Results 31 to 60 of 110
Thread: Not Getting To Play
-
2020-10-28, 12:56 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2013
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
“Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I'm not a pious hermit, I haven't done only good in my life. But if I'm to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.”
-
2020-10-28, 01:59 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2017
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
Ok, I am finally beginning to under stand the point Pex is making from your story. The encounter exposed and exploited multiple of your character's weaknesses.
There was a way for you to go int the fight but dang why would anyone handicap themselves that badly? The trick here is YOUR character. The rogue or barbarian cannot teleport out of a force cage or solid sphere. But someone in the party should have the power. Mage pops in with a d. Door then next turn frees you both.
It sounds to me like the party didnt act like a functioning party. No one tried to mitigate your weakness. Things like this need to happen for the game to properly function. Wizard casts fly on the fighter, cleric casts protection from evil on the barbarian, tanks need to position themselves between the mage and the enemy.
In that story they could have swam closer to the shore so you could attack in only hip deep water, or swam to a dock so you could yank them out. Instead they stayed in the middle of deep water for a fifht that doesnt sound like it had much "porpoise."
-
2020-10-28, 05:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2016
Re: Not Getting To Play
So...you DON'T have a story that fits the premise of the OP. You did exactly what I said is generally what happens when people supposedly get "locked out". You chose not to participate.
Unless you tried to do something/ go somewhere else and the GM said "No, you can't", you were not locked out of this situation. You have nearly limitless options at your disposal and you chose: do nothing for 30 IRL minutes. Kind of objectively the worst possible option. That's on you.
They sure could have. Rather than doing nothing, maybe the person in question could have suggested that to the party, who may just not have thought to do so for whatever reason.Last edited by Rynjin; 2020-10-28 at 05:28 PM.
-
2020-10-28, 07:20 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Location
- Eastern US
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
Per the DM, since we didn't fall in, we had no reason to have to get out of the lake. The encounter was to get out of the lake - not to fight the dolphins.
I have no idea why the 4 PCs decided to try to fight the dolphins. (Yes, 6 person party.)
That was the way this game was set up. Everything was a random encounter in the world. Every hex we moved, we had to roll for wind direction and speed, terrain, temperature, and what the random encounter would be. Sometimes it was a monster. Sometimes it was a trap. Sometimes it was a helpful NPC, or treasure. Sometimes it was nothing.
More than half - 4 out of 6. Mostly arbitrary violence.
It wasn't so much handicapping our PCs. It was that we had already "beaten" the encounter (by not falling in) and so we could not contribute.
Had any of the PCs come close to the shore, I would have extended my halbred to help them out. None did.
It sounds to me like the party didnt act like a functioning party.
No, we were told we could not participate because we had already succeeded in doing what was supposed to be done. We weren't in the lake, so did not have to find a way out.
You have nearly limitless options at your disposal and you chose:
do nothing for 30 IRL minutes. Kind of objectively the worst possible option. That's on you.
They sure could have. Rather than doing nothing, maybe the person in question could have suggested that to the party, who may just not have thought to do so for whatever reason.Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
Proud member of the "I Love Anyway" Club
Thank you, Ceika, so much for the avatar!
-
2020-10-28, 08:27 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2016
Re: Not Getting To Play
This is, again, not the context of the OP (which is about spells like Wall of Stone, unless I'm mistaken, which can lock down certain entrances and exits). This is just a bad DM arbitrarily deciding which decisions are open to a player.
In this case I'd say the best decision available to you is "don't play with this guy".
-
2020-10-28, 09:29 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2013
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
“Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I'm not a pious hermit, I haven't done only good in my life. But if I'm to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.”
-
2020-10-28, 09:37 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
Re: Not Getting To Play
Round 1: The monster crits twice and leaves one of the squishier PCs on 0.
Round 2-5: The PC makes Death Saves and does nothing the entire fight. Not only does nothing, but is constantly on the verge of literal death. And if you can't pass a 'Suck or Suck' spell, you can't pass a Death Save, either.
Pretty sure that's the worst that can happen.
-
2020-10-28, 10:19 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2019
Re: Not Getting To Play
That's more of a case of bad luck, rather than deliberate DM choice, which I assume is the more irritating thing to Pex because it's an intentional act rather than the dice falling where they may. Plus, healing is usually available, so barring unusual circumstance healing the person before they die should be pretty high on the priority list.
The stars are calling, but let's come up with a good opening line before we answer
Spoiler: Homebrew of Mine
-
2020-10-29, 02:55 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
Re: Not Getting To Play
Being critted to death's door in round 1 does suck. I would privately question the balance of the scenario. If it's level 1 or 2 I can chalk it up to being level 1 or 2. It's not the same scenario but in the same ballpark. Maybe it is a subtle difference, but the difference means everything to me. I'm more bothered by Hunger of Hadar in a choke point blocking you off unless you want to commit (near) suicide and don't know where to go on the other side even if you're willing to run through it than actually being in the combat suffering Hold Person and your d20 pretends it doesn't have numbers higher than 8. It was more irritating because it wasn't the first time in the campaign I was locked out of the encounter. At least I'm finally able to have conversations with NPCs that last more than a minute while everyone else gets fifteen, but I ramble.
-
2020-10-29, 09:26 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
Re: Not Getting To Play
Mentally I am splitting this into two categories: situational blocks ('no you can't contribute, you aren't there'), and shutdown blocks (wall spells, paralysis, etc.).
Regarding situational blocks, this is really hard to stop from happening. Players have an amazing ability to split the party right before things go down. Certainly systemic setup plays a part as well (only the 'rogue' character will pass stealth checks, so they go off on their own, taking-off-armor-times mean that the party tank is unlikely to be able to go join the dolphin fight until after the fight is resolved, etc.). In general, I think the way to help address this is to:
- Make it at least unlikely that this will happen (set up the situation where the rogue that fails their stealth can run away screaming to their friends instead of having to fight on their own, offer quick-release armor regardless of realism, etc.)
- Make individual combats reasonable of length (so that non-participation isn't thaaat bad)
- As suggested, have the player of the nonparticipating character play a different character for the fight.
Regarding shutdown blocks, in general, game combat systems are composed of either comparing your 'damage ones opponent' (DOO) mechanics against the other guy's DOO mechanics, or else various attempts to keep the other guy from getting to apply their DOO in the first place. If you eliminate all the trips, disarms, entangles, walls, and so forth, it tends to just make the combats focus on attriting HP as fast as possible (and the only variety being how defense vs. offense your focus is, single-target vs area-effect, or consistent vs. nova output). That doesn't sound very fun, so I think the focus instead should be that the shutdown should be contestable. No one-save and then you are shut down (paralysis effects are fine, you should just get repeated chances to break free). No shutdowns you can only defeat with abilities you are very likely not to have (D&D's Force Cage is my pet peeve -- overpowering a force field is a common fictional trope, yet for some reason it was decided that force effects don't bother having hit points or similar). If one side has a busta, then the other side should have a busta-busta.
-
2020-10-29, 09:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- Italy
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
also, it is often brough up how it is frustrating to often fail, but it is rarely mentioned how frustrating it can be to succeed too often.
I don't know if you guys also feel it, but to me it gets boring after a while. i had a character built to be resilient, with huge AC, saving throws and other defensive stuff. and no enemy could touch me. and the first time it was all like "cool, i am invincible!". but it got stale after a while; i lost interest. after a couple sessions, i was elated when i finally found a boss strong enough to hurt me.
having your abilities always neutralized, being unable to act, it's bad if it happens often. but if it never happens, if you always succeed, if you always do your cool stuff and nothing stops it, then it can get equally bad.In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.
Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you
my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert
-
2020-10-29, 10:27 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2017
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
OK, this has nothing to do with in game situations. The GM was being a **** by saying you cannot do anything. This is bad GMing at its finest. You absolutely could have been part of this encounter. Thrown ropes, extended halbards( as you suggested), ranged attacks, shouting out to your party, warning them of fins in the water moving to flank. You and the the other PC could totally have walked from the shore.
But the party in the water was also to blame. They chose to waste their time, your time, the gm's time. That fight was pointless as the goal is to get out of the water. I would have given no XP for the fight itself and treated the whole thing as a trap.
running away from encounters means there is no XP. That is 100% bull. As a party you observed, scouted, and successfully bypassed/temporarily neutralized a threat. You have gained knowledge of the terrain and wildlife ( experience is literally knowledge). You found a pit trap, one doesn't have to fall in to get the XP for the pit trap. Knowing it is there and bypassing it is the whole point.
Being attacked by X and getting to a location where X cannot possibly get to you is a win. Going through X to get to location Y is a win as well if X cannot/or doesnt' know to follow you into Y. It may not be as much XP as permanently neutralizing them but think of MacGyver, Solid Snake, cat burglars, Vow of Peace takers. Getting in and getting out are WINS, big shiny in character common sense wins.
Also, because you beat the trap did you get full xp just like the pcs who failed and fell into the fight? Did you suffer no fight so no xp idiocy? This was really a well disguised. trap not a fight.
-
2020-10-29, 10:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2017
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
Ok, you are being effectively locked out of the combat by the GM. Oh, man, that is some serious suck right there. And this has happened multiple times to you? I would consider leaving a game if that happens again. That is not something that can get fixed. I don't know all the details but seriously, dang.
-
2020-10-29, 11:33 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- Vacation in Nyalotha
Re: Not Getting To Play
3.5 party shalt not have any fun but mine Vow of Peace?
If all rules are suggestions what happens when I pass the save?
-
2020-10-29, 02:03 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
- Location
- Utah
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
Yeah, that example of the DM saying that you can't do anything because you didn't fall in the lake is pretty bad. Like, walk away from the table bad.
As a DM (I don't get to be a player much), I try very hard to make sure that this never happens. This can be hard, because I have a party that splits up every. single. time. I'm dead serious there - we are six months into a campaign where we meet weekly, and the only time that we have made it through a full session without them splitting up is one where everyone controlled a temporary character on a side mission to deal with something important to the campaign but not applicable to the party. The regular party almost never seems to sleep in the same place if they can avoid it - I have to have different inns prepared so they can all go to the place they like. So there are a lot of opportunities for people to not play, but I try to deal with it.
One time, they were in different locations while a zombie horde attacked the town. I had multiple combats going simultaneously as they worked their way back to each other, until I could finally merge the combats into one. Another time, one of the players stayed in town to do some stuff while the rest went to an island to do some hunting. When things got hairy, the party on the island sent the wizard's familiar to the town to find the bard and give her a note that they were doing some exploring and she could come join. She replied that she would stay there, because she had an appointment in the morning that she didn't want to miss. That was a challenge to keep her with something to do, but I would update her whenever the group was not in combat and was considering their move. The biggest, though, was when the party got in an argument and the bard left town in a huff. After ensuring that this was all fun for everyone and there were no IRL hard feelings, we spent four sessions with her doing a murder mystery as she traveled alone to the big city while the rest had some classic dungeon adventures. Before it was over, one other character decided he had to leave adventuring to go join the revolution in his home country, and made a new character that joined the bard on the murder mystery. They are now all back together, but boy that was a pain to deal with.
I think I lost the thread there a bit to complain about my campaign. And really, I shouldn't complain because I really have great players who make it a lot of fun. But there are certainly times that there is nothing I can do about some people sitting around a bit. If you split up the party - especially in a way that lasts multiple sessions - sometimes you end up sitting.
-
2020-11-01, 12:09 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2005
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
I think sometimes it depends a lot on how the group likes to play things.
A Hold Person incapacitates the wizard for several rounds in the fight, giving the player nothing to do. However, a more teamwork focused group would probably then spend actions and resources to undo it, so the character can rejoin the action. As was mentioned early on in this thread, some players like the challenge of preparing for the unexpected, bringing various remedies to different status effects. I am someone who likes to do that too (you can very often on my character sheet find ways to fix things like paralysis or blindness). Playing a Pathfinder Paladin, I also enjoy the pay-off of having picked my Mercies carefully, so that when Sickened/Diseased/Cursed/Paralysis/Poison/Blinded first appears, I kind of get that giddy feeling of "yes! I was prepared for this!".
To me, playing roleplaying games is a group-effort, and challenges are for the group to overcome together.
Even something like "I'm a melee fighter and enemy is somewhere I can't reach them for melee range", well... always carry a crossbow, or a sling, or a bow? Sure, I've been in situations too where I realise "damn I have no ranged attacks at all!" because I derp'ed and forgot to pick it up or got lazy and thought I wouldn't need it, and then one fight later where I felt useless, I pick up a ranged weapon.
I don't in my years of playing that I've been in many combats where there was *absolutely nothing* I could do or the group could do to aid me if I was under a status effect, with the exception of my character having died. In those instances, I've either been busying myself with rolling up a new character, or advising some of the other players in the fight that need a little bit more guidance with the game.
-
2020-11-02, 02:18 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
Re: Not Getting To Play
Some of the suggestions I've seen seem to not be taking an important fact into account - in most systems, combat operates on a much faster time-scale than most other actions. In D&D for example, it's rare for a fight to last ten rounds (one minute). So any plan like "go make a raft" or "search around and find another way past the wall" or "take out a pick and break it down" had better be done extremely fast or it just amounts to a fancier way of doing nothing.
This happened in Shadowrun once without even a barrier! The group was slightly split - only about a block apart, a distance that would take maybe 30-40 seconds to sprint. Combat breaks out for half the party and the other half ... gets to sit there doing nothing for an hour of real-time, because the entire fight only lasted like 10 seconds IC (wired reflexes, so both sides were moving at high speed). Yes, we were technically acting - we were running toward the fight - and the GM even let us start doing so unrealistically fast (instantly after comms were cut, rather than waiting a bit to notice), and it still didn't help.
So maybe the answer is "crunchy combat and action-preventing effects shouldn't be combined", except that it's usually crunchy combat systems that have more ways to represent such effects, and more incentive to provide mechanically-distinct alternatives to damage.
-
2020-11-02, 02:43 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
-
2020-11-02, 03:51 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2020
Re: Not Getting To Play
An RPG is complex in lots of ways, so every so often a player might be "left out" of game play. But it's not the end of the world. You just roll with it.....literally.
But putting all sorts of requirements on the GM is not helping anyone. It's bad enough if you expect the GM to alter the game based on your whims, but gets even worse when the GM is doing it for all the players.
In a good game, characters should be taken out of the action all the time: but it also should be fair, so it happens to everyone.
-
2020-11-03, 01:09 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- Vacation in Nyalotha
-
2020-11-03, 08:19 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Australia
Re: Not Getting To Play
Having "my character is absent" options is always a good idea, for cases of character death as well as those situations where a PC isn't available for the fight.
But I'll also say I accept my character not getting to be part of a fight goes with the game. If my character has the skills/stats to survive being pushed from a great height but not the ability to get back up to the fight, I don't think that means the GM shouldn't have fights around such falls, nor should they hold off on pushing me off if the enemy can do so.
And if my comrades can't nudge the odd foe down for me to play with, that's not on the GM either. Having the cliff makes for an interesting variation on the fight which I see no need to give up (though the rest of the group should be willing to catch me up on important developments if I break out my iPad while the rest of the fight happens up there).
But also, there's no wrong way to play and not everyone is a patient as I am
But also, If I'm playing a low level fighter who hasn't had a chance to pick up a magic bow, I'm going to get grumpy when we hit the 2nd adventure focused around monsters needing magic to hit them as they fly around hitting us all.
-
2020-11-04, 10:09 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- Vacation in Nyalotha
-
2020-11-04, 11:41 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2014
Re: Not Getting To Play
I completely agree, with the addendum that it's occasionally acceptable for a player to incidentally not be able to do something due to choices they made, so long as they 1.) Got to make the decision that led to it themselves, and 2.) It wasn't some esoteric "gotcha" where they legitimately couldn't have reasonably deduced this scenario.
The example above about not taking ranged weaponry (provided you could have gotten what you needed easily) is one situation I'd call fair. A related and common one is a scenario where a different player decides to scout ahead and gets into trouble away from the party. As a DM it's a good idea to not let a scenario like that take up too much time at the table, but at the same time you can't really allow decisions like that to not have that possible danger. Figuring out the right balance is among the toughest things for me to do, since it's one of the best counters to the scouts I use as NPC's/enemies and we all like the interplay when we're the ones doing it. I try to keep to a five minute rule, where I check back in with the party if an entire five minutes have elapsed without anyone else getting to do anything.Last edited by Waterdeep Merch; 2020-11-04 at 11:48 AM.
-
2020-11-04, 12:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2020
Re: Not Getting To Play
Yes. I don't think the GM or other players should tell a player what to do, and that includes character creation. I only give advise if asked.
I never liked that it must be the players fault somehow and the player must know about the thing ahead of time and then choose to let it happen. It is all just too much.
The rules are full of weapons, items, magic, spells, and effects that can take a creature out of a fight. And it can happen at any time during the game. And just about never will a player know say, all the weapons, items, equipment and magic that a group of orcs have to use.
-
2020-11-04, 01:05 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
I think if you want to not have obstacles to your players doing stuff, then you need to play a game designed with this removed.
I mainly come at this from the perspective of D&D 5th edition where such an approach is almost untenable.
So many class abilities give mobility like running up walls, give save benefits, grant immunity to certain conditions, let you dispell effects and otherwise protect against this kind of setup.
If you approach the game with the attitude that a whole slew of things cant happen to players you make a lot of characters more remarkable abilities totally worthless. If you are not going to let these abilities be useful, you should play instead a game where they are not an option.
-
2020-11-05, 07:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Australia
-
2020-11-05, 10:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
Re: Not Getting To Play
You can blame the player when he on purpose does not get the bow when available. You cannot blame him when the bad guy casts an area control spell or activates a trap that cuts off the PC from the battle, and there's absolutely nothing the PC can do about it. No getting around it. No attacking through it. Nothing to interact with in the area the PC is in. Unable to remove the obstacle. If it's a concentration spell the bad guy moves to an area where the rest of the party can't attack him to break concentration until they deal with the mooks first and/or bad guy has War Caster making it difficult to break concentration.
-
2020-11-05, 11:32 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2016
-
2020-11-05, 11:42 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- Dallas, TX
- Gender
Re: Not Getting To Play
It is the DM's job to set up obstacles. It is the players' job to overcome the obstacles.
Sometimes, in some encounters, a player will fail to overcome the obstacles, and the other players will deal with that encounter. This is normal. A player should get several chances to affect the encounter. This does not mean that a player will always have a chance to affect every encounter.
In my "Rules for DMs, I have included the following:
Originally Posted by Rules for DMs
Rule 24 means that sometimes I will set up a barrier that prevents the use of your favorite ability. Accept it, and figure out something else you can do.
If your character occasionally fails to take part in the encounter, then the DM is providing real challenges. If you never gets to take part in the action, then there's a problem. Don't confuse the two.
And look for ways to get past the obstacle.
-
2020-11-06, 12:46 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2019