I'm still a little upset, but is it really as bad as it seems to me? (Forcecage) [Archive]

rmnimoc

2017-11-19, 09:45 PM

So in a game I'm playing we'd made it to tenth level. I had a pretty fun thing going for me, I was a spear wielding monk that gave up being a monk to be a swashbuckler, aiming for something along the lines of Cuchulain in the Type/Moon universe.

Our party of four had been going through our campaign and when we got to the final fight against the big bads (a level 12 party), I was immediately put in the corner and not allowed to do anything during the fight. No roll for initiative or perception, no save, no attack roll, just instant ambush and a 1/day forcecage item that specifically locked me down and no one else. As someone who wasn't a sorcerer there was no way for me to get out. Since no spell below 6th level can destroy it and you don't get those until 11 there was nothing our wizard could do. So the rest of the party died, and both my character and me got to sit there incredibly unhappy as my entire party was straight up slaughtered. So I waited for another 59 minutes in game time, ran around a corner, hid, brutally murdered the wizard and their swashbuckler because screw those guys, and then I died.

When I talked the the DM after the game, he explained that he wanted the encounter to be hard and said he figured that each of us would probably have a coin flip to win against each enemy, and so it was totally balanced. Then he realized I could rocket-tag the wizard and kill him in one turn, so rather than talk to me as a player so we could come to a solution that would have been fun and enjoyable (it's not like it would have been a particularly challenging puzzle, just have one of the other characters challenge me and I'd have gladly fought him instead, heck I'd already challenged their swashbuckler to a duel multiple times) he just decided that I didn't get to be a part of the fight at all. They practically got an entire short rest between fighting my party and me.

In the DM's defense he is fairly new to the whole DMing thing, with this being his first campaign, but it nearly lasted a year and I really feel like he should have known better than to try to solve a meta-narrative-problem in game like that. Ultimately we all left the table feeling unhappy and when the DM asked about interest in another campaign he was working on I had a hard time saying I'd think about it instead of just an instant "No". It really feels like it just soured the entire campaign with a single spell.

So, I'll confess that as a player who got screwed, I'm a bit biased here. Was this as bad as it seems to me, or should I just forget about it and agree to be part of the new campaign?

Also as someone who played 3.5 no small amount, I've gotten very used to magical items as a solution to some of the problems martial classes face going up against spell casters. In 3.5 you've got things like boots of big stepping or a shadow cloak to get around things like forcecage, but 5e seems a lot less free with it's magic items, and it seems to have significantly fewer and weaker magic items in general. What ways can you get around things like forcecage as a martial class in 5e?

Kane0

2017-11-19, 09:53 PM

B0nes

2017-11-19, 10:05 PM

Your caster didnt have counterspell or dispel magic?
Otherwise yeah, forcecage is one of those high level, few-counter spells.
Every DM has those moments, live and learn. Was this the only major bungle he’s had?

Forcecage can't be dispelled by Dispel Magic. I believe the only ways to escape are with disintegrate or some form of teleporation (+ a CHA saving throw).

mephnick

2017-11-19, 10:35 PM

D&D basically turns into a completely different game around levels 10+ and a lot of DMs (especially new ones) aren't ready for it. You need to be able to handle high end magic that can end encounters and even campaigns in unsatisfactory ways on both sides of the screen, plan for PC magic and not abuse NPC magic. I actually cap my games at level 12 because I hate what the game turns in to during high level play.

It was a bad way to run the encounter and you're right to feel a bit cheated, but I'd give him another shot to see if he handles it better.

rmnimoc

2017-11-19, 10:37 PM

Your caster didnt have counterspell or dispel magic?
Otherwise yeah, forcecage is one of those high level, few-counter spells.
Every DM has those moments, live and learn. Was this the only major bungle he’s had?

The wizard had dispel magic, but forcecage explicitly isn't affected by it.

He'd had quite a few minor issues throughout the campaign, but they were all basic new DM stuff. We lost a few party members to a bad call on a thing that didn't quite work as the DM thought, but this was the only real time he did something stupid intentionally and not by accident.

Jerrykhor

2017-11-19, 10:42 PM

Sounds like one of those stories of nightmare DMs whose enemies simply hard counter the PCs for reason, simply because the DM doesnt want to lose.

So no initiative or perception rolls at all? Sounds like he just want to force a TPK. Funny he still had the cheek to ask for another campaign.

Its still arguable, but IMO spells that make players sit out of entire fights should not be used on players. Banishment is one, especially if there is no way to reach the caster. Its no different from the DM pointing at one player and say, 'You don't get to play', and just remove him/her from the equation.

If I were you, I'd not agree to a new campaign unless your DM watches all the Matt Colville videos to learn up about DMing.

Waterdeep Merch

2017-11-19, 10:47 PM

There should've been something you could do. I used forcecage on a new player back in 3.5 as they started approaching high levels. With a quickened cloudkill thrown in, too. The difference was that I had just off-handedly given that player a few scrolls of gaseous form amongst other kinds of loot, and I wanted to teach him how to think in terms of counter-play, since it was important for high level encounters back then. He felt very smart when he escaped that way. Exactly as planned.

It's not unusual for new DM's to accidentally screw this up. Sometimes even experienced DM's grossly miscalculate something and effectively remove a player from gameplay for a while, though usually not intentionally like your's did. If you're thinking of playing another campaign with him, let him know that you'd like something to do.

KorvinStarmast

2017-11-19, 10:52 PM

What ways can you get around things like forcecage as a martial class in 5e?Have a team mate who can cast disintegrate.
your DM sorta hosed you.

Kane0

2017-11-19, 11:12 PM

Forcecage can't be dispelled by Dispel Magic. I believe the only ways to escape are with disintegrate or some form of teleporation (+ a CHA saving throw).

Oh yeah, forgot about that.

In that case, you should have cast Book to Face.

Foxhound438

2017-11-20, 01:00 AM

this feels like one of those moments where I'd just go get a hot dog or something, since sitting at the table at that point is just like getting a handful of dog crap shoved up your nose.

Malifice

2017-11-20, 01:25 AM

No initiative was wrong. Your DM was wrong. Surprised or otherwise, initiative comes first. It always comes first.

Also how on earth don't you have access to counterspell or misty step or similar teleportation magic?

Finally 4 10th level PCs vs 4 12 level NPCs? That's a beyond deadly fight with a greater than 50/50 chance of a TPK. Again, bad DMing.

No wonder you left the game angry.

Chugger

2017-11-20, 02:23 AM

This is a bad DM. Don't let him DM any more. He's had that many weeks to learn and pulled this? This is pure crap.

Waazraath

2017-11-20, 02:49 AM

The main problem isn't force cage, that was just instrumental; problem imo is the DM using tactics the party has no way to counter, it's the 'ambush without being able to do anything about it' combined with no initiative role (invalidating rescources like the Alert feat or the barbarian class feature that help you even when surprized), and it's the combat setup against a foe in which you loose against most of the time; without the opportunity to run or not engage at all (because surpise attack). Ah, and the removing somebody from combat, round 1, intentionally. I mean, I played a lot of 3.5, and it happened a lot there; the accidental failed save against a paralyze that took somebody out of major fight. Could happen, wasn't fun, so most of that was removed in 5e, with good reason. To create such a situation as a DM, on purpose.... (where's that roll eyes emoticon when you need it)

No. If your description is correct, this just sucked and was textbook bad DM'ing.

Malifice

2017-11-20, 03:06 AM

People are being a touch harsh on the DM here. Yes he messed up but he was inexperienced so it's understandable.

JellyPooga

2017-11-20, 03:20 AM

To all those saying "no second chances"; woah, guys! Didn't you ever make a mistake when GMing? Sure, the guy f-ed up, he made a bad call (maybe several) but to slap him down and say "Nope; no GMing for you again. Ever." is no way to teach someone how to...and this is important...play the game. Because that's what GMing is; it's playing a game, just like being a player in an RPG. The only difference is that you're the one calling the shots, you're the one setting the scenes and controlling the flow. It's a lot more work being GM. It's hard. It's also supposed to be fun.

So, let's stop with the "that guys a complete douche-bag, never speak to him again" crap, shall we? He's just some guy who has never GM'd before trying to do his best, from the way I read the OP. How about, instead, we encourage our justifiably angry OP to maybe just give this guy another shot? I know I found it tough when I first accidentally killed some PC's because I didn't know the game well enough and set them up against a tougher encounter than I thought it was. I've learned since then.

To the OP; First off, Forcecage is a strong spell, but that wasn't the problem. The problem was a GM that didn't have the experience to recognise the consequences of all aspects of the encounter they had in mind. Second, you have every right to feel cheated by this turn of events, but don't take it out on this GM of yours. S/he's clearly enthusiastic to be a GM otherwise they wouldn't be offering to run another game. That's a good thing. Sit down and talk to them; explain what you felt was wrong and give them a second chance. If the second chance goes sour, then maybe think about finding greener pastures, but only if you think the problem is beyond saving.

Unoriginal

2017-11-20, 03:42 AM

Your DM had decided to make your character lose. It's not a question of Forcecage or of magic items, anything you could have done would have been shut down.

Now you could have gotten trapped in the Forcecage in a legit way, but it would still have went way different.

Your DM messed up big time, but maybe he'd improve if someone with more experience gave him advice and helped him understand the game. Because from the "aha you lose" Forcecage to having the bad guys be NPCs built like PCs, not to mention the idea that you pummeling the enemy caster is a bad thing, your DM needs a lot of help to understand the game.

sithlordnergal

2017-11-20, 04:56 AM

So, it sounds like you have every reason to be upset. That said, give the dm one more chance. I am all for second chances, and honestly? While he shouldn't have targeted you specifically, it sounds like the DM either underestimated or over estimated something.

I'll admit that the first time I DMed a game it was with a table of 11 people. They had a TPK due to a mix of poor rolls on their part and me overestimating the party's abilities. Now, in my case everyone still managed to have fun because they found the goblin who had tricked all 11 of them hilarious, and they found it funny none of them could rolk higher then 12 on an insight check against the goblin's deception roll. But still, it ended up being an unintended TPK of an 11 party member group against about 8 goblins and two worgs.

After that I learned how much a PC could handle and I set up challenges accordingly. My most recent experience was better, with the players pulling through a very difficult fight. Was it close? Ehhh, a little. The PC's thought it was close, but it really wasn't. Heck, the druid only burned 2 spell slots during it and didn't use wild shape.

Contrast

2017-11-20, 08:05 AM

So, I'll confess that as a player who got screwed, I'm a bit biased here. Was this as bad as it seems to me, or should I just forget about it and agree to be part of the new campaign?

Not giving you an initiative roll was bogus but even if you'd had one I'm not sure there's much you could have done. The real issue is he doesn't seem to have balanced the encounter right (the ability to cast forcecage once per day is a significant buff to the challenge of the encounter as you experienced).

To throw my own story into the mix as to if you should play again - I played a game a while back that lasted multiple years. The campaign was great and my favourite I've played in. The final game was probably my least favourite of all those games though because the DM had a plot in mind. The outcome of the game was determined before we started and it was just a case of turning up to twiddle our thumbs for a couple of hours while the DM patted himself on the back for all his foreshadowing.

Campaign was still my favourite because the rest of the campaign was great. So the question is - did you enjoy the rest of the game?

Chunkosaurus

2017-11-20, 08:21 AM

MrStabby

2017-11-20, 08:51 AM

Don't just judge the encounter. That is just cherry picking the most recent example. Judge the whole campaign, and the encounter in that context. It sounds like your DM was generally doing well for a new DM.

The DM did make a mistake but the same action can come from a lot of different types of mistake.

For example why did the DM use the forcecage? To stop you effectively ending the encounter on turn 1. Was this a valid judgement for a cause to act (even if the outcome was not appropriate)? I.e. could you have effectively ended the encounter too easily if there hadn't been an action?

Did the DM intend this to make the encounter more fun for the players? If you had ended it would it have stopped the other players having a chance to shine? Even if poorly executed, was the DM motivated out of concern for the fun of the party?

Did the DM plan well but execute poorly? If the DM gave the party a means to escape the cage or made the cage a cage with gaps for missile weapons to be used and the party didn't use these, then yeah the DM didn't do a good job of working with the party but the attitude is ok. Likewise, if the initiative thing was something that just happened, rather than intended to happen that way then that is just a new DM having trouble keeping on top of a complex encounter.

What you need to decide was whether this was a problem of attitude or a problem of judgement. Judgement can be more easily fixed. Were they going after YOU to go after you, or were they doing this as a power trip vs were they doing it because they thought it would add something to the encounter.

Finally, how does the DM take feedback? If you were to say "being stuck in a forcecage wan't fun for me; please can we have fewer encounters like that in the next campaign" how would they take it?

Naanomi

2017-11-20, 08:58 AM

On the other end.... a 1/day Forcecage magic item would have been a big boost for your team if you’d have taken him down...

Unoriginal

2017-11-20, 09:03 AM

For example why did the DM use the forcecage? To stop you effectively ending the encounter on turn 1. Was this a valid judgement for a cause to act (even if the outcome was not appropriate)? I.e. could you have effectively ended the encounter too easily if there hadn't been an action?

Just want to point out:

If the DM realizes that one PC can destroy an encounter on turn 1 and the DM doesn't want that to happen, the thing to do is "go back to the drawing board and re-design the encounter with enemies that won't get destroyed like that", not " let's railroad this guy into being only able to helplessly watch the encounter because I don't want them to easily beat the bad guys."

tieren

2017-11-20, 09:10 AM

KorvinStarmast

2017-11-20, 09:12 AM

D&D basically turns into a completely different game around levels 10+ and a lot of DMs (especially new ones) aren't ready for it.
I actually cap my games at level 12 because I hate what the game turns in to during high level play. High level play is almost a different game. *tips cap*

It was a bad way to run the encounter and you're right to feel a bit cheated, but I'd give him another shot to see if he handles it better. Yeah. Making someone a pariah for a DM booboo isn't good for the hobby.

No initiative was wrong. Your DM was wrong. Surprised or otherwise, initiative comes first. It always comes first. Also how on earth don't you have access to counterspell or misty step or similar teleportation magic? Finally 4 10th level PCs vs 4 12 level NPCs? That's a beyond deadly fight with a greater than 50/50 chance of a TPK. Again, bad DMing. No wonder you left the game angry. Not sure about your *Also how on earth don't you have access to counterspell or misty step or similar teleportation magic* fits with a Monk. Que? :smallconfused:

People are being a touch harsh on the DM here. Yes he messed up but he was inexperienced so it's understandable. Yes, this point is well made.
To all those saying "no second chances"; woah, guys! Didn't you ever make a mistake when GMing? Sure, the guy f-ed up, he made a bad call (maybe several) but to slap him down and say "Nope; no GMing for you again. Ever." is no way to teach someone how to...and this is important...play the game. Because that's what GMing is; it's playing a game, just like being a player in an RPG. This too.
*stands and applauds JellyPooga's post*

Unoriginal

2017-11-20, 09:17 AM

I also wonder if the fight had to happen then. Was it a sandbox campaign and your party got to them a little too early or if there was a hook to find something that might have helped swing the fight that wasn't followed up on. (wand or scroll of disintegrate for instance).

OP made clear that their character was shut down for being able to destroy the enemy mage, so no, it's probably more a scripted encounter DM didn't want the PCs to win easily.

Temperjoke

2017-11-20, 10:25 AM

My two cents worth is that, based on what you've given us here, it is understandable that you'd be upset. With what you've shared with us, the DM clearly made a mistake. It happens with new players and new DMs. It's even more magnified when the DM makes a mistake because it affects everything. However, this is also an opportunity for the DM to learn. As others have mentioned, the game dynamic changes at various level point, which is a consequence of the PCs getting stronger, and a new DM has to learn how to balance encounters all over again.

I'd give him another chance. A DM who wants to do better will never be able to learn if no one forgives a major mistake.

Unoriginal

2017-11-20, 10:28 AM

Though to be fair, getting a 1/day Forcecage item out of this fight would make it worth it.

Easy_Lee

2017-11-20, 10:48 AM

Remind the DM that he can do anything. If he's worried your character will kill the wizard, he should make the wizard more difficult to kill. Trapping you in a forcecage with no initiative roll is a bad policy.

D&D is about the player characters' decisions, not the DM's. His job is to facilitate the game, not direct it. Until your DM understands that principle, you're going to have problems like this.

Laserlight

2017-11-20, 10:53 AM

Just want to point out:

If the DM realizes that one PC can destroy an encounter on turn 1 and the DM doesn't want that to happen, the thing to do is "go back to the drawing board and re-design the encounter with enemies that won't get destroyed like that", not " let's railroad this guy into being only able to helplessly watch the encounter because I don't want them to easily beat the bad guys."

Quoted for truth.

There are some spells and tactics I won't use against PCs, because I want each encounter to be interesting and fun and "sit around for an hour looking at your phone and waiting for the encounter to end" is neither. That's not to say I would never hit them with Banish or Forcecage, but I would give them something to do. In this case, perhaps I'd throw an enemy at you and then Forcecage both of you together, for an instant Steel Cage Death Match. Or Forcecage you and ask you to run the enemy mooks. Or just accept that the baddie is going to die.

As for whether you should walk or not, I'd say "This is why I think it was a bad encounter" (not "this is why you're a bad DM") and see what happens. Every DM makes mistakes (except me, obviously), but most of them learn if you give them feedback. If this is one of the ones who refuses to get better, well, you can always walk later.

Willie the Duck

2017-11-20, 11:40 AM

Overall, here are my insights:

DMs make mistakes. Good groups deal with this. DMs who are learning also have trouble with the whole "how do I use a mage as an opponent for a group with a mage-killer class?" issue. DMs learn. New DMs also have trouble with the whole "the players have gotten this that or the other ability, how do I keep the game challenging, without it seeming like I just raised all the enemies' ACs by 1 because their to-hit went up by 1?"

As to the specific spell and 5e--Force Cage is a problem spell. It is trivially easy to break with relatively common magic (misty step works, right?), but without said magic, you really are reliant on your teammates helping out or winning the fight without you. The only thing I can say is that people were complaining about the state of the norm in 3e as well (where it was a real wild west with players having almost any level of power depending on their magic item load-out, and it very hard to make balanced encounters, etc. etc.), so I understand why the designers did it. I'm a little surprised that they didn't change Force Cage to be something you could slowly hack through or squeeze through with acrobatics or something.

MrStabby

2017-11-20, 12:05 PM

Vaz

2017-11-20, 12:13 PM

In this style, dominate is infinitely preferable: you get a save, and at worst you still get to play, just against the allies.

qube

2017-11-20, 12:43 PM

To the OP; First off, Forcecage is a strong spell, but that wasn't the problem. The problem was a GM that didn't have the experience to recognise the consequences of all aspects of the encounter they had in mind. Second, you have every right to feel cheated by this turn of events, but don't take it out on this GM of yours. S/he's clearly enthusiastic to be a GM otherwise they wouldn't be offering to run another game. That's a good thing. Sit down and talk to them; explain what you felt was wrong and give them a second chance. If the second chance goes sour, then maybe think about finding greener pastures, but only if you think the problem is beyond saving.Sorry, but I find this just to be insulting to each and every newbie GM out there.

You will note the GM decided to create a custom magical item - for the sole purpose of allowing the enemy to use a spell above their level, explicity to single out a party member so that he wasn't able to join the fight - against a combat that was designed to have an extremely high chance to TPK. And he didn't allow any form of safe or chance it to fail -- he opted the road of my way, no highway option.

This is not a matter of not seeing the consequences. This is a matter of not wanting to see the consequences. Consider that even IF the party survived that - THEY would have had an epic encounter ... while the OP would still have been screwed over, in being forced to watch from the sidelines looking at the others having fun. There is litterly no way this could have ended well.

The sheer insanity of advising "Sit down and talk to them; explain what you felt was wrong and give them a second chance. " ... as though this would NEED to be explained why this is wrong on so many levels.

He doesn't need an explenation - he needs to read this thread ! This is absolutely NOT the behavior that can just be washed away with a whoopsie. newbies will be newbies. Maybe - just maybe - if it's your first encounter you create yourself ... but not after a year of experience. By that point, this behavior is inexcusable. this is Bad DMming. Plain and simple.

Even newbies have common sense - which is what this encounter-design SEVERLY lacked.

If the DM realizes that one PC can destroy an encounter on turn 1 and the DM doesn't want that to happen, the thing to do is "go back to the drawing board and re-design the encounter with enemies that won't get destroyed like that", not " let's railroad this guy into being only able to helplessly watch the encounter because I don't want them to easily beat the bad guys."

Quoted for truth.
Quoted for truth ²

mephnick

2017-11-20, 01:48 PM

To all those saying "no second chances"; woah, guys! Didn't you ever make a mistake when GMing?

You talk as if most of the posters on this board actually have any experience running a game. Anyone who would crucify a newer GM over one mistake either has no experience behind the screen, is an idiot or has major problems with interpersonal relations. Probably all three in a lot of cases.

I'm hoping you're all overreacting because this is an internet forum and you aren't like this in real life.

JellyPooga

2017-11-20, 01:52 PM

Sorry, but I find this just to be insulting to each and every newbie GM out there.

Feel free to feel insulted on the behalf of others, I guess. No skin off my back, because "hey, let's give someone the benefit of the doubt" is in no way insulting in a case like this. *shrugs"

You will note[snip]

Let me interrupt you there...What I note is that the GM, a first time GM (albeit one who's been running a game for almost a year), is for the first time coming across PC abilities he is unfamiliar with, Monster abilities he is unfamiliar with, abilities that he simply does not, cannot, know how to balance and adjudicate appropriately and you want to prevent him from ever having the understanding to run a better game because all you perceive is the end result? Get off your high horse and think about some of the mistakes you made when you first run your players through a game, high-level or otherwise, because I'm pretty damned sure you weren't perfect (assuming you've run a high level game at all). I know I've made some awful blunders as a GM, but if my gaming groups never gave me a chance to rectify and learn from them, I'd never have learned to become a better one.

What I see is here is a GM that perceives a problem (i.e. a highly effective mage-slayer PC). What I see is a GM that didn't actually realise that taking the player out of the fight (the means of which is irrelevant) would not only be boring for that player, but change the dynamics of the fight so as to cause a TPK. This isn't persecution. This is not being able to see the consequences because he doesn't have the experience or training to see them. This is not being an idiot; sometimes, when you have a lot on your GM-plate, it's hard to see the wood for the trees. This is not being a Bad GM; to be a Bad GM, you need to have that experience and do those things anyway. This is a rookie GM that made a mistake and until given at least another chance, no-one can tell whether he wants to learn from those mistakes and be a better GM for them, or become a Bad GM by intentionally repeating them.

As for it being an unfair fight; considering at least one player (the OP) posed sufficient threat to not only put the wind up the GMs sails such that he wanted him out of that fight, but is also able to casually describe that he took out the two remaining NPCs solo, I'm fair sure that had he been a part of that fight it wouldn't have been completely one-sided in the NPC's favour. Some PC groups are better than others. Some Players are good enough at character building that they can handily take out higher level groups. Perhaps this was such a group. Without knowing the details, we can't tell for sure, but that benefit of the doubt raises its head again.

Should the GM have rebuilt the encounter to be better? Probably. Should we blame him for making a mistake? Yeah, he made a bad encounter and a bad call, it's his fault things went pear-shaped. Should we dub him a "Bad GM" and never play with him again, exiling him to the fringes of dorkdom and gamery? No. No we shouldn't. Gaming is a social hobby, let's be social with it and include people in the fun, teach them how to be better at doing the same and grow as a community; not exclude people and complain about them on the internet.

mephnick

2017-11-20, 01:59 PM

Let me interrupt you there...What I note is that the GM, a first time GM (albeit one who's been running a game for almost a year), is for the first time coming across PC abilities he is unfamiliar with, Monster abilities he is unfamiliar with, abilities that he simply does not, cannot, know how to balance and adjudicate appropriately

Exactly. I don't care if you've run D&D for 20 years, the first time you come across high level abilities it's hard to understand how to utilize them fairly and effective when running the game. It's a complete shift in power and tone that can be paralyzing for someone unfamiliar with it. Most DMs are going to screw it up somehow. Hopefully not by trying to hard counter a certain player unfairly like this, but it happens. Let the guy know it's wrong, give him another chance and see how it goes.

Temperjoke

2017-11-20, 02:10 PM

Sorry, but I find this just to be insulting to each and every newbie GM out there.

You will note the GM decided to create a custom magical item - for the sole purpose of allowing the enemy to use a spell above their level, explicity to single out a party member so that he wasn't able to join the fight - against a combat that was designed to have an extremely high chance to TPK. And he didn't allow any form of safe or chance it to fail -- he opted the road of my way, no highway option.

This is not a matter of not seeing the consequences. This is a matter of not wanting to see the consequences. Consider that even IF the party survived that - THEY would have had an epic encounter ... while the OP would still have been screwed over, in being forced to watch from the sidelines looking at the others having fun. There is litterly no way this could have ended well.

The sheer insanity of advising "Sit down and talk to them; explain what you felt was wrong and give them a second chance. " ... as though this would NEED to be explained why this is wrong on so many levels.

He doesn't need an explenation - he needs to read this thread ! This is absolutely NOT the behavior that can just be washed away with a whoopsie. newbies will be newbies. Maybe - just maybe - if it's your first encounter you create yourself ... but not after a year of experience. By that point, this behavior is inexcusable. this is Bad DMming. Plain and simple.

Even newbies have common sense - which is what this encounter-design SEVERLY lacked.

Quoted for truth ²

This is why people don't want to DM. They don't want to be crucified and vilified because they made a bad decision. This mentality of having to do everything perfect, no matter how little experience you've had is toxic and does a lot of damage to the community.

Kuulvheysoon

2017-11-20, 02:11 PM

You talk as if most of the posters on this board actually have any experience running a game. Anyone who would crucify a newer GM over one mistake either has no experience behind the screen, is an idiot or has major problems with interpersonal relations. Probably all three in a lot of cases.

I'm hoping you're all overreacting because this is an internet forum and you aren't like this in real life.

QFT, man. I'd be willing to bet that this wasn't a case of wanting to shut down a particular character, but wanting to get his story across. Which is a thing that happens to many, many DMs, old and new. If this last thing was a singular event, talk to him and express how you feel about it.

High level abilities are also awesome for crapping all over campaigns. Another reason why I basically always stop at level 15 latest unless I'm with a group that I'm extremely comfortable with.

KorvinStarmast

2017-11-20, 02:17 PM

This is why people don't want to DM. They don't want to be crucified and vilified because they made a bad decision. This mentality of having to do everything perfect, no matter how little experience you've had is toxic and does a lot of damage to the community. Yeah, it's better when folks talk to each other at the table and do after the session reviews, or after the adventure reviews, for a "what we like, what we didn't care for."

krugaan

2017-11-20, 02:19 PM

This is a side note, but ... how is forcecage not concentration?

Easy_Lee

2017-11-20, 02:28 PM

This is a side note, but ... how is forcecage not concentration?

Presumably this had to do with it coming from a custom item. Perhaps the item was a miniature cage that replicated the spell, for instance.

mephnick

2017-11-20, 02:57 PM

Presumably this had to do with it coming from a custom item. Perhaps the item was a miniature cage that replicated the spell, for instance.

The spell itself isn't concentration which is ridiculous.

krugaan

2017-11-20, 03:01 PM

The spell itself isn't concentration which is ridiculous.

This. Non-concentration no-save remove-one-martial-from-combat is pretty damn powerful for a 6th (7th?) level spell. And spells cast from items still require all concentration when applicable, no?

KorvinStarmast

2017-11-20, 03:05 PM

The spell itself isn't concentration which is ridiculous.
It's seventh level spell; wall of force that is concentration is concentration, and requires disintegrate. I erred earlier, as the spell for force cage seems to lack that method of remedy.

And spells cast from items still require all concentration when applicable, no? Hmm, not sure, I think there's a loophole regarding Glyph of Warding. \

Spell Glyph.
You can store a prepared spell of 3rd level or lower in the glyph by casting it as part of creating the glyph. The spell must target a single creature or an area. The spell being stored has no immediate effect when cast in this way. When the glyph is triggered, the stored spell is cast. If the spell has a target, it targets the creature that triggered the glyph. If the spell affects an area, the area is centered on that creature. If the spell summons hostile creatures or creates harmful objects or traps, they appear as close as possible to the intruder and attack it. If the spell requires concentration, it lasts until the end of its full duration.
At Higher Levels.
If you create a spell glyph, you can store any spell of up to the same level as the slot you use for the glyph of warding.

Easy_Lee

2017-11-20, 03:11 PM

The spell itself isn't concentration which is ridiculous.

Oh, well **** then.

KorvinStarmast

2017-11-20, 03:12 PM

Unoriginal

2017-11-20, 03:17 PM

The most likely reason why Forcecage doesn't require Concentration is because it normally require you to have ruby dust worth 1500 gp on hand.

It may seems not much compared to some treasure hoards , but with that kind of budget a NPC could have some pretty nice magic items instead.

Willie the Duck

2017-11-20, 03:19 PM

The spell is being used as designed. It takes out a non-teleporting character from combat, or makes the party use significant precious resource (even if the spell catches the wizard and they misty step out, presumably it wastes actions. More likely you either waste a disintegrate to take it down or waste two teleport-like spells and two rounds to jump in there, grab your buddy, and escape). The spell would be fine (wastes resources or excludes a party member from part of a fight; more expensive than a level 6 hold person which is also a potential TPK) except that it once again is utterly devastating if you have a non-standard party (and I thought this edition was trying to remove most of those), and is incredibly frustrating if you are the character taken out of a boss fight.

krugaan

2017-11-20, 03:21 PM

Great way to trap someone for an hour.

Cast Forcecage into Glyph of Warding ... and if they step on it, they are trapped for an hour.

Hmm, that looks like a 'win' button spell, not even save or suck. You get no save unless you have a way to magically try to get out of it.
Powerful Magic, that.

Well, at least you'd have to use a 7th or 8th level slot for glyph to do that.

... although you do get the spell slots back ... and the glyph lasts until triggered or dispelled.

But really, glyph is one of those spells that breaks the game, given enough time.

KorvinStarmast

2017-11-20, 03:29 PM

But really, glyph is one of those spells that breaks the game, given enough time. No, I don't think so. I used one once to protect a chest I had in a locked room. Well, the thief apparently triggered it and (based on the roll20 log) got away with the loot I was storing with 2 HP remaining. (I cast it as a 3rd level spell). He made his save. What's interesting is that you can cast it at higher levels .... and as I noted early on in this thread, I agree with those who point out that high level play (IMO, anything past level 11) is almost a different game. You'd need to be 14th level to pull of a glyph of that nature, as I read the text on using a prepared spell. (Unless you had a scroll of glyph of warding about?)

Danielqueue1

2017-11-20, 03:32 PM

I have overestimated PCs on a number of occasions. I have underestimated them on many more. PCs are an unpredictable lot and can come up with some very clever ways of getting out of situations. my hands do not have enough fingers to count how many times an immovable rod completely negated what I thought was clever. I think this may have been a case where the DM wanted to give the players a challenge, but did not realize just how much he was tilting the balance.

Things to think about;
Inexperienced DM may not have had a full understanding of the PCs capabilities thinking they had some way to get him out.
Inexperienced DM may not have realized just how powerful Forcecage really is when giving it to the enemy thinking the party could counter it with some way other than dispelling magic. I could completely see the Inexperienced DM thinking it was concentration or when putting the encounter together missing the part about it not being dispel-able.
Inexperienced DM may not have a good understanding of the surprise rules. (actually read clearly doesn't) that being said, if a creature is surprised it doesn't get a reaction until it's first turn, so if the Person using the item goes before the party the forcecage couldn't have been counter spelled.

All in all, I could very much see this as A DM who wants to have a climactic battle against recurring villains, (OP mentioned having challenged one to a duel several times) but seeing that the PCs could win hands down wanted to give the enemy an edge. in the process of doing so I suspect the DM in his inexperience, failed to realize how much a single spell would tilt the balance. If there was a way out, this would have been fine. there wasn't so the DM made a significant mistake.

The1exile

2017-11-20, 03:37 PM

Sounds like your DM just lacks the feel for high level fighting. That’s fair enough - I’m playing a 16th level character for what I think is the first time ever atm (possibly also once in 4e), and I’ve played at least a dozen dnd campaigns in several editions. You really need them to understand the power of save or suck. I would suggest explaining how you felt being zoned out of the fight without anything to do, without getting into an argument about how they should have talked to you etc etc, because that’s what the real problem seems to be here. It doesn’t matter if the spell was a plane shift instead (yes, I know it has a save) - but your dm needs to get to grips a bit more with the nuts and bolts of challenging encounter building.

Edit: out of interest, what type of monk were you?

krugaan

2017-11-20, 03:38 PM

No, I don't think so. I used one once to protect a chest I had in a locked room. Well, the thief apparently triggered it and (based on the roll20 log) got away with the loot I was storing with 2 HP remaining. (I cast it as a 3rd level spell). He made his save.

I meant as a high level spell. Since it stores spells, has a customizable trigger, and require no concentration, you could use it to stack all kinds of buffs of 8th level or below.

Admittedly, it would need to be stationary and costs some gold, but ... lair actions!

Edit: you can also break action economy somewhat by allowing you to "cast" spells using your movement.

qube

2017-11-20, 03:49 PM

and you want to prevent him from ever having the understanding to run a better game because all you perceive is the end result?Let me interrupt you there ... Are are you unable to differentiate between between on the one hand actually making bad GMs accountable for their mistakes and on the other hand barring them for the rest of their life from GMming?

Other then Chugger - and only if you interprete his words litteraly - nobody here is arguing for him never to DM again. But this is a captial mistake. This is the kind of mistake EVEN a DM with NO experience should realise post-fight that it was f***ed up - and with a year under his belt? He sure as heck should know where it went wrong.

Ergo. If that you actually assume that the DM is so otherworldy oblivious that even after mastering this fiasco he's got no clue how wrong it was to Deus Ex Machina a player from a hard combat just because he didn't like it and let twiddle his thumbs ; if we're in a situation where what you advice is needed, to "Sit down and talk to them; explain what you felt was wrong", Then I am 100% sure that this guys is absolutely NOT ready to DM in the short run.

This is why people don't want to DM. They don't want to be crucified and vilified because they made a bad decision. This mentality of having to do everything perfect, no matter how little experience you've had is toxic and does a lot of damage to the community.Perfectly correct. I 100% agree with you ... IF we were talking about a situation where "not being perfect" was the bar. Or "no matter how little experience you've had" was the bar.

However, as it happens to be, we're not. We're talking about a situation where the bar is him, already having a year of experience under his belt, was responsable for

Ultimately we all left the table feeling unhappy

GMming IS a big responsability - in your hands you hold the power to make or break gamenight. If you're not able to accept and take responsability from when you made a capital mistake, and say "Damn guys. it seems I seriously misscalculated here. My bad, I'm sorry. I'll make sure it never happens again" - then in my book, that's that seems to be a sign you're not ready for that responsability.

Temperjoke

2017-11-20, 03:56 PM

Perfectly correct. I 100% agree with you ... IF we were talking about a situation where "not being perfect" was the bar. Or "no matter how little experience you've had" was the bar.

However, as it happens to be, we're not. We're talking about a situation where the bar is him, already having a year of experience under his belt, was responsable for

Ultimately we all left the table feeling unhappy

GMming IS a big responsability - in your hands you hold the power to make or break gamenight. If you're not able to accept and take responsability from when you made a capital mistake, and say "Damn guys. it seems I seriously misscalculated here. My bad, I'm sorry. I'll make sure it never happens again" - then in my book, that's that seems to be a sign you're not ready for that responsability.

A year of low level DMing. As it's been pointed out, higher level DMing is different. But hey, sure, go ahead and sharpen your pitchfork and light your torch.

Vaz

2017-11-20, 04:06 PM

After a year of playing might be less than 12 times or more than 50. The number of experienced DM's who make mistakes is huge. As a 3.5 player, I'm also used to having a dozen magical items to escape sticky situations. 5e's artificial scarcity of magic items like that means that players creativity is limited. There is a hard cap on how creative you can be, by your class features.

And suddenly DM 'a-ha' s' becomes a lot more dangerous and threatening to gameplay. Pulling the same event in 3.5 would be less threatening to a more experienced player who selects magic items from the magic item marts.

JellyPooga

2017-11-20, 04:13 PM

Let me interrupt you there ... Are are you unable to differentiate between between on the one hand actually making bad GMs accountable for their mistakes and on the other hand barring them for the rest of their life from GMming?

Other then Chugger - and only if you interprete his words litteraly - nobody here is arguing for him never to DM again. But this is a captial mistake. This is the kind of mistake EVEN a DM with NO experience should realise post-fight that it was f***ed up - and with a year under his belt? He sure as heck should know where it went wrong.

Ergo. If that you actually assume that the DM is so otherworldy oblivious that even after mastering this fiasco he's got no clue how wrong it was to Deus Ex Machina a player from a hard combat just because he didn't like it and let twiddle his thumbs ; if we're in a situation where what you advice is needed, to "Sit down and talk to them; explain what you felt was wrong", Then I am 100% sure that this guys is absolutely NOT ready to DM in the short run.

Perfectly correct. I 100% agree with you ... IF we were talking about a situation where "not being perfect" was the bar. Or "no matter how little experience you've had" was the bar.

However, as it happens to be, we're not. We're talking about a situation where the bar is him, already having a year of experience under his belt, was responsable for

Ultimately we all left the table feeling unhappy

GMming IS a big responsability - in your hands you hold the power to make or break gamenight. If you're not able to accept and take responsability from when you made a capital mistake, and say "Damn guys. it seems I seriously misscalculated here. My bad, I'm sorry. I'll make sure it never happens again" - then in my book, that's that seems to be a sign you're not ready for that responsability.

You appear to be under the impression that this GM is completely oblivious to or ignorant of his mistake. All we know is that he offered to run another game. Benefit. Of. The. Doubt. The OP will obviously know more than us here in The Playground, so he's the one that will have to make the final decision. Having said that, he's feeling hard done by (rightly so) and flat refused to play this GMs next game based on that emotion. I'm advocating nothing more than thinking again with a clearer, more rational, mindset. A mindset that must appreciate that being a GM is hard work and it's a job that can only be learned "on the job" and further, that it's a job that is so so so easy to get wrong when you're wading into unknown waters, whether that be a higher levels of play, a new group of players, new splatbooks or other material, a different style of play or even a new game system altogether.

Unoriginal

2017-11-20, 04:25 PM

5e's artificial scarcity of magic items like that means that players creativity is limited. There is a hard cap on how creative you can be, by your class features.

How creative you are is not limited by your class features or your magic items. In fact, it's often more creative to find solutions without those. There's nothing creative about having a magic item that counter the current hazard as intended by the rules.

And suddenly DM 'a-ha' s' becomes a lot more dangerous and threatening to gameplay. Pulling the same event in 3.5 would be less threatening to a more experienced player who selects magic items from the magic item marts.

Not really, no. A DM who wants to go "ah-ah!" without regard for the rules or their players will do so regardless of your magic items, and arbitrarily neutralize them just as they arbitrarily neutralize everything else to make sure you don't win. A DM who wants to go "ah-ah" but still cares about the rules and their players will play fair, in which case you don't need to have a selection of magic items to deal with the situation.

It's a great thing that the magic item mart is dead. Even the Xanathar's Guide's magic item buy-sell system is not bad.

Mjolnirbear

2017-11-20, 05:17 PM

This thread is giving me nightmares. I may never DM again

Unoriginal

2017-11-20, 06:11 PM

This thread is giving me nightmares. I may never DM again

What's so nightmarish about it? Were you planning on having the party Barbarian get banished to a different plane by a guy with a wand because you realized the Barbarian could beat said guy in a pie-eating contest you wanted the PCs to struggle with?

Kane0

2017-11-20, 06:21 PM

Maybe it's because after an honest mistake some day a player ends up getting him blasted on the forums he goes on to relax and enjoy himself. I know that would worry me.

Mjolnirbear

2017-11-20, 06:33 PM

Unoriginal

2017-11-20, 06:55 PM

No, it's because apparently a year of DMing is the benchmark for learning about not screwing the pooch.

I mean there is a lot of support in this thread. A lot. But where there isn't, there is a complete lack of sympathy for mistakes. Every time one of these threads come up the usual "That DM is TERRIBLE don't EVER go back!" comments start up. Because I wasn't already paranoid about my mistakes.

It took me 20 years to try DMing again after my first fiasco. To the naysayers: you know no one is looking over our shoulders making corrections, right? There's no course for DMing. We make it up as we go along. Sure, we now have resources like the Angry GM (who I read) but not everyone knows where to look. I secretly wonder if my players show up out of habit or cause they've nothing better to do. I mean they've stuck around so far so logic says I can't be that bad, but... Y'know?

Eh, screwing up is normal for a DM. In fact, it's normal for everyone.

I think you should be confident in yourself, though, because believe me if the players don't enjoy a DM they don't come to play. RPGs aren't the kind of things you do just out of habit or because you got nothing else to do, it's hard enough to get half a dozen people together for a few hours when everyone wants to do it than no one would bother if it was just "meh".

Now, the thing is, some people had massive bad DM experiences, or lots of them, so they're kind of burned up and without the context of why OP enjoys playing with their DM, they focus on the negative and so give negative responses, which is natural.

The thing is, we also have to recognize there are different kind of screwing up. Making up a rule on the fly that has dire consequences when the books say it would have been far easier, because you didn't check this time and wanted to go on quick? Fair enough. Mis-calculating something's difficulty? Fair enough. Adding something you think is a good idea but the players end up hating it? Not even screwing up, it's just a case of different tastes.

But OP's DM screwed up, and then doubled that down again. Railroading a PC away thanks to a bs magic item far above the opponents' paygrade is pretty eurgh (though it could have been fair if there was a story-reason for this). The DM doing this because they saw OP's PC could beat up one of the bad guy and going "no, it can't happen" is just bad form, especially because it was planned in advance and not the DM panicking on the fly.

I'm not saying the DM deserves no second chance, of course, but for many people, that kind of reasoning is how "jerk DM who railroad people into following their planned fanfic" start, and that's enough for them got get angry. As I said in one of my post, this DM doesn't need a door on their face, they needs help understanding the game at that level, and how to handle both encounters and scenario-building.

It's only if the DM persists doing stuff like that that it'd become a problem.

Temperjoke

2017-11-20, 07:08 PM

I'm not saying the DM deserves no second chance, of course, but for many people, that kind of reasoning is how "jerk DM who railroad people into following their planned fanfic" start, and that's enough for them got get angry. As I said in one of my post, this DM doesn't need a door on their face, they needs help understanding the game at that level, and how to handle both encounters and scenario-building.

It's only if the DM persists doing stuff like that that it'd become a problem.

Exactly. The DM handled the situation badly, but that's part of the learning experience. As it's been pointed out, the game changes at upper levels and this DM had no experience at upper levels. If this same thing were to happen again in a new campaign, even after it's been explained to the DM why the OP felt this way, then it's time to move on. But I'm assuming that, given the OP stayed in the campaign up to this point, the DM has been learning to manage things better as the campaign progressed, which means that another chance wouldn't be out of place.

qube

2017-11-21, 12:38 AM

You appear to be under the impression that this GM is completely oblivious to or ignorant of his mistake.You seem to be very confused - because you are the one who advocates "Sit down and talk to them; explain what you felt was wrong"

I'm pointing out that if that's what he needs - he's not ready to DM in the first place. I'm assuming he ISN'T oblivious to or ignorant to and and thus he SHOULDN'T need to be explained what was wrong.

So, in fact, your impression of my stance is actually the complete opposite.

And suddenly DM 'a-ha' s' becomes a lot more dangerous and threatening to gameplay. Pulling the same event in 3.5 would be less threateningThat's true, but as evidenced by the fact the monk wasn't allowed to roll initiative, get a perception check, using no-save spell that's only escapable with teleport on a character without teleport (after a year of GMming for the character, I would presume the GM knows the monk can't teleport?) ... and then not even modding the situation when it should be clear that it's running out of hand, it's hard to argue that this was a puzzle.

I mean there is a lot of support in this thread. A lot. But where there isn't, there is a complete lack of sympathy for mistakes. Every time one of these threads come up the usual "That DM is TERRIBLE don't EVER go back!" comments start up. Because I wasn't already paranoid about my mistakes.I can only repeat and point out that there's only been 1 comment like that in the thread (by Chugger), and only if you interprete that post litterly.

screwing up is normal for a DM. In fact, it's normal for everyone.
...
The thing is, we also have to recognize there are different kind of screwing up. Making up a rule on the fly that has dire consequences when the books say it would have been far easier, because you didn't check this time and wanted to go on quick? Fair enough. Mis-calculating something's difficulty? Fair enough. Adding something you think is a good idea but the players end up hating it? Not even screwing up, it's just a case of different tastes.

But OP's DM screwed up, and then doubled that down again. Railroading a PC away thanks to a bs magic item far above the opponents' paygrade is pretty eurgh (though it could have been fair if there was a story-reason for this). The DM doing this because they saw OP's PC could beat up one of the bad guy and going "no, it can't happen" is just bad form, especially because it was planned in advance and not the DM panicking on the fly.

I'm not saying the DM deserves no second chance+1, +1, +1 and +1

JellyPooga

2017-11-21, 03:20 AM

You seem to be very confused - because you are the one who advocates "Sit down and talk to them; explain what you felt was wrong"

I'm pointing out that if that's what he needs - he's not ready to DM in the first place. I'm assuming he ISN'T oblivious to or ignorant to and and thus he SHOULDN'T need to be explained what was wrong.

Ah...you think he should be psychic then? Of course, a GM that isn't psychic is obviously a bad GM.[/facetious]

I clearly am misinterpreting your stance, because the first thing you said in response to me was that I was apparantly insulting new GMs by saying that a player should (gods forbid) actually talk to his GM about what he thought went wrong rather than flat refuse to play in this new game being proposed.

You then went on to list every reason why the OP should avoid this GM like the plague on the assumption that he obviously mustn't realise that he made a mistake because it's such an obvious mistake and therefore must be a Bad GM.

I guess I must be a Bad GM too, because I have to talk to my players to improve my GM skills and they've come up with some things that, in hindsight, I should have realised were bad calls, but at the time I was oblivious. Oh no, wait, that's made me a better GM, not a worse one :smallannoyed:

qube

2017-11-21, 05:13 AM

Ah...you think he should be psychic then?Considering we're talking about a DM,
after singling out a player
after TPKing the party
after everyone leaving the table unhappy
and after the player already having asked why he got screwed over.

Yes. I will quite happely take the stance that, he should be psychic enough to figure out.
And I am quite comfortable in having the stance that even most first time DMs realise that.

I guess I must be a Bad GM too, because I have to talk to my players to improve my GM skills and they've come up with some things that, in hindsight, I should have realised were bad calls, but at the time I was obliviousInteresting ... And are you talking about a situation where all players left the table unhappely, and one of the players already complained to you and you were still oblivious after that complaint?

... because if not, I'm not seeing the relevance.

(you know the argument "well, I killed a mosquito too once, so, I guess I'm as bad as Charles Manson too!?" ? You can't argue you did lesser things, thus are equivalent.)

JellyPooga

2017-11-21, 07:21 AM

Considering we're talking about a DM,
after singling out a player Done that.

after TPKing the party That too. Intentionally and otherwise.

after everyone leaving the table unhappy Yup, that as well.

and after the player already having asked why he got screwed over. Yeah, I frequently talk to my players about the games I run.

I didn't always see the negative aspects of my actions as a GM. One player even complained that he wasn't enjoying a game because I didn't have any notes with me (I'd left them at home because I didn't really need them for that session), claiming that it made him think I hadn't done any prep for that session; that was one I would never have guessed! On the flipside, things that may appear negative (like singling players and TPK's) can often be turned around for the benefit of the group; the game in which I intentionally TPK'd the party (for plot), for example, was the one game everyone at that table enjoyed the most in almost ten years of gaming with them.

I'm not seeing the relevance.

The relevance is that all I'm talking about is a Player talking to his GM and giving him a second chance. I'm not saying that the GM needs to talk to his players to realise that he's messed up (though it couldn't hurt to check), I'm saying that the OP needs to look beyond his hurt feelings and talk to his GM because his GM may or may not realise the extent of how badly he messed up in the eyes of his players. Players lie to GMs to avoid hurting feelings; the OP put the best face he could on "I'll think about it" instead of "No" when his GM offered to run a new game, for example. It's entirely possible that this GM thinks he ran a balanced encounter (the OP heavily implies that he does) and might do the same again if not corrected. That doesn't make him a Bad GM by default, only an inexperienced one. Not everyone is a master of social cues and insight; sometimes it's not easy to recognise hurt feelings or an unhappy table. Know how to fix that? Nothing more than a little chat. That's it. That's all I'm saying.

Unoriginal

2017-11-21, 07:42 AM

JellyPooga, I think what what qube is saying is that since OP and their DM *already* talked after the encounter, said DM should not need yet another talk to figure out what went wrong.

Which is defensible in the sense that if the player was clear about what their issue was, the DM should get what's the player is displeased about, even in the cases they don't agree it's justified.

Now, the thing is, it can take more than one talk to convince someone they ****ed up, and I'd say in this case it's more than reasonable to have said additional talks until the issue is solved.

Pex

2017-11-21, 08:25 AM

One screw up does not a tyrannical DM make. If the DM admits he screwed up that's a good sign. The DM learns from the mistake. Some DMs would have a do over, but it's not a requirement. Another option, also not a requirement, is fiat retcon.

Tyrannical DMing is a purposeful pattern of behavior. That DM knows what he's doing and is dismissive of player opinion.

Unoriginal

2017-11-21, 08:34 AM

Tyrannical DMing is a purposeful pattern of behavior. That DM knows what he's doing and is dismissive of player opinion.

To be fair, you can be tyrannical and oblivious about it, if you keep screwing up, don't recognize it, and keep insisting the players are complaining for no reason because you don't see the problems. Rare, but can happen.

Willie the Duck

2017-11-21, 09:00 AM

To be fair, you can be tyrannical and oblivious about it, if you keep screwing up, don't recognize it, and keep insisting the players are complaining for no reason because you don't see the problems. Rare, but can happen.

Sure, and that's the "Toxically Clueless Problem Gamer (DM Edition)" that is somehow simultaneously 1) an internet bogeyman that only exists in white room analysis on forums and 2) we've all also run into in our meatspace gaming experiences. :smallbiggrin:

That's pretty tongue-in-cheek, but kinda real as well. There are those people out there. Particularly in gaming. Despite the "mouthbreathing neckbeard who lives in their parents' basement" stereotype being a myth, the hobby still does collect at its' margins some pretty marginal adults. But those people are largely self-managing. Every FLGS has a 'that guy' and you learn quickly to avoid. I don't really think most of us have to deal with that very often after a certain age. People who try to DM (or try again to DM) who are less than fully competent-that's a perennial problem, as becoming a good DM is hard, there are more people wanting to play than to DM, and it isn't hard to really alienate your players.

KorvinStarmast

2017-11-21, 09:24 AM

Edit: you can also break action economy somewhat by allowing you to "cast" spells using your movement. But only if you have spent the time preparing the battlefield before hand. I find any assertion of "breaks the game" to be specious at best, and usually wrong. That said, in certain situations, as the above idea with glyph and forcecage as a trap/protective measure against a large or smaller creature, it's a neat trick. Yeah, that's a tough one, but enemies who operate at a high level should be expected to play intelligently and even cruelly (if evil) if they are in opposition to the PC's. (Malifice made a good point about the 4x 12th level versus 4x 10th level being a deadly, and worse, encounter).

A year of low level DMing. As it's been pointed out, higher level DMing is different. But hey, sure, go ahead and sharpen your pitchfork and light your torch. We do seem to have a nice lynch mob trying to form ...

After a year of playing might be less than 12 times or more than 50. The number of experienced DM's who make mistakes is huge.

5e's artificial scarcity of magic items Is not even a thing, since any Gm will regulate their scarcity, or plentitude. See the DMG on low, medium and high Magic settings.

It's a great thing that the magic item mart is dead. Even the Xanathar's Guide's magic item buy-sell system is not bad. Agreed.
This thread is giving me nightmares. I may never DM again Don't let the internet get you down. :smallcool:

I mean there is a lot of support in this thread. A lot. But where there isn't, there is a complete lack of sympathy for mistakes. Every time one of these threads come up the usual "That DM is TERRIBLE don't EVER go back!" comments start up.
(snip) It took me 20 years to try DMing again after my first fiasco. Glad you are back. Nice to see you are enjoying it.

Not everyone is a master of social cues and insight; sometimes it's not easy to recognise hurt feelings or an unhappy table. Know how to fix that? Nothing more than a little chat. My caveat is "that little chat needs to be between two people who are both willing to listen to the other."

Vaz

2017-11-21, 12:55 PM

The game has been designed to not require Magic Items. They are boons, not requisite step ups for competing like they were in 3.5.

Crafting your own magic items were considered to be part of the game, or making items to requiest. Magic items were considered part of builds, to the extent of making particular things work, and every build would have recommended items as part of it.

While in 5e, magic items are basically never mentioned. They are always 'would be nice' additions, if ever.

With the magic item creation rules, you're now limited to what your DM says. Wanna make your own Holy Avenger? Tough titty, better hope your DM lets you have some unobtainium.

Unoriginal

2017-11-21, 01:35 PM

Xapi

2017-11-21, 01:40 PM

To the OP:

Your DM made a mistake that cost you, personally, a whole gaming session of not having fun. There are now two ways to go about this:

1 - You can try to make sure he has learnt the lesson, and won't make that mistake again, and give him another go at the helm, thus having a "value" gained to that cost you pay.

2 - You can walk away from him as a DM, finding another one who may or may not have learned the lesson somewhere else, and possiby letting your previous DM go through his life having learnt nothing from your discomfort.

Personally, I'd go with 1.

Vaz

2017-11-21, 06:34 PM

Yes, and?

You said it yourself: magic items are not required, by design. Ergo, PCs do not require them to be creative and should not require one to solve a normal issue.

5e turned what was a dependency for two editions into a boon, which is great.

Not really. Because it made only what the class can do an option. Items, along with their limited access and limited Attunement nonesense suddenly became a resource to manage, rather than rewarding creative play.

Magic items were designed not to be required, but DM's didn't get the memo. In 3.5, that Force Wall could be Iron Heart Surged away, be Ankhlet'd, UMD'd, or otherwise countered because of the high magic supremacy within the game.

But no, of course, I forgot, Mr Frodo had to disattune from Sting to use Earendil.

The lack of magic item requisites mean people don't know how to build. Like people packing a day pack on a warn day without waterproofs, food or water when hiking. Magic items aren't required, oh wait, now I'm stuck.

Magic items make your characters better, your builds more variable, and your ability to do something in a game, and are limited more by your skill at the game. Wanna play a Fighter with a +5 Greatsword, sure. Going to be less powerful than the guy who has a +1 Collision Impact weapon using a +5 Greater Magic Weapon from the Wizard.

Sorry, what point were you making again, making characters have less potential things to do makes the game better?

https://media.giphy.com/media/3oz8xLd9DJq2l2VFtu/giphy.gif

tsotate

2017-11-21, 06:46 PM

Ah...you think he should be psychic then? Of course, a GM that isn't psychic is obviously a bad GM.
I hardly think it requires being psychic to realize that a session where one player doesn't get to participate at all will not be fun for that player.

Vánagandr

2017-11-21, 07:24 PM

Not just any session, the DM decided that only way OP got to participate in the CLIMACTIC FINAL ENCOUNTER was to have their character commit to a suicidal combat after the real fight was over. By the way good job killing the wizard and swashbuckler even with the odds against you OP.

Essentially the DM decided it was worth intentionally ruining one player's day, this would have happened even if the group managed to win even though it is obvious they weren't meant to, if not the whole tables fun just so they got to have their own personal good time.

Whether that makes the DM a lost cause or not is debatable, but it certainly doesn't paint the DM as a considerate or good person. That's just my opinion though. OP knows the DM so maybe it was a weird one off of jerkitude or maybe the DM has a tendency for such things in life.

Unoriginal

2017-11-21, 07:28 PM

Not really. Because it made only what the class can do an option.

Wrong. Characters are not limited by class mechanics.

Also, magic items being required means that the builds are limited by the magic items. A crutch can be nice when you have trouble walking, but when you can run it's just dead weight.

rather than rewarding creative play.

There is nothing creative in having a supermarket of powers you can buy from. You might fight creative ways to use those powerful items, but that wouldn't be something you can prepare in advance. If you want to prepare to counter X hazard, you will just get the item whose purpose is to counter X hazard.

In 3.5, that Force Wall could be Iron Heart Surged away, be Ankhlet'd, UMD'd, or otherwise countered because of the high magic supremacy within the game.

Pretty sure at least 3 of those "options" don't involve a magic item, or are not feasible by your typical Monk.

But no, of course, I forgot, Mr Frodo had to disattune from Sting to use Earendil.

Yes, it's sad 5e cannot recreate the scene where Frodo escaped a Forcecage using the magic items he bought at Wall Mart. It was my favorite moment in the books, but it's sad it's only in the movie's extended cut.

The lack of magic item requisites mean people don't know how to build.

That's absurd. People know how to build, they do so without magic items.

Magic items aren't required, oh wait, now I'm stuck.

No you're not. Your DM has prepared something that absolutely requires a magic item to do, it means that you're on a quest for said magic item. If not, the magic item is not required.

your builds more variable

Ah, yes, because having standard buy-this-to-do-X sure makes things variable.

and your ability to do something in a game, and are limited more by your skill at the game.

You play a character evolving in a world, there is no "skill at the game" to have.

Wanna play a Fighter with a +5 Greatsword, sure. Going to be less powerful than the guy who has a +1 Collision Impact weapon using a +5 Greater Magic Weapon from the Wizard.

...That exemple has nothing to do with 5e, I'm afraid.

Sorry, what point were you making again, making characters have less potential things to do makes the game better?

I find it pretty sad some people think that no magic supermarket means "less potential things to do".

If you can solve all your adventure's obstacles by spending some gold in a shop, they're not great obstacles.

Vaz

2017-11-21, 07:29 PM

Kay. Go play 3.5, and learn how what you've typed out is meaningless.

krugaan

2017-11-21, 07:49 PM

Kay. Go play 3.5, and learn how what you've typed out is meaningless.

You do know you're in the 5e forum, right?

Unoriginal

2017-11-21, 08:07 PM

Kay. Go play 3.5, and learn how what you've typed out is meaningless.

Great idea. I'm sure it'll teach me how spending money at the supermarket to solve the PCs' problems makes for an exciting adventure.

Naanomi

2017-11-21, 08:41 PM

Great idea. I'm sure it'll teach me how spending money at the supermarket to solve the PCs' problems makes for an exciting adventure.I really enjoyed 3.X, but that drove me crazy. I shouldn’t feel like I’m handicapping myself or my party when I spend copper on booze, or donate to a local orphanage instead of purchasing the optimal magic item from the local village grand-artificer...

Vaz

2017-11-21, 09:17 PM

Great idea. I'm sure it'll teach me how spending money at the supermarket to solve the PCs' problems makes for an exciting adventure.

I too remember being bored having things I can do in game.

Scripten

2017-11-21, 10:23 PM

I too remember being bored having things I can do in game.

Serious question: Do you just come onto the 5E forum to have pointless edition wars?

Twizzly513

2017-11-21, 10:55 PM

I won't rant about how clearly wrong this is a bunch, but I would like to say that as a DM, your job is to make things for the players. If your encounter doesn't work with the players, you fix the encounter, not take a player out of the game. That's so against the whole idea of D&D.

Beyond that, speak with the other players about this. Chances are, they feel cheated as well. Then you all need to approach the DM (who is clearly overzealous and overconfident about his DMing, since he is offering a new campaign after a TPK) and tell him that if he wants to DM then he needs to make some real effort to be one. Of course, it's never a bad idea to give him the...

DM Creed:
You have to use resources.
This will require research.
You will have to ask others for their opinions.
This is a long process.
You are playing with the PCs, not against them. You are their obstacle course, not their enemies.
If you don't like planning and tailoring everything to your players' preferences, then be a player, be a writer, or play video games.
No DM ever has become good on their own.

MeeposFire

2017-11-22, 12:01 AM

I really enjoyed 3.X, but that drove me crazy. I shouldn’t feel like I’m handicapping myself or my party when I spend copper on booze, or donate to a local orphanage instead of purchasing the optimal magic item from the local village grand-artificer...

While I do have places that sell some magic items in my games I am SO happy that magic items are back to being boons and not required for the math. When I play 4e I always use the inherent bonus rules so the same is true in 4e too. That way magic items just were given out when I thought they were cool and not just to keep you on the treadmill. I did the same thing in 3e for NPCs but holy crap that was still more complicated than I liked. I am really glad that I do nto have to worry about that anymore.

LexTalionis

2017-11-22, 12:44 AM

No, it's because apparently a year of DMing is the benchmark for learning about not screwing the pooch.

I mean there is a lot of support in this thread. A lot. But where there isn't, there is a complete lack of sympathy for mistakes. Every time one of these threads come up the usual "That DM is TERRIBLE don't EVER go back!" comments start up. Because I wasn't already paranoid about my mistakes.

It took me 20 years to try DMing again after my first fiasco. To the naysayers: you know no one is looking over our shoulders making corrections, right? There's no course for DMing. We make it up as we go along. Sure, we now have resources like the Angry GM (who I read) but not everyone knows where to look. I secretly wonder if my players show up out of habit or cause they've nothing better to do. I mean they've stuck around so far so logic says I can't be that bad, but... Y'know?

Yeah. Sometimes when I go on this forum, or peruse DM tips on reddit. I can't help but think to myself "have half of these commentators even been a Dungeon Master before?" or hell, "have they even played DnD?"

These aren't particularly charitable thoughts. But I mean, the value of going online for advice can be quite minimal, especially when it comes to tricky scenarios. To begin with, we only ever get to see the perspective of the OP, who's posting because they have a grievance to air. So that's some measure of objectivity out of the door.

Then there's a lot of internet-tough-guying and posturing, useless cantrips like "bad DnD is better than no DnD" or "always say yes" etc.

I find the BEST advice is usually just "Talk to your players" or "Talk to your DM". DnD is ultimately a social activity, and there's little point playing arm chair general. The game is what happens at the table, and away from the table between Players and DM, and all individuals in that game need to collectively come to terms with that in whatever fashion best suits them.

Edit: btw, I completely feel you. I read DnD threads all the time, I scour Matt Colville's running the game series, and AngryGM. No matter what, I always feel I've missed something after a session or made a critical error, no-one beats me up more over my real or perceived failures as a GM than I do. It will never be enough. But DM-ing is not for the critics on online forums, we DM for our players (who are often friends) and we DM for ourselves (and don't forget, we too are players).

Vaz

2017-11-22, 01:18 AM

Serious question: Do you just come onto the 5E forum to have pointless edition wars?

I apologise for pointing out flaws in the clearly holy grail of 5e with its unassailable position as the most perfect game of all time which cannot be improved.

qube

2017-11-22, 02:02 AM

Done that.
That too. Intentionally and otherwise.
Yup, that as well.
Yeah, I frequently talk to my players about the games I run.
And did you do all at the same time, or are you talking about seperate occassions
And after all these things, were you still obvlivious you messed up, or did you know?

Because, you know, if the answer is yes, I've got no quarrel in pointing out that that makes you at that time a bad DM in my book.
... and if the answer is no, then ref below.

I didn't always see the negative aspects of my actions as a GM.And one who claims otherwise, would be lying. However, as long as you're trying to lump in all mistakes together and ignore there are degrees, you're only talking to yourself - opposite to replying to my point.

It's entirely possible that this GM thinks he ran a balanced encounter (the OP heavily implies that he does) and might do the same again if not corrected. That doesn't make him a Bad GM by default, only an inexperienced one.And as pointed out before - no, it doesn't make him inexperienced. With a year of experience under your belt, one - like everyone else - might not see all the mistakes you make - you can ever argue that one won't see most mistakes - but one sure as heck should recognize the major screw ups.

That's why I called your stance insulting to newbie players: your argument requires the assumption that newbies are unable to learn anything; that even a year of experience has a zero learning curve; that after a year of GMming one still can't tell the difference between

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/98/Ruta_Panamericana_Buenos_Aires_Florida.jpg/220px-Ruta_Panamericana_Buenos_Aires_Florida.jpg

and

http://www.fortworthpersonalinjurylawyer.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/car_crash_texas.jpg

Yeah. Sometimes when I go on this forum, or peruse DM tips on reddit. I can't help but think to myself "have half of these commentators even been a Dungeon Master before?" or hell, "have they even played DnD?"15 years and counting.

Made plenty of mistakes in those years. But the ability to accept that you're not always perfect and not always going to be perfect, to accept that that sometimes you make mistakes and are a bad DM, is what makes one a better DM tomorrow.

Willie the Duck

2017-11-22, 09:08 AM

I apologise for pointing out flaws in the clearly holy grail of 5e with its unassailable position as the most perfect game of all time which cannot be improved.

Setting aside the performance art of pretending to be a beleaguered victim for speaking truth to power, the 'is it better to have the purchase-an-option scenario' is always going to end in a subjective perspective on whether it is worth the cost one pays.

Yes, being able to (and being able to expect to be able to, as in magic marts are an expected thing) buy 'things to do' to address problems allows great customization, and allows the party monk/rogue/fighter to have an answer to a Forcecage other than letting his friends rescue him. But (beyond the mentioned fact that you then can't use your funds for anything else without falling behind), then the game has to be balanced around that expectation. 3e was a dog's breakfast of balance issues, and people can reasonably say "that's the price I pay for this? No thanks," but even with a theoretically more well balanced second take on the same type of game, you are still basically requiring people to play that game. That means no regularly poor peasant heroes, no being able to take the PCs captive without serious thought to what that does to WBL if they don't get their stuff back, no Conan the easy-spender. 5e seems clearly built for the people who said "it's not worth it to me" (with option for those who liked the 3e method to add magic items back in). Most of the game has been re-jiggered to accommodate this (most 'save or sucks' are now 'save or suck until you get damaged', or 'save or suck but keep saving every round' and so forth). Force Cage seems to be the rare unchanged 5e spell that still requires a spellcasting/item toll to bypass. It is interesting that they didn't put in an acrobatics check or something as a mundane bypass.

Scripten

2017-11-22, 09:12 AM

I apologise for pointing out flaws in the clearly holy grail of 5e with its unassailable position as the most perfect game of all time which cannot be improved.

Flaws that are so subjective as to be considered personal preference? D&D 5E has flaws, just like any other system. Magic item scarcity, as has been pointed out, is not necessarily one of them. Every DM hands them out at different rates. The requirement for their existence is gone, yes, but that's hardly the same thing as their nonexistence. It provides for just as wide, if not a wider, breadth of gameplay styles, because I can run a game with one magic item per player and you can run one with five magic items per player and nobody ends up shortchanged.

However, arguing about which edition is better is hardly going to illuminate the problems behind OP's situation and ways to deter others from running into the same problem, whether as a player or DM, which was what the post you replied to was about.

Vaz

2017-11-22, 12:52 PM

Flaws that are so subjective as to be considered personal preference? D&D 5E has flaws, just like any other system. Magic item scarcity, as has been pointed out, is not necessarily one of them. Every DM hands them out at different rates. The requirement for their existence is gone, yes, but that's hardly the same thing as their nonexistence. It provides for just as wide, if not a wider, breadth of gameplay styles, because I can run a game with one magic item per player and you can run one with five magic items per player and nobody ends up shortchanged.

This guy doesn't permutate.

If you think that someone with 20 options has less options than someone who has 10 options, you're having a giggle.

krugaan

2017-11-22, 01:09 PM

Happy flower sunshine funtime!

Naanomi

2017-11-22, 01:23 PM

This guy doesn't permutate.

If you think that someone with 20 options has less options than someone who has 10 options, you're having a giggle.
Yeah, I had the option to make my character objectively worse and fall behind the expected curve by buying land, or helping orphans, or partying hard with my cash instead of immediately reinvesting it into my adventuring career optimal magic items. I love options like that....

Vaz

2017-11-22, 03:17 PM

Yeah, I had the option to make my character objectively worse and fall behind the expected curve by buying land, or helping orphans, or partying hard with my cash instead of immediately reinvesting it into my adventuring career optimal magic items. I love options like that....

I'm sure there's a point inside of your comment wanting to get out, but, i'm afraid it's stuck behind the fact you actively decided to not try and pick up said gear.

An adventurer who wants to adventure will pick up there things with which they wish to adventure with. I, as a Diver, picked up kit that helped me scuba dive. I, as a marine with a high arch in my foot bought proper assault boots to help me do my job. A lot of my fears are that if anything should ever happen to me, the wife will sell my stuff for what I told her I paid for it. The wife has a pair of horses which she rides and has to stable, as well as riding equipment. We have triplets. That was a shock to find out. Throw into that a pair of dogs and a guinea pig and costs are ****ing high.

I could probably have afforded a nicer house, better cars than the 25 year old Defender, 10 year old tranny van, and Focus that we have, higher cost partying, and actually be friends with the neighbours rather than having to spend time going and doing diving things, or camping things, or horse riding things, parenting things, or dog walking things or mechanicy things.

All of these things I want to go and do cost time and money, and I only have so much. If i didn't spend X on Y, then X could be better spent.

X could represent money or it could represent class levels. Y could be Fighter Champion levels, and Z could be Hexblade levels. The resource has a different name, but how wisely you spend that resource affects how strong you are in game.

Which given that I spend more time in game adventuring, I'd personally prefer to use my time doing stuff rather than managing spreadsheets to calculate how much gold I've earned from my properties.

Getting annoyed that spending half a million on a castle doesn't give you the same clout in combat as having bought a Legendary Weapon is daft. That's like getting annoyed that you dipped Fighter as a Wizard and now have to wait until level 13 to get access to your higher level spells.

Naanomi

2017-11-22, 03:59 PM

I'm sure there's a point inside of your comment wanting to get out, but, i'm afraid it's stuck behind the fact you actively decided to not try and pick up said gear.
I dislike the aspect of the game that a primarily role-playing decision of the character (how I spend loot, and to a lesser degree, how greedy I am at acquiring such loot to begin with) had such powerful and generally expected outcomes on the mechanical aspects of my character.

I like the idea (and I feel the are fairly well represented in fantasy literature) of a character who isn't just a hardcore professional adventurer in every aspect of their life. A character who donates the bulk of their wealth to their temple without expectations of reward; or who is a primitive naturalist with little care for material things (who will pick up the magic sword, but has no desire to scrounge up coins to pay for one); or maybe who engages in a high-risk profession like adventuring because they tend to spend all of their spare coin on ale and loose women... all of those sounds like interesting characters to me.

In 5e, so long as I manage to get my hands on the basic mundane equipment to do my job, I can just stumble across 'magic gear' as I want... and spend the rest of the coin the way I think my character would (or not spend it at all).

In 3.X, I felt like such decisions... fundamentally roleplaying decisions in my mind... would have disastrous effects on the expected efficacy of my characters; that it would result in me dragging my party down. So my wild druid, raised by wolves, who cared nothing for the ways of civilized men... still collected every coin, carefully poured through mail-order catalogs for the best gear for my level, bargain hunting through a dozen books for 'standard' items that were under-priced compared to their competition, never bought an ale or donated to a good cause... for fear of falling behind that treadmill.

It is freeing, to not have to 'worry about' one more aspect of 'character creation' in ensuring that every slot of my body is filled with the most cost-optimal gear or I'm increasing deadweight compared to my frugal party members.

Scripten

2017-11-22, 11:29 PM

However, arguing about which edition is better is hardly going to illuminate the problems behind OP's situation and ways to deter others from running into the same problem, whether as a player or DM, which was what the post you replied to was about.

This guy doesn't permutate.

If you think that someone with 20 options has less options than someone who has 10 options, you're having a giggle.

Quoted the part of my post you cut out and ignored.

Guess I got my answer. Enjoy your threadcrapping.

Vaz

2017-11-23, 02:32 AM

Quoted the part of my post you cut out and ignored.

Guess I got my answer. Enjoy your threadcrapping.

If you think this is edition wars, you need to give your head a wobble.

@naanomi, you voluntarily build your character weaker = weaker character. I'm not sure what you expect me to say about that? At least the 3.5e model encouraged people to take control of their magic items, letting then escape a force cage. Unless you expect a DM to tailor an encounter so that it can be overcome by your party, in which case you get into similar versimilitude issues of just why are we left on 10% resources after every adventure?

It's a game, not Sid Meiers Thene Landlord.

tsotate

2017-11-23, 03:05 AM

D&D 5E has flaws, just like any other system. Magic item scarcity, as has been pointed out, is not necessarily one of them.
It's not a mechanical flaw, but it's certainly a setting flaw, given that 5e's default setting is FR, a land basically paved in magic items from previous civilizations.

Danielqueue1

2017-11-25, 03:10 AM

It's not a mechanical flaw, but it's certainly a setting flaw, given that 5e's default setting is FR, a land basically paved in magic items from previous civilizations.

If one takes the standards in the DMG as canon, there is no default setting. in fact the DMG's first mentioning of established settings is:

This book, the Player's Handbook, and the Monster Manual present the default assumptions for how the worlds of D&D work. Among the established settings of D&D, the Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Mystara don't stray very far from those assumptions.

the thing that the DMG expects established (not default) settings to not stray very far from established expectations yet it is implied that they do stray.

also as for being "basically paved in magic items from previous civilizations." consider this snippet from the DMG core assumptions page.

The World Is Magical. Practitioners of magic are relatively few in number, but they leave evidence of their craft everywhere.

so based on the 5e core assumptions, people who can make magic items are relatively few, but the leftovers can be found all over the place.