PCs succeeding in what they shouldn't.

[MrUberGr]

So, during our tonight's campaign I had two moments that were really akward/annoying/i-don't-want-to-deal-with-them.

First moment: Dire Bear chained on top of a trap door. PCs surprise and get initiative and kill it where it was sleeping.ON TOP OF THE FRIGGIN TRAP DOOR. Now the one is a dual-hand crossbow fighter and the other is a monk/rogue. Both have a friggin 8 Strength score. Now, the PCs had to get down the trap door. Technically they wouldn't be able to move the 400-500kg (900-1100 pound thing) off of that trap door. They had to let it play a round so it would get up and walk away.

Second moment: a group of four mages are casting a ritual inside a wall of force so the monk says: "K, I got dis." and proceeds to use his class feature that allows him to walk on walls. RAW I it a solid wall, and RAW monk can walk on walls. (note. I made it a ring so they could shoot the loose rocks on top of the ring, since either is a magic users)

What the heck was I supposed to do in these two situations? In the first, if I didn't let them through it would be silly, but they were silly as well... The second just blew my mind and lost all will to argue. :smallannoyed:

[JNAProductions]

Well for the second situation, that's just players being smart. Don't punish them, let them shine.

For the first... Eh. Make it take time (since they really shouldn't be able to) but let them push it working together. Or have the bear slump off the trapdoor in death or something.

[Brendanicus]

You made the right call both time, however begrudgingly. To my knowlegde, Walls of Force are so solid that they could be hit by cars and not bend even the slightest. It makes complete sense that a Monk could run up one.

In general, do not put anything in front of the players that you wouldn't mind seeing broken.

[MrStabby]

Well the bear is not a problem if they can cut enough bits away to make it lighter...

The fall of force thing is kind of smart... but then you have one member of the part isolated and unable to be helped so it could still end badly. It is a good ability used well - much better this than an ability that is only ever allowed to be used when it is unimportant.

[Ralanr]

How did it walk away if it was already dead?

By level 9 the monk can run up anything that's a solid or a liquid, magical or otherwise. They could probably run along a rope attached to an arrow, despite the arrow not being able to support the monk's wait. Bonus points if you're playing Po.

[Raphite1]

1) Let them drag it really slowly, they could chop it up or drain the blood as someone mentioned, they could find something to use as a lever, use a rope and a ceiling feature to winch it up enough to take some weight off and make it drag-able, the PCs could defeat but not kill some other monsters and make them help drag the bear, they could make a DC 10 Wis(medicine) check to stabilize the bear and wait 1d4 hours for it to revive and then force it to move, burn the corpse to make it lighter, chop a hole in part of the trap door that it isn't covering.... sounds like a really fun puzzle for the PCs, with many different solutions.

2) So what? Great move by the monk, assuming he could beat the ritualists solo. The players are allowed to influence the story.

[Malifice]

I would've said 'sorry, the bear carcass is too heavy, you can't lift it to open the trap door'

Let them figure out a way to solve it (cutting the bear into pieces is a pretty elegant solution).

I don't see a problem with the wall of force thing. That's just the player using his class features. Why did this bother you?

[PoeticDwarf]

The second situation was just smart. If they didn't have a chance it would be a little bit railroading.
The first, I don't know what to think about that.

[Steampunkette]

Don't put stuff in front of your players that they're not supposed to complete.

That's just bad form.

[Mellack]

I am not really sure what is the problem in either of these situations. In 1, they can move the bear, it will just take time and work. They can roll it with levers, pull it with rope, or cut it apart. Now I think it would be out of place to say they instantly toss it aside, but there was certainly no reason it should stop them entirely. The second case was a fine solution by the monk using their class features. That is kind of the point of the game, players overcoming obstacles in fun ways. It sounds like they did not play the way you expected, and that somehow bothers you. Never expect any plan to go exactly as you think it will.

[Shining Wrath]

Monk says "Wall of Force is a wall" and acts accordingly? Yay monk. The game as it should be played.

Dead dire bear blocking access? Time for creative players, and BTW, a bearskin rug would be a lovely accessory to the party HQ.

[MrUberGr]

Well, the solutions as I had them in my mind were:

1) they'll attack the bear, the bear wakes up and charges them. they kill the bear, problem solved. This wasn't even supposed to be a problem. It's not my fault the two dished out 220 damage in 2 rounds.

2)well it just seems really silly to me. It's supposed to be a product of a spell, it's magic, etc. Dunno. Also, this class feature seems a bit silly if you're not running. Even if the monk runs fast :smalltongue:

@Steampunkette. If I wanted them not to complete I would've put two dire bears, and made the ring shaped wall of force a dome as it should be :smallwink:

[WickerNipple]

Neither of these particularly strikes me as a problem. I don't see how they weren't supposed to succeed.

[Lolzyking]

I'd let the monk run the wall no problem magical or not, its still just a wall, also mages never makes domes of force, you know why? oxygen, the last mage that did died.

however it depends on if the wall of force is that quasi lightblue see through glowing wall of force, or the invisible kind. if invisible I'd have him roll perception to keep his footing, its not like he'd even get hurt falling (monk lvl 9 is immune to most conventional fall damage) , just as a stalling thing till he got it right

[D.U.P.A.]

Monk gets that ability at 9th level, where spells like Levitate, Spider climb and Fly are aplenty. So many classes can achieve the same as the monk did.

[HoarsHalberd]

Well, the solutions as I had them in my mind were:

1) they'll attack the bear, the bear wakes up and charges them. they kill the bear, problem solved. This wasn't even supposed to be a problem. It's not my fault the two dished out 220 damage in 2 rounds.

2)well it just seems really silly to me. It's supposed to be a product of a spell, it's magic, etc. Dunno. Also, this class feature seems a bit silly if you're not running. Even if the monk runs fast :smalltongue:

@Steampunkette. If I wanted them not to complete I would've put two dire bears, and made the ring shaped wall of force a dome as it should be :smallwink:

1) If he has this class feature he's level 9+. Assuming the rogue is the same level you should have planned for that.

2) And the monk is magic as well, the Ki allows him to do impossible things like understand every language, or teleport or create vibrations in someone that can kill them. Running on walls, even magic ones, is hardly silly in a game with dragons.

[illyrus]

Hoping the PCs solve a challenge in a particular way is going to leave you disappointed as a GM.

The players are going to have a different perspective than you as you created the adventure.

Also their first thought is going to be different than yours as their experiences in life have been different. Say "roll" to person A that loves board games and they might picture rolling dice, say it to person B who has been practicing Judo since age 5 and they might picture rolling after being thrown. It is not that they're being contrary, and they would understand the other definition; their primary association is just going to be different. Same thing with puzzles, someone who cut their teeth on the Zelda games may respond to a locked door differently than someone who did not.

[coredump]

Well, the solutions as I had them in my mind were:

I think this is the biggest issue. As DM, give them obstacles, don't concern yourself with the solutions. IME, most cases of Railroading begin with a DM that is expecting a certain solution, and prevents other options....thereby railroading the players onto the one true path that he assumed in the beginning. You were not doing this, but it also stems from a DM devising solutions instead of just providing obstacles.




1) they'll attack the bear, the bear wakes up and charges them. they kill the bear, problem solved. This wasn't even supposed to be a problem. It's not my fault the two dished out 220 damage in 2 rounds. So they have an obstacle. I am sure they can figure out a way to move a large weight off of a trap door. Leave it up to them, and you may be surprised with what they come up with.



2)well it just seems really silly to me. It's supposed to be a product of a spell, it's magic, etc. Dunno. Also, this class feature seems a bit silly if you're not running. Even if the monk runs fast :smalltongue: Well, it is within your purview to decide that a wall of force is too slick, or too malleable, or too something to allow for running up its side. But I wouldn't, it seems to fit within the intent of the ability. OTOH, the ability only works while the monk is moving, he isn't 'climbing' the wall, but running up the side. He needs to have a place to stop, or just go over the top.

[Gryndle]

I think this is the biggest issue. As DM, give them obstacles, don't concern yourself with the solutions. IME, most cases of Railroading begin with a DM that is expecting a certain solution, and prevents other options....thereby railroading the players onto the one true path that he assumed in the beginning. You were not doing this, but it also stems from a DM devising solutions instead of just providing obstacles.


So they have an obstacle. I am sure they can figure out a way to move a large weight off of a trap door. Leave it up to them, and you may be surprised with what they come up with.

Well, it is within your purview to decide that a wall of force is too slick, or too malleable, or too something to allow for running up its side. But I wouldn't, it seems to fit within the intent of the ability. OTOH, the ability only works while the monk is moving, he isn't 'climbing' the wall, but running up the side. He needs to have a place to stop, or just go over the top.

I have to second this entire quote.

One of my favorite parts of being a DM is seeing what kind of crazy and/or brilliant solutions my players come up with.
One of the most infuriating things for me as a player is when the DM sets up a scenario, and gets pissy when we don't solve it his way because he only envisioned one way (HIS way) of it being resolved.

[coredump]

I have to second this entire quote.


Why, thank you good sir....:smile:

[EvanescentHero]

I have to second this entire quote.

One of my favorite parts of being a DM is seeing what kind of crazy and/or brilliant solutions my players come up with.
One of the most infuriating things for me as a player is when the DM sets up a scenario, and gets pissy when we don't solve it his way because he only envisioned one way (HIS way) of it being resolved.

And I'm gonna throw a third at it. I adore seeing my players come up with crap that I never would've dreamed of to solve a problem. It leads to way more memorable moments and stories down the line.

[zinycor]

on the first scenario you just let them know that the massive bear is in top of a trap door, and they can't move it easily, then the players have to ocme up with an answer to the problem.

second scenario... I don't see the problem with a monk climbing a wall...



1) they'll attack the bear, the bear wakes up and charges them. they kill the bear, problem solved. This wasn't even supposed to be a problem. It's not my fault the two dished out 220 damage in 2 rounds.


the only reason this became a problem is because you wanted this to be a problem, if you wanted you could have just said that the bear moved to the side when he died. If you didn't have this in mind, then why was the bear over the trapdoor in the first place?. The fact that you just didn't handwave the problem away indicates that you wanted this to be resolved in some way, so the 2 players with str 8 will have to be smart now to move this massive bear, which could be lots of fun for everyone!

[mephnick]

It's not my fault the two dished out 220 damage in 2 rounds.:

Well...it kind of is. It was obviously an enemy, it was alone, and it was sleeping. There's almost no way that incident was going past a surprise round and first round. If it wasn't a crap load of damage it would have been a disabling spell. But taking something unexpected and making a new challenge out of it (like "how the hell are we going to move this bear?") is one of those things that evolve from play that make the game great.

Treat it as a learning experience :smallwink:

[DracoKnight]

So, during our tonight's campaign I had two moments that were really akward/annoying/i-don't-want-to-deal-with-them.

First moment: Dire Bear chained on top of a trap door. PCs surprise and get initiative and kill it where it was sleeping.ON TOP OF THE FRIGGIN TRAP DOOR. Now the one is a dual-hand crossbow fighter and the other is a monk/rogue. Both have a friggin 8 Strength score. Now, the PCs had to get down the trap door. Technically they wouldn't be able to move the 400-500kg (900-1100 pound thing) off of that trap door. They had to let it play a round so it would get up and walk away.

Second moment: a group of four mages are casting a ritual inside a wall of force so the monk says: "K, I got dis." and proceeds to use his class feature that allows him to walk on walls. RAW I it a solid wall, and RAW monk can walk on walls. (note. I made it a ring so they could shoot the loose rocks on top of the ring, since either is a magic users)

What the heck was I supposed to do in these two situations? In the first, if I didn't let them through it would be silly, but they were silly as well... The second just blew my mind and lost all will to argue. :smallannoyed:

Sounds like a night of badassery :D

I had a similar issue a couple of weeks ago. I'm currently DMing a party of level 4s. The party consisted of 3 Berserker Barbarians, a Life Cleric, a Battle Master Fighter, an Open Hand Monk, a Draconic Sorcerer, a Land Druid, and a Swashbuckler Rogue. They were fighting an Adult Blue Dragon. They killed it. In under 5 rounds. They lost their Cleric, 2 of the Barbarians and the Druid, but they killed the son of a bitch.

[Ardantis]

Sounds like a night of badassery :D

I had a similar issue a couple of weeks ago. I'm currently DMing a party of level 4s. The party consisted of 3 Berserker Barbarians, a Life Cleric, a Battle Master Fighter, an Open Hand Monk, a Draconic Sorcerer, a Land Druid, and a Swashbuckler Rogue. They were fighting an Adult Blue Dragon. They killed it. In under 5 rounds. They lost their Cleric, 2 of the Barbarians and the Druid, but they killed the son of a bitch.

Adult Blue Dragons are CR 16. How did they do that?

[DracoKnight]

Adult Blue Dragons are CR 16. How did they do that?

A combination of rolling really good initiative (and the dragon critically failing) and the magic items that they had found thus far. (It's an open world piracy campaign. So the players went to a treasure hoard I had planned for them at a higher level.) Soooo...yeah. They shouldn't have been able to kill the dragon, but they did :P

[Once a Fool]

I think this is the biggest issue. As DM, give them obstacles, don't concern yourself with the solutions.

100% this. They collectively have more brains than you do. Their solutions will usually be better than the ones you preconceived. And they will always be more fun.

Also, unexpected complications are some of the best things that can happen for a DM. They give you a chance to seem more clever than you really are, add a sense of urgency, and get the players thinking laterally.

Next time, try to take advantage. For instance: they shoot a massive creature to death on top of a trapdoor, you roll for wandering monsters while they figure out how to move it. Perhaps multiple times.

[eastmabl]

So, during our tonight's campaign I had two moments that were really akward/annoying/i-don't-want-to-deal-with-them.

First moment: Dire Bear chained on top of a trap door. PCs surprise and get initiative and kill it where it was sleeping.ON TOP OF THE FRIGGIN TRAP DOOR. Now the one is a dual-hand crossbow fighter and the other is a monk/rogue. Both have a friggin 8 Strength score. Now, the PCs had to get down the trap door. Technically they wouldn't be able to move the 400-500kg (900-1100 pound thing) off of that trap door. They had to let it play a round so it would get up and walk away.

Second moment: a group of four mages are casting a ritual inside a wall of force so the monk says: "K, I got dis." and proceeds to use his class feature that allows him to walk on walls. RAW I it a solid wall, and RAW monk can walk on walls. (note. I made it a ring so they could shoot the loose rocks on top of the ring, since either is a magic users)

What the heck was I supposed to do in these two situations? In the first, if I didn't let them through it would be silly, but they were silly as well... The second just blew my mind and lost all will to argue. :smallannoyed:

It's taken 10 years of DMing to make my peace with this statement.

A DM's battle plan does not survive first contact with the party. What you think will happen is never what will actually happen.

Be grateful that your players out-thought you, and proceed.

[goto124]

Another problem. What if, after the DM explicitly allows something, the players abuse it? I can't think of the potential uses of wall-walker+moveable wall, but it does sound like a gateway to, erm, shenanigans.

Is there a flaw in my logic? Maybe the DM is supposed to trust the players first?

As for this bit:


The second just blew my mind and lost all will to argue.

It's funny how we forumers all say 'let the players do it'... while the DM is crying and probably seeking some form of condolence.

[EvilAnagram]

Sounds like a night of badassery :D

I had a similar issue a couple of weeks ago. I'm currently DMing a party of level 4s. The party consisted of 3 Berserker Barbarians, a Life Cleric, a Battle Master Fighter, an Open Hand Monk, a Draconic Sorcerer, a Land Druid, and a Swashbuckler Rogue. They were fighting an Adult Blue Dragon. They killed it. In under 5 rounds. They lost their Cleric, 2 of the Barbarians and the Druid, but they killed the son of a bitch.

You have nine PCs? That's twice the recommended number. Of course they're kicking your expectations!

[rollingForInit]

I think the issue is that you're expecting that situations will play out in a very specific way. Don't do that. If the players do something unexpected, roll with it and improvise. If you really want the players caught, and they do something that avoids the traps, invent new traps, find new situations to trap them. Just plan everything knowing that the PC's not only can, but probably will, do something unexpected.

[coredump]

Another problem. What if, after the DM explicitly allows something, the players abuse it? I can't think of the potential uses of wall-walker+moveable wall, but it does sound like a gateway to, erm, shenanigans.

Is there a flaw in my logic? Maybe the DM is supposed to trust the players first?

You do have to be careful with that. I think in this case it is well within the expected behavior of the class, and thus the playtesting supports letting it happen.
But for times when I am not sure, when I *think* there isn't a problem but there *may* be.... I am just honest about it.
ME/DM: The wall feels odd under your feet, like you are not sure if you are doing this alone if the forces of Fate are helping you. You are glad to make it to the top, but you feel unsure how often you will get this lucky.
Or I just tell them. "Hey, this is okay, but if I decide its broken later, I may change things some."



It's funny how we forumers all say 'let the players do it'... while the DM is crying and probably seeking some form of condolence.
Sure, but I think he felt the need because he assumed he 'failed' or did something 'wrong'.... what we are saying is everything went just fine, he has nothing to feel bad about.

[Knaight]

Well, the solutions as I had them in my mind were:

1) they'll attack the bear, the bear wakes up and charges them. they kill the bear, problem solved. This wasn't even supposed to be a problem. It's not my fault the two dished out 220 damage in 2 rounds.

2)well it just seems really silly to me. It's supposed to be a product of a spell, it's magic, etc. Dunno. Also, this class feature seems a bit silly if you're not running. Even if the monk runs fast :smalltongue:

@Steampunkette. If I wanted them not to complete I would've put two dire bears, and made the ring shaped wall of force a dome as it should be :smallwink:

This is your problem. It's fine to come up with solutions, and to some extent you thinking up solutions are you're presenting situations is indicative of them being manageable. Where you went wrong is in wanting only your solutions to work. Don't do that.

Take the bear. One solution to a bear on a trap door you need to get through would be to provoke the bear into a fight, then kill it when it moved. They killed it while asleep, which closes that option. That's fine. The players found a solution which then segues immediately into their next problem, which is that the trapdoor they need to get through has 800 pounds of bear on top of it and they aren't strong enough to just lift it off. So, then they need to come up with a solution for that. Maybe they cut the bear into pieces and haul of each piece. Maybe they come back with a battering ram and repeatedly slam it as hard as they can, in the hopes of shoving it a small distance each time (possibly after oiling the floor behind it). Maybe they find a bunch of flesh eating beetles and release that onto the corpse to get rid of it.

As for the monk, that's a perfectly valid use of class abilities. They had the right tool for the job, and they used it. It's probably more memorable than it would otherwise be.

[Lolzyking]

also in regards to the bear, the monk was likely not openhand or elemental, since both of those have abilities that move targets, even if the target is dead, Open hand will force them back, by the magic of ki, no matter how heavy you are, same with elements.


also if it was shadow, why not teleport into a mages shadow and chokehold him?

[Once a Fool]

Another problem. What if, after the DM explicitly allows something, the players abuse it? I can't think of the potential uses of wall-walker+moveable wall, but it does sound like a gateway to, erm, shenanigans.

Is there a flaw in my logic? Maybe the DM is supposed to trust the players first?

Well, yeah. It's much easier to trust first and adjudicate later than to pre-adjudicate every conceivable scenario. Also, lack of trust in players leads a DM toward railroading (because railroading = micromanagement, which is a fear response arising from a lack of trust). DMing from a place of fear is no fun for anybody.


It's funny how we forumers all say 'let the players do it'... while the DM is crying and probably seeking some form of condolence.

I would venture to guess that is because many of us are speaking with enough experience to recognize this particular red flag when we see it. We know why the basic assumption is problematic, either because we have been the micromanaging DM sometime in our past, or we have had one. Or both. Because, again, DMing from a place of fear is no fun for anybody.

[PoeticDwarf]

Monk gets that ability at 9th level, where spells like Levitate, Spider climb and Fly are aplenty. So many classes can achieve the same as the monk did.

Yes, but he didn't except the monk was that clever.

[Millface]

Another problem. What if, after the DM explicitly allows something, the players abuse it? I can't think of the potential uses of wall-walker+moveable wall, but it does sound like a gateway to, erm, shenanigans.

Is there a flaw in my logic? Maybe the DM is supposed to trust the players first?

As for this bit:



It's funny how we forumers all say 'let the players do it'... while the DM is crying and probably seeking some form of condolence.

I don't see this as a problem at all! Over time your party is going to learn to work together and occasionally come up with some pretty whacky stuff. That's sort of the point! So the Wizard and the Monk have a code phrase, like "Flying Treadmill!" and they both know what to do, work together and do it.

Will it get them around some things in a way that you didn't plan? Yes! But, and I won't hold back here, if that bothers you you're not being a good DM.

I make sure my obstacles have at least one solution, then I leave them. I don't give two craps how the party solves it, my only job when creating an obstacle as the DM is to make sure it's fun and has at least one discernible solution.

I tend to actually reward players for solving things in ways I didn't think of, I don't make an angry face and say "You RUINED it!". That's bad form. Very bad. What fun do you have as the DM if you're not letting the players tell part of the story too?

[zinycor]

Another problem. What if, after the DM explicitly allows something, the players abuse it? I can't think of the potential uses of wall-walker+moveable wall, but it does sound like a gateway to, erm, shenanigans.

Is there a flaw in my logic? Maybe the DM is supposed to trust the players first?

As for this bit:



It's funny how we forumers all say 'let the players do it'... while the DM is crying and probably seeking some form of condolence.

As a GM I allow all the shenanigans! the crazier the better!!

And yeah, is all about trust

[SharkForce]

Another problem. What if, after the DM explicitly allows something, the players abuse it? I can't think of the potential uses of wall-walker+moveable wall, but it does sound like a gateway to, erm, shenanigans.

well, for starters, it wasn't their wall.

but secondly, you can already use wall of force as a bridge anyways iirc.

[Kurt Kurageous]

It was obviously an enemy, it was alone, and it was sleeping.

And I thought werebears were mostly good per MM pg. 207.

[EvanescentHero]

And I thought werebears were mostly good per MM pg. 207.

It was a dire bear, not a werebear.

[Kurt Kurageous]

Helps when I read, huh? :smallbiggrin:

[Yakk]

2)well it just seems really silly to me. It's supposed to be a product of a spell, it's magic, etc. Dunno. Also, this class feature seems a bit silly if you're not running. Even if the monk runs fast :smalltongue:
The monk doesn't run fast. The monk is **magic**.

Possibly more magic than the wall.

And even if the monk wasn't magic, the monk is **awesome**. And awesome is allowed to trump magic, or there is no point in playing a non-magic class. (Magic can also trump awesome, but you should err on the side of awesome over magic)

[DracoKnight]

The monk doesn't run fast. The monk is **magic**.

Possibly more magic than the wall.

And even if the monk wasn't magic, the monk is **awesome**. And awesome is allowed to trump magic, or there is no point in playing a non-magic class. (Magic can also trump awesome, but you should err on the side of awesome over magic)

I agree 100%. Especially because magic must follow the rules that the game puts forth, but awesome is determined by the mind of the players! :D

[Malifice]

The monk doesn't run fast. The monk is **magic**.

Possibly more magic than the wall.

And even if the monk wasn't magic, the monk is **awesome**. And awesome is allowed to trump magic, or there is no point in playing a non-magic class. (Magic can also trump awesome, but you should err on the side of awesome over magic)

Yeah this.

Crouching tiger and all that.

[Dimcair]

Your campaign feels like cod^^

There is a rock over the wall of force ring which i briefly described, now use the only solution I gave you...

Why are you mad at your players for being smart using their class features...