"DMs dont have to follow the rules" is at best problematic to state is 101 rules....that statement requires a lot of nuisance and is not 100% always in the best interest is what we are all saying.
Its not nearly as cut and dry as that and to state so, especially to a new player, should be called out as potentially problematic.
You are absolutely free to play the game your way, but again the sacrosanct RAW say, amongst the first sentences so as to make sure that they are read by everyone: "To play D&D, and to play it well, you don’t need to read all the rules, memorize every detail of the game, or master the fine art of rolling funny looking dice. None of those things have any bearing on what’s best about the game." and "A Dungeon Master adjudicates the game and determines whether to use an official ruling in play".
For me, that's more 101 than almost everything else in the game, wouldn't you say ?
I would say the more “101” than this is:
”
The success of a D&D game hinges on your ability to entertain the other players at the game table. Whereas their role is to create characters (the protagonists of the campaign), breathe life into them, and help steer the campaign through their characters’ actions, your role is to keep the players (and yourself) interested and immersed in the world you’ve created, and to let their characters do awesome things.
Knowing what your players enjoy most about the D&D game helps you create and run adventures that they will enjoy and remember. Once you know which of the following activities each player in your group enjoys the most, you can tailor adventures that satisfy your players’ preferences as much as possible, thus keeping them engaged.”
I said "almost". :D
I don’t think anyone is saying the other side is doing it wrong, just making it clear that our tables are all different and that as long as the PCs are having fun, it’s all good 🙂
I agree, and don't think that I am not more in line with you than you might think. It's just that, the way I see it, these forums are much too focussed about playing the game a certain way, where the RAW is indeed sacrosanct. The game can be played in many different ways (and the quotes that I have provided as well as yours show that the designers had a slightly different intent than this in mind, although they wisely left the game open), and for me it's therefore very important to remind players and DMs that they are not necessarily bound by this when, as you posted, what is important is enjoyment.
And this especially in terms of monsters, where there should always be some mystery about what they can actually do.
And this especially in terms of monsters, where there should always be some mystery about what they can actually do.
Agree.
Like I said earlier, whether to protect against meta-gaming, whether intentional or not, or merely to challenge/ entertain the players, an experienced DM SHOULD be mixing up the stat blocs of monsters/ NPC's. There is no reason why even two supposedly identical monsters can't have varying abilities.
Creating challenging encounters is routinely suggested and completely fine.
Creating scenarios where there is no way for PCs to "Win" is problematic and is the root of about 60% of r/rpghorrorstories
I think that you have absolutely zero proof of that, but if you have, I would be interested to hear them. My feeling is that, these days, it's more due to players acting like entitled little s***t and not respecting their DMs and their work rather than Psycho DMs (which I've never ever encountered, contrary to the category above which I've heard about in droves, in real life and on these forums).
In any case, I'm not concerned, because I live by the RAW: "There’s no winning and losing in the Dungeons & Dragons game." :p
Yet you say you have encounters that players are supposed to win?
"As for players claiming to be good because they went through an encounter designed for them to win, please..."
NPCs get the same actions that PCs do. Move, Standard, Reaction, Bonus. Just like PCs, they can only use them on abilities they have. They may have no reaction except an AOO. They may have no ability to use at all. If they have a spell that is cast as a Bonus action, then they can use their bonus action to do so. They have the same casting rules for multiple spells per round that PCs do. NPCs are far more limited, but only by the tools available to use with their action economy. It happens to PCs sometimes too, where you end your turn because you have no valid action take as a bonus, or a reaction. It doesn't mean you don't' have one to use if you did have something to do.
NPCs get the same actions that PCs do. Move, Standard, Reaction, Bonus. Just like PCs, they can only use them on abilities they have. They may have no reaction except an AOO. They may have no ability to use at all. If they have a spell that is cast as a Bonus action, then they can use their bonus action to do so. They have the same casting rules for multiple spells per round that PCs do. NPCs are far more limited, but only by the tools available to use with their action economy. It happens to PCs sometimes too, where you end your turn because you have no valid action take as a bonus, or a reaction. It doesn't mean you don't' have one to use if you did have something to do.
An NPC acting like a PC has the limitations you state. However, an NPC run by the DM as part of any encounter is not bound by any rules a PC is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think we agree yes 🙂
Agree.
Like I said earlier, whether to protect against meta-gaming, whether intentional or not, or merely to challenge/ entertain the players, an experienced DM SHOULD be mixing up the stat blocs of monsters/ NPC's. There is no reason why even two supposedly identical monsters can't have varying abilities.
Mixing up creatures is always fine to do
Creating challenging encounters is routinely suggested and completely fine.
Creating scenarios where there is no way for PCs to "Win" is problematic and is the root of about 60% of r/rpghorrorstories
Yet you say you have encounters that players are supposed to win?
"As for players claiming to be good because they went through an encounter designed for them to win, please..."
Which is it?
NPCs get the same actions that PCs do. Move, Standard, Reaction, Bonus. Just like PCs, they can only use them on abilities they have. They may have no reaction except an AOO. They may have no ability to use at all. If they have a spell that is cast as a Bonus action, then they can use their bonus action to do so. They have the same casting rules for multiple spells per round that PCs do. NPCs are far more limited, but only by the tools available to use with their action economy. It happens to PCs sometimes too, where you end your turn because you have no valid action take as a bonus, or a reaction. It doesn't mean you don't' have one to use if you did have something to do.
An NPC acting like a PC has the limitations you state. However, an NPC run by the DM as part of any encounter is not bound by any rules a PC is.