work that way.


Rust (Ex)
A rust monster that makes a successful touch attack with its antennae causes the target metal to corrode, falling to pieces and becoming useless immediately. The touch can destroy up to a 10-foot cube of metal instantly. Magic armor and weapons, and other magic items made of metal, must succeed on a DC 17 Reflex save or be dissolved. The save DC is Constitution-based and includes a +4 racial bonus.

A metal weapon that deals damage to a rust monster corrodes immediately. Wooden, stone, and other nonmetallic weapons are unaffected.

So, the OP missed his attack. Then on the Rust Monster's turn, it bit the OP. The Rust Monster's bite attack is a secondary natural attack, which means he only does it after his primary attack (rusting antennae attack) during a full-attack action. The OPs metal armor rusts. Then Player 2 gets a critical hit on the Rust Monster with his metal bastard sword, which also rusts.

So basically, the Rust Monster should have taken damage, but it didn't necessarily die. (We don't know how much damage the crit actually dealt.) Note that double natural 20s = instant death is a variant rule that may not have been in play. And unless the armor and sword were magical (according to the given prices, they weren't), they don't get a save to avoid the rusting.

[OneFamiliarFace]

Or, you can get the mayor to give you money on loan or something, resting on your lawful good alignment, you could even say that you'll get a paladin to detect alignment on you, to be sure. Then, buy another set of armor, maybe even better armor, and eventually repay him, slaying the rust monster for profit, or other things.

Good has benefits, but they're not as easy to get, and usually take longer.

This one is probably the best solution I've seen for keeping your character happy while appeasing the other players. Unless the DM is purposely trying to screw you over, then using your honor and honesty to gain the favor of a patron is not out of the question. It would also allow you to prove yourself as lawful.

If you don't mind approaching them directly, then just flat-out telling your DM that this would help you narrow the treasure gap could work. But if you are opposed to open conversation (which is problematic in a group of friends, though I can understand it, having been there myself), then you can still try it out in-character to see if good ol' fashion honesty and good feelings can win the day. If not, then you will have to do as another poster noted and concede that this world is not one which your character can operate as a fully functional hero. Either find a way for a heroic sacrifice (maybe inspiring some altruism in your comrades) or just go corrupt.

Still, you can always fight the good fight for us good characters everywhere and show all the Unaligned, Neutral, Chaotic Stupid, and Evil characters out there that we're tenacious enough to stick to our guns, despite their being non-magical and easy targets for rust monsters.

[Kylarra]

So, the OP missed his attack. Then on the Rust Monster's turn, it bit the OP. The Rust Monster's bite attack is a secondary natural attack, which means he only does it after his primary attack (rusting antennae attack) during a full-attack action. The OPs metal armor rusts. Then Player 2 gets a critical hit on the Rust Monster with his metal bastard sword, which also rusts.

So basically, the Rust Monster should have taken damage, but it didn't necessarily die. (We don't know how much damage the crit actually dealt.) Note that double natural 20s = instant death is a variant rule that may not have been in play. And unless the armor and sword were magical (according to the given prices, they weren't), they don't get a save to avoid the rusting.Given the fact that rust monster actually hit with its bite attack (-2 to hit vs AC 15 is only 15% whereas the base +3 to hit gives him 45%) and no mention was made of an antennae attack in the OP (followed by the character running the hell away after damage wasn't dealt by the crit), I'm willing to wager that in all probability, the DM made no mention of hitting with an antennae attack in game, and thus only made a bite attack. An easy assumption to make given that the DM has already shown unfamiliarity with the Rust Monster's capabilities (see: sword rusting w/out damage).

Now, it's entirely possible that the OP is leaving that decidedly important fact unmentioned, but given the facts presented:

a) The sword was correctly destroyed (but should've dealt damage).
b) The armor was incorrectly destroyed (a successful touch attack is needed with the antennae, one that is absurdly easy to make +3 vs AC 9)
c) The DM is a jerk. Rust monsters are the big "screw you" to parties. :smallwink:


Amusing corollary, a properly played rust monster would've nuked the armor as soon as it got within scent range (90'), and made short work of the armor long before all this shenanigans began (extrapolation based on the fact that the rust monster was able to burst out of its cage and attack the cleric as soon as she got near it.

[KillianHawkeye]

I just assumed that the DM failed to mention the antennae attack or that he deemed that the character didn't notice it. It basically happens at about the same time as the bite, after all. Since the stat block doesn't list a seperate entry for the RM's bite attack, only a bite following an antennae, it's reasonable to assume that the antennae attack did happen.

And I guess the OP did say that the RM didn't take any damage from the bastard sword. Missed that. So I guess you are right about that one.

Maybe the DM decided to change how rust monsters work in his game? It is, after all, his game. I agree that he was kinda being a jerk, though.

[Starbuck_II]

I just assumed that the DM failed to mention the antennae attack or that he deemed that the character didn't notice it. It basically happens at about the same time as the bite, after all. Since the stat block doesn't list a seperate entry for the RM's bite attack, only a bite following an antennae, it's reasonable to assume that the antennae attack did happen.

And I guess the OP did say that the RM didn't take any damage from the bastard sword. Missed that. So I guess you are right about that one.

Maybe the DM decided to change how rust monsters work in his game? It is, after all, his game. I agree that he was kinda being a jerk, though.

That should increase CR by alot if it is now immune to weapon attacks.

[nysisobli]

i would recommend finding a new dm, he seems to favor hack and slash and evil antics rather then traditional role playing, he also seems like hes just picking on the odd man out, if this was going to be a campagin where lg was punishable he should have let you know.

[Yakk]

You could also accept "being good will make the game harder", and play on hard mode.

Ie, even if the world punishes good behaviour, it doesn't mean you cannot be good. Accept that your character is screwed by the world. Try anyhow, even if your actions are doomed.

This is not an easy path, and could easily be non-fun.

Meh, it presumes that he doesn't realize what you just did - once it's done, it's too late to go back and once you have the power to do whatever you want in game, there's nothing he can do provided that you keep using those infinite powers to circumvent everything he says. He can parch his throat, he can never cover every one of the infinite options in existence. :P
No. You say "I do X" and the DM says "It doesn't work". You are once again assuming the rules of the world are fixed and fair -- the DM can simply veto your action. You do not have 'infinite powers' -- you have exactly the powers the DM says you do.

That is how an RPG works. Most DMs have a world that is somewhat consistent, or can be argued into allowing actions that are consistent with the game rules: but this isn't a requirement. The DM is, in essence, the judge of the game.

Give it a try: let's pretend you are pun-pun in a game. I'll pretend to be DM.

I now state your powers don't work. Your character is now a level 1 half-orc fallen paladin. By fiat.

Sure, it isn't a reasonable action for me to take as DM: but I'm the one who determines the rules of the reality of the game we are playing. You have the power to walk away from the game the DM is running. Playing "fight the DM" when the DM is willing and able to cheat doesn't work in-game. You can pull off a "metagame" conflict with the DM (based on the real world).

This is why "power tripping" is one of the classic problems you can have with a DM.

[OneFamiliarFace]

That is how an RPG works. Most DMs have a world that is somewhat consistent, or can be argued into allowing actions that are consistent with the game rules: but this isn't a requirement. The DM is, in essence, the judge of the game.

Of course it is a requirement. Being the judge does not give the DM carte blanche to use DM fiat or make up rules as he goes. A judge in a court can influence the way a trial goes, but he must still follow the basic laws of society and precedents that he and other judges (and courts) have set. Likewise, a basketball referee can favor one player or team, but she cannot outright decide who wins a game, especially not in keeping with basic morals.

I don't have my old rule books with me (2e and 3e), but I remember Rule 0 as not being a power granted to the DM alone, but to the entire group. Likewise, the 4e PHB defines the DM's role as judge to be no more than deciding "how to apply the rules and adjuticate the story." It also frequently encourages saying, "yes," to your players as often as possible.

What you are saying is tantamount to a group sitting down to play Risk, and then the owner of the game stands up and says that Black (his color) gains twice the armies per turn, and that if other people disagree, then he won't let them use his Risk game. While this is perfectly legal for him to do, no one would consider it healthy, reasonable, or justified behavior.

Yes, D&D is an RPG, but it is still one with a fairly rigid ruleset (which, I believe, is why it tends to be more popular than many other RPGs which leave much more rules design up to the GM). It would seem to me that, by the points I have stated above, a DM who acts above the law (as you said) is no longer a DM at all, since she isn't playing the game that gave her that title. At the very, very least, the GM of any game has to abide by the rules that she set up herself at the beginning of the game, or I would ask, "Are we even playing a game at all?"

[Tengu_temp]

Rust Monsters totally work that way.

So, the OP missed his attack. Then on the Rust Monster's turn, it bit the OP. The Rust Monster's bite attack is a secondary natural attack, which means he only does it after his primary attack (rusting antennae attack) during a full-attack action. The OPs metal armor rusts. Then Player 2 gets a critical hit on the Rust Monster with his metal bastard sword, which also rusts.

So basically, the Rust Monster should have taken damage, but it didn't necessarily die. (We don't know how much damage the crit actually dealt.) Note that double natural 20s = instant death is a variant rule that may not have been in play. And unless the armor and sword were magical (according to the given prices, they weren't), they don't get a save to avoid the rusting.

I meant this:


I run like hell but NOPE my armor disintegrates after a certain amount of time, or something.

How can you explain how this happened? For me, it seems that the DM had a wrong impression and thought that all metal around a rust monster gets destroyed without it doing anything, by some sort of aura.

[Starbuck_II]

I meant this:

How can you explain how this happened? For me, it seems that the DM had a wrong impression and thought that all metal around a rust monster gets destroyed without it doing anything, by some sort of aura.

Maybe it was an Epic destiny of the Rust Monster. (Granted they are too low level to fight an Epic Rust Monster)

[Om]

Granted, I'm certainly no expert but I must be missing something here. The DM produces a nasty monster whose abilities he may or may not have interpreted correctly (there seems to be a bit of controversy around this point) and the other players are looting their little black hearts out (although I did get a laugh out of "they behead the corpse and throw it off a cliff"). So now people are suggesting that the DM is a "maniac" and the OP should ditch his friends and find a new group ASAP...? :smallconfused:

What have I missed? Should you really walk away from a campaign because the DM threw a rust monster at you?

[Kesnit]

What have I missed? Should you really walk away from a campaign because the DM threw a rust monster at you?

1) The OP is the only lawful PC in the party. The other PCs are making their money "off camera" by killing NPCs and taking their stuff (or just taking their stuff and selling it). So the OP is way behind the rest of the party when it comes to wealth.
2) The OP finally saved up enough to buy reasonably decent gear.
3) As soon as that happened, the DM threw a rust monster at the party and took away everything the OP had.
4) The other PC who lost his sword still has his ill-gotten wealth and can replace the sword. The OP cannot replace his weapon or armor because he has not been stealing.
5) The DM is making no effort to help the OP equalize his wealth with the wealth the thieving PCs have, meaning the OP will fall farther and farther behind the other PCs WRT gear. The DM also left the OP useless as the OP is now a Fighter with no armor or weapon, no money to buy more, and no way to get money to buy more.

[Olo Demonsbane]

Yeah, Im sorry about my last post, I could have sworn there was paladin there somewhere...

Anyway, my new suggestion is this. Your NG character recognizes how evil everyone around him is and decides to Nova. Buy some explosive potion or something (you explode when you die), then run into the middle of your former friends. Try to do damage all around, and when you die you will explode for 5d6 (or 10d6) damage, hopefully causing a self-inflicted TPK. I mean, you are third level.

Then either convince your fellow players to play something more inline with your tastes, or swtich and make a CE Necromancer of death.

[Jarawara]

Ok, here's a possible alternative explanation...

Actually, let me clarify that I don't at all believe this is what happened, but it is possible.

...what if the DM had pre-prepared the adventures long ago, complete with the Rust Monster, and by sheer bad luck and timing, the party bought all their shiny new armor and weapons in the session just before they stumbled into this planned out encounter. The DM was smiling because of the sheer absurdity of luck, having the party encounter the rust monster at just the wrong time. Had they fought it one week before, while still in leather armor, they could have been victorous and then bought up all their armor and weapons, but instead they went shopping at just the wrong time.

*~*

Now, this leads to a question to the group. If you were the DM, and you *had already* planned an encounter with a rust monster, and lo and behold the party had trouble coming up with the cash to buy armor, but after a long struggle they finally found the cash and found an armorer with the right skill to get a suit of really nice armor...

... do you as DM cancel the rust monster encounter, replacing it with something less frustrating? Or do you stick with what you had planned (or maybe with what the module had planned, if you're using a store-bought adventure)?

[Kylarra]

If I was a jerk DM (as evidenced by the fact that I am using a rust monster in an unavoidable scenario*) I would carry on with my fiendish plan, that wouldn't change the fact that I'm a jerk.



*Opened cage with rust monster inside is is effectively an unavoidable scenario when metal is involved.

[Assassin89]

If I was a jerk DM (as evidenced by the fact that I am using a rust monster in an unavoidable scenario*) I would carry on with my fiendish plan, that wouldn't change the fact that I'm a jerk.



*Opened cage with rust monster inside is is effectively an unavoidable scenario when metal is involved.

Wouldn't the scenario be nonexistent due to the rust monster eating said cage if the cage was metal itself?

[Kylarra]

Wouldn't the scenario be nonexistent due to the rust monster eating said cage?I'm referencing the OP


...The fifth fight we face takes place in a roundish cave with a wooden cage in the center. We hear something scurrying that doesn't respond to speech and I suggest setting the cage on fire, but the rest of the party says 'no, what if it's sentient but mute?'

So the party cleric (I **** you not) goes in front of the cage to see what's inside. (It was blocked off on all but one side)

The large beetle bursts from the cage and attacks her, ....

Effectively the cage is something that only held it long enough to lure the PCs close enough to rust their items, which is why I called it an unavoidable scenario.

[Rhiannon87]

Now, this leads to a question to the group. If you were the DM, and you *had already* planned an encounter with a rust monster, and lo and behold the party had trouble coming up with the cash to buy armor, but after a long struggle they finally found the cash and found an armorer with the right skill to get a suit of really nice armor...

... do you as DM cancel the rust monster encounter, replacing it with something less frustrating? Or do you stick with what you had planned (or maybe with what the module had planned, if you're using a store-bought adventure)?

I'd have changed it, assuming I'd been enough of a b*tch to plan on throwing a rust monster at them anyway. There are some things that are Just Not Done, imo, and rust monsters in 99% of situations are one of them. But my hatred of rust monsters aside, I'd have rolled with the situation and changed it to something that wouldn't have resulted in a huge waste of money. The point of D&D is for everyone to have fun, after all, and if as a player you would find the situation not fun, it's probably not the best idea. Note that challenging or scary or even frustrating doesn't mean something can't be fun, and the players might do things that make it less fun for them (like something doing something stupid that gets a character killed), but the second part you can't control. What you, as a DM, can control is whether or not your players are likely to leave a session having had a good time, rather than getting bitter and resentful. Not that they'll always think that, but you can make it more likely. By not doing things like throwing rust monsters at them.

...That turned into way more of a PSA than I'd intended. Oops.

[Shpadoinkle]

Okay... everything you've related says that your DM is either:

1: Inexperienced
2: Just plain bad at DMing
3: A ****, or
4: All of the above.

Personally, I'd bring up my concerns to him and the rest of the group ("I feel like I'm getting screwed because I chose to play a good character.") There's also the whole "You're not LG anymore because you started a bar fight."

Now there's nothing wrong with playing maniacs, lunatics, and murderers in D&D... as long as everyone is on board for that. It sounds to me like you want to play a very different campaign than the rest of the group. So you can either change your character and go along with it, excuse yourself from the game until someone else decides to take up DMing, find a new group altogether, try DMing yourself, or just suffer though it.

[magellan]

What yakk said, except for one thing: A DM can by definition not cheat.

Why? It is his game, his rules. Yes, there is this book with suggestions (DMG, PHB what have you), but those are just that: suggestions. If he wants to alter/ignore them it's his call.

Also: taking stuff away is vitaly important to get new stuff.

[Starbuck_II]

What yakk said, except for one thing: A DM can by definition not cheat.

Why? It is his game, his rules. Yes, there is this book with suggestions (DMG, PHB what have you), but those are just that: suggestions. If he wants to alter/ignore them it's his call.

Also: taking stuff away is vitaly important to get new stuff.

A DM who won't admit to using houserules is cheating because he isn't following his own rules then. If he admits he is hiouseruling then yes, he isn't cheating.

[Learnedguy]

Protip: You don't need class abilities to Coup-de-grace sleeping people:smallwink:

[magellan]

A DM who won't admit to using houserules is cheating because he isn't following his own rules then. If he admits he is hiouseruling then yes, he isn't cheating.

A rule from a book is a houserule from someone else but the DM. The DM can use it, adapt it, and change it when he feels it needs tweeking. Just like the other houserules that are not in a printed book.

There are no houserules. or only houserules. There is no fundamental difference between houserules and .... office rules?

[Xenogears]

Well if the other PC's are running around stealing and murdering maybe he should suggest to the DM that the police get involved. Or maybe in order to make some extra cash he turns the other PCs into the authorities in a town they went a'stealing in.

[Starbuck_II]

A rule from a book is a houserule from someone else but the DM. The DM can use it, adapt it, and change it when he feels it needs tweeking. Just like the other houserules that are not in a printed book.

There are no houserules. or only houserules. There is no fundamental difference between houserules and .... office rules?

It is one thing for the DM to say:
1) Hey guys I'm changing the rules foe this campaign: I'll let you know what when it is important.

Another for him to say:
1) Sorry, Jim, you did'nt say Yatchsee before casting a spell, you lose a turn. Yeah, I never told you that rule, but it is there. No I won't show you where.


If he is going to change the rules it should be known prior if it will seriously affect the player's effectiveness and playstyle.
And he shoud at least be honest that he isn't follow the rules.

[Oslecamo]

If he is going to change the rules it should be known prior if it will seriously affect the player's effectiveness and playstyle.
And he shoud at least be honest that he isn't follow the rules.

So tell me, how's playing a game where your DM hands you all the maps, plots and monster stats in the first session? Some things must remain scecret untill the PCs are affected by them.

For all we know the rust monster wasn't houseruled. The player wasn't very clear on what hapened and didn't happen, and the whole situation could have hapened whitout any DM fiat.

Besides the PCs could have easily avoided the whole situation if they had just used some basic D&D smarts:

1-Set cage on fire since it clearly didn't have a creature willing to talck inside.
2-Knowledge check to know what the hell it is, then kill rust monster with sticks.
3-Lure out the monster ANY other way than trying to enter the cage yourself.
4-Ignore cage, go somewhere else.

Was it an evil trick from the DM? Yes. But easily avoidable. The DM was evil and the party was as dumb as drinking a potion whitout identifying it.

[magellan]

Huh... what happened here? ah well i 'll just use this nifty edit button.

See, starbuck II, the DM doesnt change the rules. He makes them. He might take a few or even all of them out of a book. But he doesnt change them, because without a game the rules have nothing to apply to. When they are in the game those are the rules that apply. wether something similiar is in a book somewhere or not doesn't matter. Does he tell the players all, some, a few: His game. his decision. Will he lose players if his rules are arbitary and stupid? I guess he will. Again: his game, his decision. But since he isn't breaking a rule, nor changing it, but mereliy adding an exception, he can not cheat. :)

[Starbuck_II]

Huh... what happened here? ah well i 'll just use this nifty edit button.

See, starbuck II, the DM doesnt change the rules. He makes them. He might take a few or even all of them out of a book. But he doesnt change them, because without a game the rules have nothing to apply to. When they are in the game those are the rules that apply. wether something similiar is in a book somewhere or not doesn't matter. Does he tell the players all, some, a few: His game. his decision. Will he lose players if his rules are arbitary and stupid? I guess he will. Again: his game, his decision. But since he isn't breaking a rule, nor changing it, but mereliy adding an exception, he can not cheat. :)

In 2nd and 4th edition: yes, but in 3rd edition you are houseruling because 3rd edition actually made all the rules visable and presented.

In 2nd and 4th: 1/3 the rules are optional. And explicitly mentioned to be (page 42 in 4th).

But not in 3rd. The rules are presented to be not optional, but assumed (Wealth per level, CR values, etc). Changing them is houserules.
I'm saying houserules are bad, but I dislike dishonesty.

Houserule = rules changing from house to house. You can't get more houseruling than DM's modifying the rules.
The chance that every DM will change the rules the same way is small so thus named "houserules".

[Count Chumleigh]

Of course it is a requirement. Being the judge does not give the DM carte blanche to use DM fiat or make up rules as he goes. A judge in a court can influence the way a trial goes, but he must still follow the basic laws of society and precedents that he and other judges (and courts) have set. Likewise, a basketball referee can favor one player or team, but she cannot outright decide who wins a game, especially not in keeping with basic morals.

I don't know enough about professional sports to comment on the basketball reference, but your observation on judges is spot-on, at least in American courts. German judges, on the other hand, are a whole different beast, and pretty much do dominate the court room. But the judge analogy, I'm afraid, doesn't really apply to a DM sitting behind the screen.

It's true that judges, be they American or German, abide by a set of rules, in a way that's superficially similar to DMs using the published rules to run a game of D&D. However, the rules those judges live by--these pesky things we call LAWS--also constrain those judges' behavior, as do other concerns such as re-election, higher courts, and the separation of powers. Unless the DM is running an RPGA-sanctioned event, he is the highest power. There's no wizard who lives on the coast who's going to force the DM to run his game a certain way. It's his game; he can do whatever he damn well wants, and no one can stop him*. Likewise, the players are fully within their rights to walk.


What you are saying is tantamount to a group sitting down to play Risk, and then the owner of the game stands up and says that Black (his color) gains twice the armies per turn, and that if other people disagree, then he won't let them use his Risk game. While this is perfectly legal for him to do, no one would consider it healthy, reasonable, or justified behavior.

I don't think that's what's being said at all. Risk and D&D, like American and German judges, are altogether different beasts. Risk doesn't have any position analogous to D&D's DM--it's entirely player-vs.-player--so when any one player, who the rules treat no different from anyone else, starts unilaterally declaring the rules are different, he's acting entirely out of order.

Cheers,
--Count Chumleigh

*Please note, however, that while a DM is fully within his rights to issue arbitrary and capricious rulings, that doesn't make him and less a douche for doing so.