Psychic Robot wrote:If anything, RC2 is probably the most honest (and most sane) poster here. Claiming that he's being dishonest and then putting him on ignore is pretty much an admission that one is in the wrong and probably not on the level.
If there's one thing PR is consistent about, it's that he always takes the side of whoever is most wrong, even if that means blatantly contradicting points he made not too long ago or claims to regularly advocate. Why? Because there's more trolling for the lulz inherent to that. And if you look at PR himself, you'll see he's talking a lot like a Paizil would. Yeah, Obvious Troll is Obvious.
Weren't you supposed to be on an attention seeking hiatus?
Now to Smite Imbecile.
RandomCasualty2 wrote:Roy wrote:So in other words you have to give them a free ride by having them treat level 5 junk as if it were 8?
Yup, just like if they were powergamed I'd treat CR 11 stuff like it was CR 8. I try to keep the difficulty relatively fixed at whatever power level the PCs happen to be at. It's the whole point of a level system in fact.
So in other words, because your players are competent they get rewarded less. Fuck you, fuck your game, and fuck your lies. What are you, the mother fucking communist of D&D? Guess what? Better people are better.
Setting some arbitrary line in the sand that says "If you're under this line, as a DM I'm just going to rape you with unwinnable battles" is just plain being a dick.
Straw man, and if the battles are unwinnable it's because the group failed, not because the DM did anything wrong. It's exactly what they are supposed to fight, and further they walked right into it. Even if it were an actually unwinnable fight, the fact they willingly walked into it disqualifies any complaints about it. But see it wasn't, because they didn't ignore the keep the fuck out sign in front of Great Wyrm OwnYourFacearicus's home. They went and fought a mind flayer at level 5, who was in charge of the plot of the week.
Stop trying to justify your own incompetence via blame shifting.
D&D isn't adversarial. It's a cooperative game. If you're playing DM versus PCs, then that's bad.
Fail. There is nothing adversarial about expecting PCs to do the things they are supposed to be able to do. There is however quite a bit adversarial in players too lazy to make a competent character, because in addition to everything else they expect the DM to do all the work to keep their useless characters from being the next victims of Darwin's Chainsaw.
Obviously if your PCs are making terrible characters, it's because they're newbies. It's not good practice to attract newbies by beating the fuck out of them with unfair scenarios. At best, they'll think you were a terrible DM (which you were) and at worst, they'll think the game sucks and not play it again.
Fail again. If they were just newbies, they'd have listened when I or someone else explained their characters were not good enough and why and told them how they could make a character that can actually do what they want it to do. And there is no sane person in the world that when they want a character to do something does not want them to actually do it, so they will quickly get the fuck away from Swashbuckler and be a Rogue. Or whatever.
If they're doing it anyways, it's because they were being willfully ignorant. Which means it's time to get hands off and wait, as being as obvious as it is, the truth will become self evident very quickly without doing anything different or to single out the gimp. And if they still don't get it, they can just deal with being the team Red Shirt, as it is entirely their fault they are dragging down the group, and without saying or doing a thing it's quite likely the group will apply some peer pressure to get them to stop failing.
Stop trying to justify your own incompetence.