godzillabacter

@godzillabacter@lemmy.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. For a complete list of posts, browse on the original instance.

godzillabacter ,

Not OP but loss of the Pi results in loss of network connectivity. A headache if you're home and never doing anything time-critical on the network. A disaster if you or anyone else is dependent on the network for anything time-sensitive (virtual doctors appointment, work call, etc), or you're away from home and unable to directly VPN to your router to reconfigure DNS settings.

godzillabacter OP ,

I mean it makes the game less fun for me. I enjoy running monsters and tactical combat. I like using cool and powerful monsters (as appropriate for party level). I like using some semblance of strategy and making my monsters behave in a way that is realistic for their stat block. It makes running the game less enjoyable to be faced with the choice of 1. nerf the monsters significantly to remove all real danger to the party and be easily defeated 2. choose suboptimal behaviors to minimize damage to PCs or 3. Risk a TPK on an encounter that shouldn't normally produce a TPK

godzillabacter OP ,

I've tried, I don't attack downed players. The general flow is

  1. Seemingly well-balanced encounter (although higher in difficulty than others because boss monster)
  2. Stab-wizard (not always a wizard) goes down first, boss shifts focus to other players.
  3. Other players panic as the death saves rise, and will stand right next to the boss monster trying to heal the stab wizard, taking huge damage and dealing none
  4. Next player goes down, snowball, TPK

Unfortunately, none of the players are really well versed in the system (and don't really want to learn beyond in-game learning), so even though they'll put two characters right next to the boss, they'll never flank etc unless I explicitly remind them at that time.

I appreciate that the other players feel a sense of camaraderie and won't abandon the other player, but I'm not going to have a dragon just suddenly decide their going to do ranged attacks when there's someone standing directly in front of them that is actively distracted doing something else.

I've tried the typical advice of minions with a lower level boss, and while the individual monsters are weaker, when the stab-wizard goes down the party gets fucked by the action economy.

Sometimes I'll do what I did last time, which is just debuff the boss monster to a significantly lower level (moderate encounter level) but then (as happened last time) you get one lucky roll and it's dead at the start of combat and you're like "fuck that's not scary or fun"

godzillabacter OP ,

I've had the discussion with them twice. For leveled spells they're trying to conserve, but to a ridiculous extent. Like fully rested before a known dragon encounter that is also an explicitly stated last encounter of the dungeon and reminded to use spells immediately prior to the encounter and never used a leveled spell. But they never give an explanation for not using cantrips beyond "I just forget". This is when we have the discussion about "well it seems like the mechanics of this class are really at-odds with the way you like to play, maybe next time you should try a Paladin?" Which seems to go over well, until the next character sheet shows up in my inbox.

godzillabacter OP ,

I never once asked the community to help me find fault in their behavior. It is a devastatingly poor mechanical choice to play a full caster with no armor and completely avoid using any leveled spells while rushing into melee. It makes it exceptionally hard to balance the game at a level which is challenging to the players but without threat of TPK. I am allowed to be frustrated that the "safe" encounters I feel I have to build to avoid TPK result in me basically never landing a single hit on the players. I have tried addressing this multiple times in a polite and genuine manner. I've tried suggesting we play a different, more narrative driven game like PBtA systems, which all of my players shot down, especially this player in particular, because they "like the crunch" of the systems we've been playing. I don't like that you're calling me an adversarial dick because I am expressing a frustration with a player even though I have done nothing adversarial.

godzillabacter OP ,

Not really, they predominantly pick combat-focused spells but then don't use them in combat. When they do have utility cantrips, despite scenarios to use them, they rarely cast them.

Help with a player that likes the idea of being a caster, but not the mechanics

I've been a DM for about 3 years, and have predominantly run one-shots and short campaigns in DnD5e and PF2e. I have a player who persistently builds primary caster based characters, but then won't do anything in combat but "I stab it with my dagger." They rarely use cantrips, and basically won't cast a leveled spell unless I...

godzillabacter OP ,

Accurate, just less hostile 😂

godzillabacter OP ,

I haven't explicitly stated "your poor choices are killing your friends" but after the last TPK, they were sad and I apologized for killing them, but then immediately went into a discussion of "you know you were fully rested for this, why didn't you use any of your more powerful spells?"

Unfortunately none of my players are exceptionally well versed in the rules of the system/their characters. They know the basics well enough. Unfortunately they (and I) have very demanding professional lives and reading a rule book is too low on their priority list to ever make it to the top.

I totally agree that the individual would be better suited to an eldritch knight, Paladin, arcane trickster rouge, etc. We've had that discussion twice, and it seems to go over well and they agree, until the next session comes up and they have made another caster character.

godzillabacter OP ,

They generally pick combat focused spells, minimal utility cantrips/leveled spells. But then don't use them. When they have utility cantrips, they rarely use them outside of combat (like won't cast detect magic to look for things, won't use prestidigitation for intimidation, etc).

godzillabacter OP ,

This is a great thought, I'll definitely give it some thought

godzillabacter OP ,

That's why I came to the community. I feel like I'm a reasonable and half-way experienced DM at this point. The player is aware cantrips are unlimited use. The player is a very intelligent individual. I've had the conversations about spell use. At its core, I genuinely think the player is attracted to the "cool factor" and "aesthetic" of playing a caster but doesn't actually want to engage with any of the mechanics. I can remind the player about spells and that reminder will last for a combat, sometimes less. I feel like I've done everything I know to do aside from straight banning the player from playing full casters or queuing them to cast spells every-other turn, I'm at a loss.

godzillabacter OP ,

I don't try and TPK my players, quite the opposite. I'm actively downgrading encounters and making mechanically disadvantageous choices to avoid them. The only thing I'm not doing is fudging rolls.

I am reaching out to the community to help me try and better understand how I can resolve this problem at my table, and everyone else in this thread seems to agree that this player's choices are, at a surface level at least, baffling. I recognize it is probably reflective of some underlying assumptions that I have tried multiple times to elucidate so I can better understand the situation. But for some reason, you are the only person I have encountered who has become hostile and accusatory towards me. I don't know if you've been butt-hurt by some DM in your past or if your games live by the rule of cool. Regardless, you're being disrespectful and I don't appreciate that. I won't be engaging with you anymore.

godzillabacter OP ,

It's not quite 3 years. I've been DMing for about 3. This player has been playing on-and-off for about 1.5. I have complicated the rules a touch because in the last 8mo or so I've switched to PF2e. I mean this problem in specific isn't that system specific, so I don't think that really excuses it.

But all-in-all you're right. The most effective answer is find another group that is more invested in the game. I'm moving across the country in a few months, so I guess I should just ride the issue out a little longer and then move on, which is a huge bummer. I guess in the meantime I'll try and remind them more regularly and once again have the conversation about "Why?"

Thank you

godzillabacter OP ,

I go back and forth on this. I feel like I'm enabling these choices by pulling punches. But it feels excessively anti-fun to just kill them and be like "sorry lol be better". I don't think I have the heart to just murder characters all the time.

godzillabacter OP ,

That's a really cool narrative way to go about fixing this, though it does feel kinda rail-roady. I'll give it some thought.

godzillabacter OP ,

My table tends to not metagame at all, even in situations I really wish they would. I think of all the answers I've gotten, this is the most reasonable and actionable answer. Just remind the player more often. I'm gonna have to come up with a good way to not sound like a condescending asshole because this is the only player I'm going to have to do it to. It just sucks cause it's one more thing I've gotta do while running combat. But that's life I guess

godzillabacter OP ,

Oh, absolutely, there was going to have to be a discussion well before I would be willing to do that. I'd never take unilateral control of a player's character like that

godzillabacter ,

As a general rule, yes. People who are able to better perform a task should be preferentially allocated towards those tasks. That being said, I think this should be a guiding rule, not a law upon which a society is built.

For one, there should be some accounting for personal preference. No one should be forced to do something by society just because they're adept at something. I think there is also space within the acceptable performance level of a society for initiatives to relax a meritocracy to some degree to help account for/make up for socioeconomic influences and historical/ongoing systemic discrimination. Meritocracy's also have to make sure they avoid the application of standardized evaluations at a young age completely determining an individual's future career prospects. Lastly, and I think this is one of common meritocracy retorhic's biggest flaws, a person's intrinsic value and overall value to society is not determined by their contributions to STEM fields and finance, which is where I think a lot of people who advocate for a more meritocracy-based society stand.

godzillabacter ,

If I was guessing, in general, I think people who advocate for a pure meritocracy in the USA feel the world should be evaluated in more black and white, objective terms. The financial impact and analytic nature of STEM and finance make it much easier to stratify practitioners "objectively" in comparison to finding, for instance, the "best" photographer. I think there is also a subset of US culture that thinks that STEM is the only "real" academic group of fields worth pursuing, and knowledge in liberal arts is pointless -> not contributing to society -> not a meaningful part of the meritocracy. But I'm no expert.

godzillabacter ,

Well you need to clarify further then. Are you saying we should make the best scientist the president, or the person with the most aptitude for politics and rule to be president? I don't see how this is functionally different than what I said.

godzillabacter ,

I didn't say it did, but I am a citizen of the USA and the vast majority of my cultural experience and knowledge, and therefore what I can intelligently comment on, are centered on the US.

godzillabacter ,

Then no, I don't agree with this specific implementation of the system, at least the second half. I do think more productive/effective workers should be compensated more. But being a good engineer does not make you a good manager, and the issues associated with promoting an excelling worker into management (a job requiring a substantially different skill set) are so common there's a name for their inevitable failure, The Peter Principle

godzillabacter ,

All of my encounters with individuals who feel liberal arts are useless and STEM is the way seem to, at their core, feel that way because of earning potential, and I've never heard one of them bash Econ/finance/investment as a career path. But 🤷‍♂️

godzillabacter ,

You're generalizing a specific phenomenon, and incorrect. Acid-base reactions only very rarely produce gases. The reactions produce heat and water, only in the case of bicarbonate being a base is a gas produced. This is because carbonic acid forms, which spontaneously decays into carbon dioxide. This is not a universal acid-base phenomenon. Soaps should not cause fizzing with vinegar.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •