To everyone upset about me saying the acronym "CP" in this video... obviously, I didn't mean it that way. It's Chris Perkins' initials. I'd never heard the other thing referred to as "CP" so it never occurred to me. I'm sorry for any offense caused, now let's move past it.
I ran a one shot once where the bbeg was a crazy wizard, and almost all my players were ranged fighters of some sort.After they took the Wizard to 1/4 health in one round, you BET I gave him more HP and bumped his damage to make the fight more interesting. On the other hand, when my players have had a bad luck streak and were having too much trouble with what was supposed to be a simple encounter, I fudged numbers in their favor. We have DM screens for a reason. If I have to lie about the number on a piece of plastic so my friends have more fun, I don’t feel an ounce of regret.
@sporkbot I completely agree, I ran a crazy wizard as well, the only reason I didn't end up buffing her hp was due to the fact the battle lasted only 3 rounds. Three rounds where two people and half a dozen npcs nearly died and the wizard was counterspelled preventing her from conjuring minions. Sometimes the players can "earn" the quick takedown of an enemy, but I must admit it more often happens to be the case that the DM (me) failed to balance our npcs to the proper threat level
Great video. This is what the 5E DMG SHOULD have had in it - namely HOW to run a game, not starting off with pantheons, money, and city generation. I've cracked my DMG mostly to review some of the contents, but I would not really call it a guide for Dungeon masters. I enjoyed CP's takes on things, especially the multiple choices, as it shows that there is more than one way, often multiple ways to deal with situations in your game.
There was an interview somewhere, were they say there's loads of "how to DM" videos out there so putting to much of that in a book is redundant and makes some people feel like they have to DM like this or that. I agree it's not my favourite version of DMG they've realised but, I would be hard to balance everyone's expectations vs keeping it simple for 1st time uses.
@@wizardsling Some of this is okay, generic advice but some is terrible. Some of it leads to DMs placing very unrealistic expectations on themselves, where they are supposed to be putting on a production for their players 1) The DM is not a storyteller. Take this from a guy who runs games and writes fiction--first off, writing fiction is much harder. Scene, setting, mood, character, dialogue, plot progression is all on the author. In running games, the DM is a conflict engineer, and the story emerges out of the ways the players engage with the conflicts the DM put in their way, and the dice to see whether they succeed or fail. 3) The DM is not always an actor nor does he/she have to be. This is one of the reasons why there is such a DM shortage for 5E games. That is an unrealistic expectation for player to have of the person running the game around the table. Sure, you want to know the motives of your major NPCs so their actions are consistent when they interact with the party, but to have the pressure of putting on a full on production isn't something most DMs have the training, skills, or even interest in doing. 4) The DM is not a director. In a movie or TV show, there is a definite script to follow where the outcome is known to everyone involved in the production. D&D is a game, where the possibilities for character success or failure exists--otherwise why play? The DM can guide the action to a certain extent, but the players and dice get a vote and can leave your carefully designed epic campaign in tatters if the players come up with something you do not anticipate, or the dice are definitely against you. Sometimes the dice are against the party and leave one or more characters dead unexpectedly. It's a game where you are one failed saving throw away from being polymorphed into a goldfish after all. Also, I'm not a fan of the 8+ page character backstory. I'm mush more in the camp of the first three levels are your character's back story. The character backstory is all stuff that happens before page 1 of the novel that the reader almost never needs to encounter. Things that happen out of scene never have the power of events that happen in scene--the same applies to the game, and even more so because events that happen in game are a shared experience with everyone at the table. It evokes memories of the other players, increases emotional stakes, and doesn't just involve events no one ever played through.
I find all of this is in the DMG actually. Half or more of these points, some word for word, are in the introductory pages. If you mean that it literally shouldn't have started with world creation and you're that neurotic, just read chapter 8 first I guess? It's not a novel or even a published adventure. Source out the chapter you need information on.
This is a great summary and I want to refer back to this so here's some timestamps 00:23 6 DM roles 03:47 General DM advice 05:58 Playing with First-time players 06:27 "Controversial" topics
Awesome video, I was never going to watch that hour, but now I know! Regarding the barbarian riding the Owlbear there is also a variant of the rule of cool I use. If something like this comes up I usually say "Rule of cool, yes". This is a thing I talk about in session 0: A rule of cool applies only for that moment and never sets a precedent. This has worked wonders, because players stay creative without trying to find exploits to continually abuse.
Who tells the story of your NPCs? Who tells the history of the places your PCs have never been? Your players take the stage, but often you build the set and scene. You can facilitate, but I bet you've told a story or two in those fifteen years. The roles are not mutually exclusive.
Here is the thing, depending on the Villian's you are using, your Players have no idea what their abilities are or what HP they have. Your Players will never know if you up their HP or give them different abilities ETC on the FLY, again though it's all about if everyone is having Fun.
I gm a group and we all have a great time. I will sometimes boost even a minor villains hp because the players want a good fight, and because of random rolls, crits, and crazy plans it is impossible to make all encounters balanced. I also lower npc hit points when the fight is really over and its mopping up. My players never notice these little adjustments and the game flow is thus maintained behind the illusions we gms spin.
I actually found Perkins' advice practical and reasonable. I've had to adjust HP and other stuff. You just can't tell your players, or they have to have played with you enough to have trust built. Or I take away or add mobs, etc. As long as everyone is challenged and having fun, there really isn't a wrong way to be a DM in that regard.
Yes but at that point you could argue you are not really playing a game anymore, you're just creating a story. Because it ultimately won't matter what choices the player's make, you will alter the HP values anyway. And that can be fine I guess, but I understand arguments against it too.
@sanserof7 if you made or the book has things too challenging, then no one is having fun. I ran one for my family, who were all first-time players. If I had not changed things a bit, then they'd never wanted to play again. As it is, we are prepping to start Dragonlance SotDQ. It was the right decision for my table and that module. Now, they know more, and I'll likely not have to change things mid-stream. But if I'd left stuff as was, not realizing how much they might struggle BEFORE then I'd not be able to continue playing with them. We all learned from i. I now bave a better read on them, and they know how to play more and better. Seems like a win/win to me.
The discussion was presented with the context of "these options are valid, do what feels right for you -and maybe the right thing isn't one of the options discussed." The main thing is to focus on fun.
I like the idea of the BBEG beating the snot out of the PCs & leaving them bloodied and battered and humiliated. “You’ll remember this, you’ll remember what I did to you & know that I am the only reason you continue to breath. Killing you is a quick punishment for your miscalculations. Having you live on, knowing I could end you anytime I feel like is much more delicious” Great story telling. You tie the entire party together & give them a common goal outside of their own motivations & create a straight up bad ass villain who you know they are going to want to fight again.
great video giving us the breakdown! Thank you! Funny enough, we too are doing a take on the "is it okay to fudge dice" a little later this week, but the short of it is, even most books allows for it in their rules (but we go into a bit more depth haha).
Great points. The only thing I would say is that "if you and players are having fun" is not a measure of a good DM but a good group and a functioning table
Ultimately, Chris said, "all of the above" to most of his questions. Since 5e is designed for the broadest audience, his advice is pretty open-ended. He can't really take a strong stance.
I think his "all of the above" answers were him saying that there is no single one right way to play D&D, which was his most controversial take of all. If you ask most grognards, they say there's only one right way to do anything.
@wizardsling 100% agree! I don't think there's anything wrong with "there is no wrong way" advice. It's good to let people know your games can run many different ways. For example my oldest son runs games very differently than I do. But beyond the general good vibes of that advice, I don't think that's very useful or practical. So, that's why we exist. We can say, "even though there's not one way you must run D&D... Here is one way to achieve this style of game... Here is another way to achieve that style of game. We can deliver more nuanced and specific advice.
Something I'm going to incorporate for boss fights from Baldur's Gate 3 is an ability called "Unstoppable". For anyone who doesn't know, Unstoppable X (usually 1 or 3 charges), means they only take 1 damage and each hit consumes an Unstoppable charge, then they lose that ability until a long rest (or maybe for really tough boss fights they have a way to replenish them) and can be damaged normally. They also can't be forced to move, but that's more minor.
An additional alternative resistance for boss monsters: (Damage) Threshold X The monster has to take a minimum of X damage, otherwise they are unharmed. (Threshold is normally reserved for vehicles and other similar entities.)
I play remotely with friends across the country via discord and one of our channels is just a basic recap I write at the end of each session. This tells the players what happened but has the hidden benefit of giving them clues about what details I - running this out of the adventure path - consider important, which doesn't railroad them but does let them know where the railroad IS so they are empowered to at least go the same general direction.
On HP. SlyFlourish (Mike Shea) often speaks of the HP dial. This is not something you should use every time, but if your combats are too easy, the game lacks tension. The DM is intended to facilitate entertainment, and sometimes that means adding tension. It is those moments of tension that make to instant kills so savory. Mix it up.
I have increased my bosses hp and lowered it during sessions. I don't fudge dice rolls though. If there's a logical way to keep players from dying I'll consider it, but death should always be a possibility.
I agree with the position that sometimes there's no way a pc can be kept alive without plot armor or hand waving logic. Give them a dozen hooks and other paths, and sometimes you will still get that 1 person committed to doing whatever it is that will most likely get them killed.
"First and most importantly, always kill off Wil Wheaton. He falls into a pit trap? Make it an acid pool with greased walls. Are you writing this down?"
Regarding avoiding TPKs, I think the usual argument would be that there's no risk if the party can't die. I think that's the argument of people who've never fought a rust monster. There's more on the line when characters lose a fight than their lives. If captured, they'll lose equipment, including some magic items -- and they'll either have to fight to get them back or they're gone forever. If the DM intercedes with NPCs then a very good technique is to have the villain(s) target a favored NPC with their heaviest attacks in response. It's always a great story beat if part of the supporting cast dies to save the hero. So the question isn't, "Should I let the TPK happen?" The question is, "What are the PCs going to lose as a result of this near-TPK?" Maybe they won't lose anything if the dice suddenly decide to be friendly, but they're still risking someone or something they'd rather not lose.
@@wizardsling They can make good pets if you can catch them. They'll eat scraps of enemies' armor and weapons, and they're not hostile to kids if you don't dress them in anything metal. Just remember to put them in a wooden pen. Hey, town encounter idea: the local who knows a thing or two about the nearby dungeon has a pet rust monster picked up from dungeon level 1, but to get their help the party must first mediate with the village blacksmith who's angry because he thinks it'll break loose and come after his forge.
The TPK is inevitable. It will come eventually. Regardless of how cautious your players are, every encounter has the potential to be one. I ended up starting a new game after a TPK once because my players were absolutely astounded that a bunch of goblins could do that to them. They all decided then and there that they wanted to be goblins instead. I never needed to go any farther than some of the simplest monsters because I know how to use what they are and what they can do.
@@almitrahopkins1873 Oh, that's fun! I've heard of groups playing as "monsters" but never been involved with it. I'd have to imagine it changes the dynamic a lot when humans, elves, dwarves, and so on are more likely to become fully hostile on sight of the party.
@@SingularityOrbit A standard goblin has a +13 stealth for the half hit die ones. And when you add in the coup de grace rules from AD&D 2nd, the players turn into serious murder hobos. Stealth is a class skill for any goblin and they have a racial +4 on top of the +4 for size in addition to a dex bonus. A 5th level goblin can have a +21 stealth with max dex. The TPK that inspired the goblin party was an encounter in which the goblins tried to kill any horses and spellcasters, run away and then track the survivors back to their camp to finish them off in their sleep. They got wiped by four goblins, three wolves and a 3rd level goblin rogue at 5th level.
I don't do a recap, I have them do it, so that if they forget something they should have remembered (Because the session happpens a week after but in game it's 5 minutes later) I can remind them, but it also alllows them to forget things. If they forget something that their characters might well have... that's on them and I can use it. It also tells me without asking what parts of the game they are focused on, so I know if something needs pushing more to the front, or can even be phased out of the game. That's one of the roles Perkins doesn't mention that modern players are a bit scared of, "The Psychologist" The more you can learn from your players without asking them, the better your games will be. When you can use intuition and inference to know what they want without them having to say it out loud, and have it show up... Your players will love it. That's why I don't rely on back stories. Never have. If they want to write one, fine. Just don't expect me to use it. I MIGHT do, if it any of it comes up in the course of the game. But don't present me with a list of things you want to do and expect it to be in the game. In my current game the players have a set of magic candles, long story short you can give one candle to someone else and use them to transmit messages between them. Kind of like a magical fax machine. But you have to light the candle and place it on a sheet of paper so the wax can melt and become the text/image on the paper. Last December they sent a message to their contact on another continent asking for an update. They finally remembered they had sent it, about three weeks ago. Which was about 4 months in game time. So now they are four months behind in warning that the Elven Homeland might be facing a massive invasion. No one has heard from the Elves in over a month. Oops... Since this happened, their note taking and general "paying attention to stuff" has become a lot better...
I played in a campaign where the DM had us do the recap, but he kept interrupting every two minutes, so I just found it annoying. Like, why don't you just go ahead and do the recap, dude. Shrug. Your mileage may vary.
@@wizardsling That's got to be a ballache. I think it's one of the key stages of becoming a proper GM. Learning when to keep your trap shut and let them talk. My players know me, they know they can ask "What was the guy's name? And I'll fill in the bits they need, but for the most part I tend to avoid the "Speak slowly and.........pause, for dramatic efffect..." monologues. Some of my favourite moments are where I throw something at them, and they spend the next ten or twenty minutes arguing about it. Some people think that you should skip that stuff and nudge them to wards the next "Exciting part". If they're having fun, why spoil it? I'll wait til they finish and say something like "You might also recall the bit where the clouds suddenly converged over the city, a bolt of lightning struck the temple, then it all dissipated? Right?" At which point there will be a monets silence followed by, "Oh... yeeaah... That was Mike's fault!" To which I will reply with something like, "I don't care who you're blaming... I just want to be sure you remember it!"
I'm very reserved on the "just add extra hp" thing. DM's should only cheat/"cheat" for the benefit of the players if the dm made a design mistake for their encounters, which is reasonable, there isn't infinite time to pre-plan everyhting, just don't punish the players for it. You can always re-use the fight/monster/encounter later in other context with some paint on top of it, so even if the dm is robbed of their cool encounter they planned, it is only "wasted" for this very exact moment, and saves some planning time in the future. So then my question is what do the player's get out of you adding hp to the monster and prolonging the fight? I have a very hard time coming up with a reasonable excuse for this, but maybe my brain just isn't wrinkly enough.
I know that I have, as a player, been disappointed when supposedly-epic fights were over too quickly. So I think HP-adding is fine in instances when it's done to increase the fun by increasing the challenge. It all depends on the motives of the DM.
The way 5e is hard to balance, sometimes you need to either add HP or reduce damage because it just might not have the effect you wanted it to. I think it is especially important if you homebrew a monster because technically you invented the numbers the first time, so why not keep tweaking them? @@wizardsling
Same. I have ADHD and worked at call center once. I was very good at avoiding the "dead air penalty" while being on a call (it's especially bad if the customer asks if you are still there) because I could ramble or keep talking absently while a webpage loaded or I typed what they previously said into a notes page. It's a strange idea to try to un-learn that behaviour as a GM.
I like this. My only objection is to padding the HP and that is only because it drags out a combat that was going to be quick. I like quick snappy,exciting combat. I really like your “desires and secrets”. I a have been trying to come up with something pithy like this but get stuck on “secrets are just another way of saying a desire”
I appreciate your summary on this. I did in fact start that video and never finished it. So to here's a controversial stuff at the end. I appreciate that you summed it up. Concisely. Thank you
Pitch forker here! It’s almost never ok to fudge dice. I’ve done it a few times and I HATED it every time I’ve done it. Because all you have to ask is this: “Should I have asked for a roll?” One of the few times it is ok is “I made this enemy too strong. Like so much so that the party has no chance.” But at that point the players can just run! You should always allow them to escape. So you can even avoid it there! If you find yourself fudging it is reminder to stop asking for rolls you’re not going to abide by OR get better at learning the games’ rules. I like Matt Coville and Chris Perkins ALOT but I don’t think I’d play in their games with how much they advocate fudging. As for player death, it generally only works in old school gaming or short adventures I’d rather D&D 6e and Pathfinder 3e remove it from the baseline game since people tend to play story focused campaigns and not OSR style dungeon/hex crawls. Have it so people can only die in a blaze of glory otherwise you escape and the villain succeeds! Fabula Ultima comes to mind in how it removes death and replaces it with narrative setbacks. Which in turn removes temptations to fudge since the game doesn’t stop because a TPK is impossible.
i agree it should be rare. you're not a pitch forker at all. The pitch forkers are the ones who say "do it the same way I do it or else you're doing it wrong."
i hardly disagree about thinking only 1 session ahead. Always have the whole chapter (Milestone) prepared. Never Railroad the PC. Never say "i don't have this prepared", just have it prepared or have a good understanding of your gameworld react improvised in the range thats fits your gameworld. JUST PREPARE MORE!!!! nothings kills the vibe of a session like underpreparing stuff. Make extensive notes, so you don't have to memorize everything.
None of this is surprising, considering how little DM support there is in 5e. I don't disagree with most of this advice in principle, as I tend to play more fiction first games. The dramatic pacing is the goal, and the right kinds of rules and systems will help you center on that. Thing is, D&D, at least as written, isn't a fiction first game. It's a strategy game. The only reward structure it codifies in its rules is kill monsters for XP, and XP rewards are set by relative difficulty represented by CR. (We know the CR budgets don't work, and WotC even admitted to not using their own CR rules internally because of this. That's a separate topic though.) So, when your game rules set the precedent that you will be rewarded for winning, based on how challenging it was/should be to win, then fudging dice and artificially inflating HP is absolutely cheating. Look at it from the player's end. The players have finite, defined tools with which to make their characters. They must obey those limits. But they also get to make choices within those limits to flag what they're interested in being good at. If a player sets out to make an expert alpha striker and Slayer of beasts, and bring their Bugbear Gloomstalker/Assassin with Sharpshooter to your table, they WANT to be able to delete high priority threats immediately. That was their goal. If you negate their efficacy because you find losing the BBEG on round one to be anticlimactic, then the players choices didn't matter. They could have made a Peace Cleric instead, not needing to consider damage at all. When you inflate enemy HP, and won't permit the enemy to die until 5 or 6 rounds in because the fight is set to your dramatic pacing, then what matters is what YOU want a fight to be rather than the PCs capabilities. This is a misalignment of play goals, both between the players and DM, but also the DM and the rules. Again, I'm not fundamentally against drama being of higher value to the people at the table than the numbers. For this reason I play FATE, or PbtA and FitD games instead. That way the rules are aligned with that preference, and the players get to make valuable and informed decisions, supported by the rules. There are no alpha strike builds for them to make, and so I don't have to rob them of their efficacy to maintain dramatic pacing.
I have a few options on the controversial answers. Any mid combat adjustment to boost the bbeg is in my option a failure in game design. The boss has the same exact stat block rules as a minion, with the only difference being what makes its CR higher: damage per turn, hp, and legendary actions. It shouldn’t be that way. Why should an epic, ancient dragon need minions to keep the party from going nova on its butt? A bbeg fight shouldn’t be so easy. Imagine Stahd could only be injured by a stake through the heart, but he’s impossibly fast, can punch with the might of a giant, and can attack all members of the party on one turn but instead plays with his food. The party has to outsmart him or TPK. Intense, high stakes, and a ticking clock. More exciting of a victory that simply using brute force. This leads to TPK. As a player, I want my actions and failures to matter. I play “7 days to Die” and I know if I go to certain areas unprepared, I’ll be torn apart by a horde of zombie dogs...over...and over. It ticks me off, but it was my choice and it makes it fun to overcome. Saving the party last second by any of those suggestions is horrible. It takes everything from the players to the point you might as well give them godhood or set a respawn point for them to reload. No consequences, no risk, no worries...no fun and no challenge.
As Gygax said "sometime the dm rolls the dice just for the sound they make" in other words you’ve decided on a course of action but roll the dice to give the illusion that the dice determined the outcome…. Once you learn this dming becomes a lot more fun.
I've used this so many times. Also, most of the time when I call for a roll in the moment, I have no set DC in mind. If the player gets above 12, they're probably going to succeed. If they get below 10 they're probably going to fail. It's exceedingly rare that a single digit is going to make that big of a difference to the outcome and most of those kinds of rolls are so low-consequence that it's better to just keep the game moving along. It's also a great way to lean into the chaos the dice can cause. Failures make things funny!
@@TitterpigRancherI love that rule. You may need to revise slightly during high level play where 30 dc are routine. Reliable talent gives a minimum of 10 plus all your normal bonuses.
In previous interview they said that it was perfectly fine to add or remove HP from a monsters. My take on this is concerning the « balance » topic. don’t ask too much balance from a designer who say that is fine to change monsters HP during a fight!
So I am going to disagree wiht one of these up front, but I am not disagreeing with the ones you think I am. The DM is NOT a storyteller. If you try to be a storyteller, you will more than likely railroad your players down a specific path instead of leaving things open for them to truly shape the narative. The best description I have heard is the DM is a Scenario creator. You create scenarios for your players, and you adjust them based on how they react. This allows you to not get locked into an idea and just run with it no matter what your players are doing.
sure, it would be wrong if you said "the DM is the ONLY storyteller." The DM is one of the storytellers at the table, and usually the one who kicks things off. Then the players get to tell part of the story, too.
The advice sounds fine. I love d&d mostly for the stories and if a player doesn't know things are fudged and the game is more interesting for it, I think it's good.
On fudging the dice: If I put the players in a TPK situation (due to overestimating them or underestimating the enemy, bad dice rolls don't count) I will fudge. If the players put themselves in a TPK situation (due to stupidity or by being murder hobo's) I have no mercy.
I dislike fudging dice, and personally would not want to game with a DM that does it. Why? For me, I don't find a point in playing if you're just going to invalidate the impartial rules decider (the dice). However, once that outcome is set... and especially if it is unfavorable, I have, as a DM, offered alternatives to failure. Do you want to succeed? How badly? What are you willing to sacrifice to turn the impartial fate derived from the dice in your favor? It keeps the dice relevant - while engaging the player in a tense story moment. A loss still occurs, but the player (with DM guidance) gets to decide what shape that loss takes. As for the villains... I cannot say I have never altered them mid-battle, but as a general rule I do not.
I think giving a villain extra hp mid fight really depends. Is it a monster you homebrewed and balanced poorly? In that case you're playtesting it and should make changes to it so it doesn't ruin the game. If it's just the party playing well and beating down a monster that's been thoroughly playtested (like a published monster or one you've run many times before), then it's kind of taking away the reward for playing well. If it's a playtested monster that you're running poorly and the players are playing poorly and are still having an easy time of it, then I think it's kind of up to the DM.
Yup. That is one instance where in my eyes fudging is fine. You’re a normal dude who hombrewed a monster in a day for their players. In those instances I would say that best practice is nerfing or buffing an ability that has yet to be used on the fly. However once something is used… don’t touch it.
For the TPK advice....great advice in teir 1...though try to avoid tropes like NPC's saving the day or divine intervention (though npc's assisting lightly can give the players the space they need to pull it out)...some modules (I can think of one I am running currently) do have tpk traps that would hit tier one, but that should be discussed in session 0 and everyone should be okay with it. However tier 2 and up if they players get themselves into a tpk risk situation you should let them sink or swim on their own. Anything else is a disservice to your players IMO. Again discuss this at session 0 along with what you want to do in the event of a tpk
@@wizardsling shouldn't matter. Best to just not use the abbreviation which is commonly used to refer to something criminally sick, both to distance the topic from that, and as a general politeness to the person.
@@zhornlegacy7936 after some googling, i see you're referring to child porn, i assume? obviously i don't mean that. i never heard it abbreviated that way. either way, too late to change the video now. that's not how youtube uploads work
I always add HP or change abilities mid-fight if it seems too easy or too hard. DMS NEEVR CHEAT!!! You're there to share a compelling story and some fun and interactive fights. Nothing wrong with making things flow better for YOUR games. Okay, that's my 2 cents lol
Deciding not to tpk s party isn’t fudging dice. It’s making a decision that the monsters are just mindless blood thirsty stat blocks who do nothing but kill. It’s come up with a creative way to prevent something. Funny enough I disagree with Perkins methods of avoiding a tpk, I think there’s better solutions that would make more narrative sense. But I still agree with the jest of it.
I don't fudge rolls, but adding hitpoints midfight is usually realizing ypu balanced the combat wrong and fixing it. The goal is to make them game more funn not less. No player wants a boss to feel too easy. The is to some extent a correct number of hitpoints for a boss to have and adding or removing hitpoints to get closer to that point is a skill and fixing it is preferable to leaving wrong because you already wrote it down.
If a DM hates that their boss gets one-shot but is okay with TPKs, more specifically throws things to prevent one-shoting the boss but is against "act of God" or sudden rescues fro ma TPK, then the DM is a bad DM. They are clearly 'DM vs Player', not 'DM is a player too'. Let's be fair, most BBEGs would prefer to capture the heroes because then they can be taunted, or "questioned" (where allies are, capabilities, etc etc). They are less able/likely to talk if they are dead and even if you leave one alive they may not be the one who knows the info the BBEG needs. And if the TPK happens against bandits? Well, slave trade is easy and good money for said bandits.
What's with the misleading title but mostly agreeing with CP? He said raising the hitpoints was one possible option, and whether that's the right option totally depends on the specifics of the situation.
Chris Perkins....Yeah lets make D&D more complex. Glad I was around in the golden era of D&D back when TSR owned it. Better adventures bc of the authors who wrote them and better art. WOTC/Hasbro could even do fresh adventures for 5e they just watered down and remastered( not for the better) most of the old adventures that TSR done back in the 80's. It's like trying to polish an old terd.
I summarize DM rules as: 1) Keep the story moving and 2) Everyone has fun. As for the details: No, you may never fudge/lie about a secret dice roll. Don't *ever* do it. If you can never lie about it, then why is it rolled secretly? Don't worry about that detail. All you need to know is that NO DM may EVER fudge the dice. Got it? Got it? Can you give the BBEG more HP? You *can*, I suppose, but why would you? The BBEG doesn't understand the fight they're getting into? If they're so outmatched that they die in one round, why are they fighting at all? Did the party *really* foil his plans that hard? Or has he just been sitting there for ten sessions waiting as the party carves up his minions? What kind of an idiot are they, and how did they get any amount of power in the first place? If it's a trap, and the party is supposed to think they can win, and then boom demon summons... then let that be the explanation. If the BBEG doesn't have a trick up their sleeve, how BBEG-y are they really? TPKs - It's not going to happen. You don't need to worry about it. It's functionally impossible in 5e anyhow, unless you just bust out world-ending spells or deity level powers. If the encounters are even remotely close to the CR threshold of the party, they'll (mostly) survive.
"The rules are there to serve you not the other way around" Exactly why I quit 5e. Honestly not sure how I lasted so long in it, considering it also has the same issue that got me to quit 3.5/pathfinder; the internet killed playing the game and fixated everyone on playing the rules/system/builds, and as the DM you end up having to strictly adhere to all the little rules and can no longer make callings or really let anyone do anything outside of what those little rules let them do
Absolutely true statement. I have players exploiting every rules hole and acting like they figured it out themselves instead of from the latest dungeon dudes video.
@@36samsonfirst pathfinder game: I guess I'll approximate my old dragon disciple characters from NWN, turned out great for the DM since dragons weren't around and my character was unexpectedly a herald of their return. Playing the game I'm like "I am Ur'hak thr barbarian!" Like 3 sessions in the DM asked for my character sheet and burst out laughing because I had 2 higher intelligence than anyone in the party and most of the knowledges I could pull off... as a barbarian/sorcerer. I ended up working at a library because my character broke down weeping when he saw so many books in one place Second game: Cool, we're doing pirates? Okay I'll make a character that is focused on being a great captain. Oh we're all on a ship right now, no reason not to just be a deck hand, oh there is a pirate city, cool I'll be from there but not wanting to follow in my father's dread footsteps I left my mother in that city and made way to be an honest sailor. Was the build good at anything other than profession? Not really, but the roleplaying turned out to be super great Third character? Yeah Minotaur cartographer exploring the world to map it. Fourth? Little old lady oracle that just wanted to mother those she could see within 30ft Blast of a time. Shield bashing/throwing infinite loop builds on reddit killed the game as I saw the builds online. 5e came around and seemed so refreshing until I went through a bunch of games and it quickly became a rules lawyer game focused on internet builds on coffeelocks. Just sad.
RPGs have 2 rules - 1) Have fun, 2) Make it memorable. Everything else is guidelines to help you achieve that. Rules lawyers can go play accountancy or tax planning :)
I'm really different. I would prefer to know everything before getting started. Once the game starts and the DM "forgets" to tell me important information or things I could have done, it starts to make me hate the system and not enjoy the game.
TOTALLY DISAGREE with scarce descriptions! It's a recipe to piss off players when they never saw the altar in the top corner of the room. Reeks of "I got you" old school dnd. Never fudge dice. It forces you to become a better DM. If you're going to fudge, let the players know it could happen. If you don't want to tell your players, fudging could occur, I think you know it's wrong, and your players will call you on it. Otherwise, why does it need to be a secret?😮
DM’s are not referee’s. No referee is allowed to decide which rules they want to follow, change or ignore. It is impossible to referee a game that you are participating in. A referee is someone who is not directly participating and is only watching to ensure that the rules are adhered to and arbitrate on matters arising from play. Since rule 0 means there only one person aka the DM gets to decide what rules will be enforced there is no way that same person can also referee their own rules. The idea that a DM is a referee is one of dumbest fallacies sines WoC took over D&D. Let me be clear no DM is a referee. You will have good DM’s who value players helping to craft the story and you will have bad DM’s who do not value any change to their story.
i agree, unless you have a solid plan for what comes after and the table has buy-in. I'm not a fan of shrugging and telling everyone to roll up new characters
Calling him CP to abbreviate his name is not something you should do 👀 There is another thing abbreviated with that and it is very bad and illegal for those who don’t know.
when saying No to a player just decide what the game's GONZO Level will be if this is violated it becomes a No. it's that easy. this should be handled in session zero if you do one or in the initial campaign brief.
Simply this. It is a Game. That's it. What Chris says is not divine. I don't care what he has to say. I do care that he makes a living off people who really don't have their priorities straight. Do you this with the game Monopoly? Do you spend money, time and energy on figuring out what you are doing to do in Yahtzee? Especially when people are starving and homeless, no, let's spend money on a game that gives us joy. Do you really pursue to better your life with this game? Whoopee.
But the 5e DM Guide is the absolute most worthless DM guide ever written. You don't even need it. Moreover, Perkins really fucked up when he tried to translate The Tomb of Horrors to 5e by not specifying a character level that would be appropriate for it to have maximum scary effect...I don't see what you or he says as controversial, but at least some of it is stupid from a pre-WoTC (i.e., TSR, more fantasy literature-based than video game-based RPG) point of view...Recommend you read Gygax's "Role Playing Mastery" and compare what Gygax said to what Perkins said. What Chris Perkins says has little bearing on my life.
If you're going to just make up the result anyway what's the point of rolling dice? TPKs are a part of the game. Sure you can have your villains show mercy sometimes, especially if the characters try to negotiate. But literal divine intervention is going to kill your game. I respect my players enough to roll with the dice and see what happens. It leads to far more varied story telling than just faking it.
To each their own if course. I just wonder why people play D&D when they don't want what it was originally designed for. Gary Gygax woukd design dungeons to literally kill characters off. I got my 5e players to play Basic Expert combat and they loved it. Maybe an in built lack of stakes is why there are so many videos about how to make 5e combat not as boring.
@@wizardsling Of course you don't need any rules. It's a game not your job. And I too homebrew a little. But what's the point of playing D&D if you don't want to generally follow its rules? At that point you could either play a system that's closer to what you like or just play Calvin ball with no pretense of a ruleset. D&D is designed around combat. Otherwise you wouldn't have a whole book based around monster stat blocks. If you're getting rid actual stakes for combat you've got rid of what makes it fun. "No TPK" is just an admission that your table would be better off playing a different game that's designed around other stakes. It'd be like playing risk but with no invading or diplomacy but with no communicating.
@@mnm1273 well i would disagree that the threat of a TPK (and therefore deadly stakes) is what makes it fun for EVERY table. Your table, sure. I also enjoy tense and high-stakes combat. But some tables just want their characters to do cool stuff and that's what makes it fun for them. There's a lot of room in D&D for all types
@@wizardsling His job is to sell D&D. He needs to make it look like the right answer for every table. But that's just not accurate. If TPKs scare you'd do better with a game system that's actually designed with that in mind. If Deus Ex Machina is a tool you're even considering consistently using to kill off the stakes of the fight maybe you need to realize the game design isn't working in tandem with your DM style.
Perkins's "6 rolls" of the DM are reasonable. The advice about extra HP for bosses, and avoiding TPKs is garbage. If the party is steamrolling the BBEG it's either because of bad prep on the DM's part, or dice chance favoring the party in some way. Or some of both. Same for a TPK. As for bad prep, the DM should take his/her lumps and learn from it. As for 'bad dice'... The game is predicated on using a fair degree of random chance to determine a wide variety of outcomes. If you're not willing to abide by that randomness simply because you don't like an outcome, why the hell are you playing the game?
@@wizardsling Never said it was. Problem is, opinions from someone like Perkins carry far more weight than they should, and everyone exposed to them tend to adopt them as *the* official, approved way. I've been playing this game for over 46 years, far longer than Perkins' entire gaming career. I've seen at least as much variety and change in the game as he has, and can say definitively that his 'solutions' to the questions posed are not necessarily the optimum ones. It varies by game and the people who are playing it. Yet his position at WotC gives lots of other people the belief that his answers are better than any others. Not true. He's entitled to his opinion, sure, but when one man's opinion suddenly becomes the next best thing to gospel for so many othes, I object.
@@wizardslingThere is no wrong way to play, but there is 100% a wrong table to play in. A high fudge likelyhood table is a bad table for me as a player and GM. A high fudge table is a great table for others. I personally believe fudgers should find a game where death isn’t the main consequence for losing in combat. Do they have to? No. They can play whatever they want however they want and have their own fun. Though I am curious, would any fudgers be ok with their GM doing it? I imagine so. I 9’ the other hand would be deflated and would rather game at another table.
@@wizardsling Having fun is always the main key. The burden of role playing is always on the players. The DM can do it all he/she wants with NPCs, but if the players aren't that unto it then it doesn't happen much. Melee is where the rubber meets the road. If the DM is well prepped, and the players are on the ball, then dice randomness is the only ghost in the machine. The DM should keep the tension at a good level. If that means adjusting a baddy'd HP or fudging a dice rill or two, fine. Let the players feel good about the win. If their actions and/or the dice are so bad that they end up with a TPK, let it happen and use it as grist for future story. But there is not one, officially approved best way to handle that, which is where I cringe when guys like Perkins speak like there is, and their statements are proclamations of absolutes. Every game, table, player, and DM are different and blanket comments like Perkins makes just don't fit.
giving extra hp to a villain IS cheating to down a bbeg in the first round the group probably used their biggest spell / most expensive ressource and we're not even counting the obstacles they faced before getting to the guy and giving all the hp you want to a bbeg just because the dices were on the player side just make the entire encounter pointless also don't bring "it's better for the story if I keep adding mid fight more hit point" there is no story if you just deus ex machina this sh%t by that point there is no story you just want to make a point the players won't cheat meaning that when they are out of ressourses they are out in those case I would even argue what is the point of even trying at all? powercreep SUCKS in both ways you got a character with a big armor class? their saves must be shit target those instead of making a bloody dmpc god chris perkin is just a sadist and it is a known fact
So, he never read the fundamental books that led to Table Top Roleplay. Let alone Ptolus by Gary Gygax, The Book is 20+ lbs. AND , never roll behind a screen. Be adaptable, Manage the game session by time, that way all parties know there is a limit to their actions and cater to their OOC questions later if you have the time.
To everyone upset about me saying the acronym "CP" in this video... obviously, I didn't mean it that way. It's Chris Perkins' initials. I'd never heard the other thing referred to as "CP" so it never occurred to me. I'm sorry for any offense caused, now let's move past it.
Giving bosses extra hp is completely reasonable
I ran a one shot once where the bbeg was a crazy wizard, and almost all my players were ranged fighters of some sort.After they took the Wizard to 1/4 health in one round, you BET I gave him more HP and bumped his damage to make the fight more interesting. On the other hand, when my players have had a bad luck streak and were having too much trouble with what was supposed to be a simple encounter, I fudged numbers in their favor. We have DM screens for a reason. If I have to lie about the number on a piece of plastic so my friends have more fun, I don’t feel an ounce of regret.
@sporkbot I completely agree, I ran a crazy wizard as well, the only reason I didn't end up buffing her hp was due to the fact the battle lasted only 3 rounds. Three rounds where two people and half a dozen npcs nearly died and the wizard was counterspelled preventing her from conjuring minions. Sometimes the players can "earn" the quick takedown of an enemy, but I must admit it more often happens to be the case that the DM (me) failed to balance our npcs to the proper threat level
I agree with you but a large number of ppl in the community think it is an egregious, player-agency-stealing sin.
It's not stealing player agency; it's just a 'second phase' of the boss encounter.
A great compromise is giving every boss the ability to heal a large amount of HP using a Legendary Action
Great video. This is what the 5E DMG SHOULD have had in it - namely HOW to run a game, not starting off with pantheons, money, and city generation. I've cracked my DMG mostly to review some of the contents, but I would not really call it a guide for Dungeon masters. I enjoyed CP's takes on things, especially the multiple choices, as it shows that there is more than one way, often multiple ways to deal with situations in your game.
Glad it was helpful!
There was an interview somewhere, were they say there's loads of "how to DM" videos out there so putting to much of that in a book is redundant and makes some people feel like they have to DM like this or that.
I agree it's not my favourite version of DMG they've realised but, I would be hard to balance everyone's expectations vs keeping it simple for 1st time uses.
Mothership has one of the better DM guides in their new book.
@@wizardsling Some of this is okay, generic advice but some is terrible. Some of it leads to DMs placing very unrealistic expectations on themselves, where they are supposed to be putting on a production for their players
1) The DM is not a storyteller. Take this from a guy who runs games and writes fiction--first off, writing fiction is much harder. Scene, setting, mood, character, dialogue, plot progression is all on the author. In running games, the DM is a conflict engineer, and the story emerges out of the ways the players engage with the conflicts the DM put in their way, and the dice to see whether they succeed or fail.
3) The DM is not always an actor nor does he/she have to be. This is one of the reasons why there is such a DM shortage for 5E games. That is an unrealistic expectation for player to have of the person running the game around the table. Sure, you want to know the motives of your major NPCs so their actions are consistent when they interact with the party, but to have the pressure of putting on a full on production isn't something most DMs have the training, skills, or even interest in doing.
4) The DM is not a director. In a movie or TV show, there is a definite script to follow where the outcome is known to everyone involved in the production. D&D is a game, where the possibilities for character success or failure exists--otherwise why play? The DM can guide the action to a certain extent, but the players and dice get a vote and can leave your carefully designed epic campaign in tatters if the players come up with something you do not anticipate, or the dice are definitely against you. Sometimes the dice are against the party and leave one or more characters dead unexpectedly. It's a game where you are one failed saving throw away from being polymorphed into a goldfish after all.
Also, I'm not a fan of the 8+ page character backstory. I'm mush more in the camp of the first three levels are your character's back story. The character backstory is all stuff that happens before page 1 of the novel that the reader almost never needs to encounter. Things that happen out of scene never have the power of events that happen in scene--the same applies to the game, and even more so because events that happen in game are a shared experience with everyone at the table. It evokes memories of the other players, increases emotional stakes, and doesn't just involve events no one ever played through.
I find all of this is in the DMG actually. Half or more of these points, some word for word, are in the introductory pages.
If you mean that it literally shouldn't have started with world creation and you're that neurotic, just read chapter 8 first I guess? It's not a novel or even a published adventure. Source out the chapter you need information on.
This is a great summary and I want to refer back to this so here's some timestamps
00:23 6 DM roles
03:47 General DM advice
05:58 Playing with First-time players
06:27 "Controversial" topics
thanks!
Awesome video, I was never going to watch that hour, but now I know!
Regarding the barbarian riding the Owlbear there is also a variant of the rule of cool I use. If something like this comes up I usually say "Rule of cool, yes". This is a thing I talk about in session 0: A rule of cool applies only for that moment and never sets a precedent. This has worked wonders, because players stay creative without trying to find exploits to continually abuse.
glad it was helpful!
Well right off the bat I disagree. As someone who's been DMing for over 15 years. A DM is not a storyteller a DM is a story facilitator.
thanks for the comment
Who tells the story of your NPCs? Who tells the history of the places your PCs have never been?
Your players take the stage, but often you build the set and scene. You can facilitate, but I bet you've told a story or two in those fifteen years. The roles are not mutually exclusive.
@@malformedheader actually every single game that I DM is based on my players backstories if it's not in their backstory it's not in the game
Here is the thing, depending on the Villian's you are using, your Players have no idea what their abilities are or what HP they have. Your Players will never know if you up their HP or give them different abilities ETC on the FLY, again though it's all about if everyone is having Fun.
Totally agree that "fun" is the scales to use to determine how to run things.
I gm a group and we all have a great time. I will sometimes boost even a minor villains hp because the players want a good fight, and because of random rolls, crits, and crazy plans it is impossible to make all encounters balanced. I also lower npc hit points when the fight is really over and its mopping up. My players never notice these little adjustments and the game flow is thus maintained behind the illusions we gms spin.
I actually found Perkins' advice practical and reasonable. I've had to adjust HP and other stuff. You just can't tell your players, or they have to have played with you enough to have trust built. Or I take away or add mobs, etc. As long as everyone is challenged and having fun, there really isn't a wrong way to be a DM in that regard.
Yes but at that point you could argue you are not really playing a game anymore, you're just creating a story. Because it ultimately won't matter what choices the player's make, you will alter the HP values anyway. And that can be fine I guess, but I understand arguments against it too.
@sanserof7 if you made or the book has things too challenging, then no one is having fun. I ran one for my family, who were all first-time players. If I had not changed things a bit, then they'd never wanted to play again. As it is, we are prepping to start Dragonlance SotDQ. It was the right decision for my table and that module. Now, they know more, and I'll likely not have to change things mid-stream.
But if I'd left stuff as was, not realizing how much they might struggle BEFORE then I'd not be able to continue playing with them. We all learned from i. I now bave a better read on them, and they know how to play more and better.
Seems like a win/win to me.
The discussion was presented with the context of "these options are valid, do what feels right for you -and maybe the right thing isn't one of the options discussed." The main thing is to focus on fun.
Too many people say: play the game my way, or else you're playing it wrong.
I like the idea of the BBEG beating the snot out of the PCs & leaving them bloodied and battered and humiliated. “You’ll remember this, you’ll remember what I did to you & know that I am the only reason you continue to breath. Killing you is a quick punishment for your miscalculations. Having you live on, knowing I could end you anytime I feel like is much more delicious”
Great story telling. You tie the entire party together & give them a common goal outside of their own motivations & create a straight up bad ass villain who you know they are going to want to fight again.
Clever!
great video giving us the breakdown! Thank you!
Funny enough, we too are doing a take on the "is it okay to fudge dice" a little later this week, but the short of it is, even most books allows for it in their rules (but we go into a bit more depth haha).
Glad it was useful! Dice fudging is way more controversial than it needs to be... some very strong opinions out there.
@@wizardsling heh yep
The perfect Dungeon Master's Guide already exists.
It's the 4th Edition version.
I would agree it's better. Let's hope they improve in the 2024 versions
Great points. The only thing I would say is that "if you and players are having fun" is not a measure of a good DM but a good group and a functioning table
Fair enough!
Ultimately, Chris said, "all of the above" to most of his questions. Since 5e is designed for the broadest audience, his advice is pretty open-ended. He can't really take a strong stance.
I think his "all of the above" answers were him saying that there is no single one right way to play D&D, which was his most controversial take of all. If you ask most grognards, they say there's only one right way to do anything.
@wizardsling 100% agree!
I don't think there's anything wrong with "there is no wrong way" advice. It's good to let people know your games can run many different ways. For example my oldest son runs games very differently than I do.
But beyond the general good vibes of that advice, I don't think that's very useful or practical. So, that's why we exist. We can say, "even though there's not one way you must run D&D... Here is one way to achieve this style of game... Here is another way to achieve that style of game. We can deliver more nuanced and specific advice.
@@wizardsling
I made a video out of this conversation
@@direden awesome!
Something I'm going to incorporate for boss fights from Baldur's Gate 3 is an ability called "Unstoppable". For anyone who doesn't know, Unstoppable X (usually 1 or 3 charges), means they only take 1 damage and each hit consumes an Unstoppable charge, then they lose that ability until a long rest (or maybe for really tough boss fights they have a way to replenish them) and can be damaged normally. They also can't be forced to move, but that's more minor.
unstoppable is a killer BG3 feature! i love that one.
An additional alternative resistance for boss monsters:
(Damage) Threshold X
The monster has to take a minimum of X damage, otherwise they are unharmed.
(Threshold is normally reserved for vehicles and other similar entities.)
I play remotely with friends across the country via discord and one of our channels is just a basic recap I write at the end of each session. This tells the players what happened but has the hidden benefit of giving them clues about what details I - running this out of the adventure path - consider important, which doesn't railroad them but does let them know where the railroad IS so they are empowered to at least go the same general direction.
i do that too! clues in the recap is a solid method
On HP. SlyFlourish (Mike Shea) often speaks of the HP dial. This is not something you should use every time, but if your combats are too easy, the game lacks tension. The DM is intended to facilitate entertainment, and sometimes that means adding tension. It is those moments of tension that make to instant kills so savory. Mix it up.
well said!
I have increased my bosses hp and lowered it during sessions. I don't fudge dice rolls though. If there's a logical way to keep players from dying I'll consider it, but death should always be a possibility.
I support your desire to run your table however you want
I agree with the position that sometimes there's no way a pc can be kept alive without plot armor or hand waving logic. Give them a dozen hooks and other paths, and sometimes you will still get that 1 person committed to doing whatever it is that will most likely get them killed.
"First and most importantly, always kill off Wil Wheaton. He falls into a pit trap? Make it an acid pool with greased walls. Are you writing this down?"
the only good will wheaton is a dead will wheaton (jk)
If it has a DC, make it greater than 19.
Regarding avoiding TPKs, I think the usual argument would be that there's no risk if the party can't die. I think that's the argument of people who've never fought a rust monster. There's more on the line when characters lose a fight than their lives. If captured, they'll lose equipment, including some magic items -- and they'll either have to fight to get them back or they're gone forever. If the DM intercedes with NPCs then a very good technique is to have the villain(s) target a favored NPC with their heaviest attacks in response. It's always a great story beat if part of the supporting cast dies to save the hero. So the question isn't, "Should I let the TPK happen?" The question is, "What are the PCs going to lose as a result of this near-TPK?" Maybe they won't lose anything if the dice suddenly decide to be friendly, but they're still risking someone or something they'd rather not lose.
Rust monsters are the absolute worst
@@wizardsling They can make good pets if you can catch them. They'll eat scraps of enemies' armor and weapons, and they're not hostile to kids if you don't dress them in anything metal. Just remember to put them in a wooden pen. Hey, town encounter idea: the local who knows a thing or two about the nearby dungeon has a pet rust monster picked up from dungeon level 1, but to get their help the party must first mediate with the village blacksmith who's angry because he thinks it'll break loose and come after his forge.
The TPK is inevitable. It will come eventually. Regardless of how cautious your players are, every encounter has the potential to be one.
I ended up starting a new game after a TPK once because my players were absolutely astounded that a bunch of goblins could do that to them. They all decided then and there that they wanted to be goblins instead. I never needed to go any farther than some of the simplest monsters because I know how to use what they are and what they can do.
@@almitrahopkins1873 Oh, that's fun! I've heard of groups playing as "monsters" but never been involved with it. I'd have to imagine it changes the dynamic a lot when humans, elves, dwarves, and so on are more likely to become fully hostile on sight of the party.
@@SingularityOrbit A standard goblin has a +13 stealth for the half hit die ones. And when you add in the coup de grace rules from AD&D 2nd, the players turn into serious murder hobos.
Stealth is a class skill for any goblin and they have a racial +4 on top of the +4 for size in addition to a dex bonus. A 5th level goblin can have a +21 stealth with max dex.
The TPK that inspired the goblin party was an encounter in which the goblins tried to kill any horses and spellcasters, run away and then track the survivors back to their camp to finish them off in their sleep. They got wiped by four goblins, three wolves and a 3rd level goblin rogue at 5th level.
I don't do a recap, I have them do it, so that if they forget something they should have remembered (Because the session happpens a week after but in game it's 5 minutes later) I can remind them, but it also alllows them to forget things. If they forget something that their characters might well have... that's on them and I can use it. It also tells me without asking what parts of the game they are focused on, so I know if something needs pushing more to the front, or can even be phased out of the game.
That's one of the roles Perkins doesn't mention that modern players are a bit scared of, "The Psychologist"
The more you can learn from your players without asking them, the better your games will be. When you can use intuition and inference to know what they want without them having to say it out loud, and have it show up... Your players will love it. That's why I don't rely on back stories. Never have. If they want to write one, fine. Just don't expect me to use it. I MIGHT do, if it any of it comes up in the course of the game. But don't present me with a list of things you want to do and expect it to be in the game.
In my current game the players have a set of magic candles, long story short you can give one candle to someone else and use them to transmit messages between them. Kind of like a magical fax machine. But you have to light the candle and place it on a sheet of paper so the wax can melt and become the text/image on the paper. Last December they sent a message to their contact on another continent asking for an update. They finally remembered they had sent it, about three weeks ago. Which was about 4 months in game time.
So now they are four months behind in warning that the Elven Homeland might be facing a massive invasion.
No one has heard from the Elves in over a month. Oops...
Since this happened, their note taking and general "paying attention to stuff" has become a lot better...
I played in a campaign where the DM had us do the recap, but he kept interrupting every two minutes, so I just found it annoying. Like, why don't you just go ahead and do the recap, dude. Shrug. Your mileage may vary.
@@wizardsling That's got to be a ballache. I think it's one of the key stages of becoming a proper GM. Learning when to keep your trap shut and let them talk.
My players know me, they know they can ask "What was the guy's name? And I'll fill in the bits they need, but for the most part I tend to avoid the "Speak slowly and.........pause, for dramatic efffect..." monologues.
Some of my favourite moments are where I throw something at them, and they spend the next ten or twenty minutes arguing about it.
Some people think that you should skip that stuff and nudge them to wards the next "Exciting part". If they're having fun, why spoil it?
I'll wait til they finish and say something like "You might also recall the bit where the clouds suddenly converged over the city, a bolt of lightning struck the temple, then it all dissipated? Right?" At which point there will be a monets silence followed by, "Oh... yeeaah... That was Mike's fault!" To which I will reply with something like, "I don't care who you're blaming... I just want to be sure you remember it!"
I'm very reserved on the "just add extra hp" thing. DM's should only cheat/"cheat" for the benefit of the players if the dm made a design mistake for their encounters, which is reasonable, there isn't infinite time to pre-plan everyhting, just don't punish the players for it. You can always re-use the fight/monster/encounter later in other context with some paint on top of it, so even if the dm is robbed of their cool encounter they planned, it is only "wasted" for this very exact moment, and saves some planning time in the future.
So then my question is what do the player's get out of you adding hp to the monster and prolonging the fight? I have a very hard time coming up with a reasonable excuse for this, but maybe my brain just isn't wrinkly enough.
I know that I have, as a player, been disappointed when supposedly-epic fights were over too quickly. So I think HP-adding is fine in instances when it's done to increase the fun by increasing the challenge. It all depends on the motives of the DM.
The way 5e is hard to balance, sometimes you need to either add HP or reduce damage because it just might not have the effect you wanted it to. I think it is especially important if you homebrew a monster because technically you invented the numbers the first time, so why not keep tweaking them? @@wizardsling
Dead air is the worst for me. I tend to keep talking to attempt to keep things moving if my players don't respond...and I need to stop it.
Keep working on it! I'm still learning too.
Same. I have ADHD and worked at call center once. I was very good at avoiding the "dead air penalty" while being on a call (it's especially bad if the customer asks if you are still there) because I could ramble or keep talking absently while a webpage loaded or I typed what they previously said into a notes page. It's a strange idea to try to un-learn that behaviour as a GM.
I like this.
My only objection is to padding the HP and that is only because it drags out a combat that was going to be quick. I like quick snappy,exciting combat.
I really like your “desires and secrets”. I a have been trying to come up with something pithy like this but get stuck on “secrets are just another way of saying a desire”
thanks! I did a whole video on secrets and desires and how to make great NPCs
I appreciate your summary on this. I did in fact start that video and never finished it. So to here's a controversial stuff at the end. I appreciate that you summed it up. Concisely. Thank you
The video was pretty long, I thought people could use a summary. Glad you found it useful!
Pitch forker here! It’s almost never ok to fudge dice. I’ve done it a few times and I HATED it every time I’ve done it.
Because all you have to ask is this:
“Should I have asked for a roll?”
One of the few times it is ok is “I made this enemy too strong. Like so much so that the party has no chance.”
But at that point the players can just run! You should always allow them to escape. So you can even avoid it there!
If you find yourself fudging it is reminder to stop asking for rolls you’re not going to abide by OR get better at learning the games’ rules.
I like Matt Coville and Chris Perkins ALOT but I don’t think I’d play in their games with how much they advocate fudging.
As for player death, it generally only works in old school gaming or short adventures I’d rather D&D 6e and Pathfinder 3e remove it from the baseline game since people tend to play story focused campaigns and not OSR style dungeon/hex crawls. Have it so people can only die in a blaze of glory otherwise you escape and the villain succeeds!
Fabula Ultima comes to mind in how it removes death and replaces it with narrative setbacks.
Which in turn removes temptations to fudge since the game doesn’t stop because a TPK is impossible.
i agree it should be rare. you're not a pitch forker at all. The pitch forkers are the ones who say "do it the same way I do it or else you're doing it wrong."
i hardly disagree about thinking only 1 session ahead. Always have the whole chapter (Milestone) prepared. Never Railroad the PC. Never say "i don't have this prepared", just have it prepared or have a good understanding of your gameworld react improvised in the range thats fits your gameworld. JUST PREPARE MORE!!!! nothings kills the vibe of a session like underpreparing stuff. Make extensive notes, so you don't have to memorize everything.
sometimes underpreparing leads to great improv. but we can all play our games however we want
None of this is surprising, considering how little DM support there is in 5e. I don't disagree with most of this advice in principle, as I tend to play more fiction first games. The dramatic pacing is the goal, and the right kinds of rules and systems will help you center on that.
Thing is, D&D, at least as written, isn't a fiction first game. It's a strategy game. The only reward structure it codifies in its rules is kill monsters for XP, and XP rewards are set by relative difficulty represented by CR. (We know the CR budgets don't work, and WotC even admitted to not using their own CR rules internally because of this. That's a separate topic though.) So, when your game rules set the precedent that you will be rewarded for winning, based on how challenging it was/should be to win, then fudging dice and artificially inflating HP is absolutely cheating.
Look at it from the player's end. The players have finite, defined tools with which to make their characters. They must obey those limits. But they also get to make choices within those limits to flag what they're interested in being good at. If a player sets out to make an expert alpha striker and Slayer of beasts, and bring their Bugbear Gloomstalker/Assassin with Sharpshooter to your table, they WANT to be able to delete high priority threats immediately. That was their goal. If you negate their efficacy because you find losing the BBEG on round one to be anticlimactic, then the players choices didn't matter. They could have made a Peace Cleric instead, not needing to consider damage at all. When you inflate enemy HP, and won't permit the enemy to die until 5 or 6 rounds in because the fight is set to your dramatic pacing, then what matters is what YOU want a fight to be rather than the PCs capabilities. This is a misalignment of play goals, both between the players and DM, but also the DM and the rules.
Again, I'm not fundamentally against drama being of higher value to the people at the table than the numbers. For this reason I play FATE, or PbtA and FitD games instead. That way the rules are aligned with that preference, and the players get to make valuable and informed decisions, supported by the rules. There are no alpha strike builds for them to make, and so I don't have to rob them of their efficacy to maintain dramatic pacing.
fair enough!
I have a few options on the controversial answers.
Any mid combat adjustment to boost the bbeg is in my option a failure in game design. The boss has the same exact stat block rules as a minion, with the only difference being what makes its CR higher: damage per turn, hp, and legendary actions. It shouldn’t be that way. Why should an epic, ancient dragon need minions to keep the party from going nova on its butt? A bbeg fight shouldn’t be so easy. Imagine Stahd could only be injured by a stake through the heart, but he’s impossibly fast, can punch with the might of a giant, and can attack all members of the party on one turn but instead plays with his food. The party has to outsmart him or TPK. Intense, high stakes, and a ticking clock. More exciting of a victory that simply using brute force.
This leads to TPK. As a player, I want my actions and failures to matter. I play “7 days to Die” and I know if I go to certain areas unprepared, I’ll be torn apart by a horde of zombie dogs...over...and over. It ticks me off, but it was my choice and it makes it fun to overcome. Saving the party last second by any of those suggestions is horrible. It takes everything from the players to the point you might as well give them godhood or set a respawn point for them to reload. No consequences, no risk, no worries...no fun and no challenge.
well that's the great thing about D&D innit? there is more than one way to have fun
As Gygax said "sometime the dm rolls the dice just for the sound they make" in other words you’ve decided on a course of action but roll the dice to give the illusion that the dice determined the outcome…. Once you learn this dming becomes a lot more fun.
ahh, never heard that quote. very interesting!
I've used this so many times.
Also, most of the time when I call for a roll in the moment, I have no set DC in mind. If the player gets above 12, they're probably going to succeed. If they get below 10 they're probably going to fail. It's exceedingly rare that a single digit is going to make that big of a difference to the outcome and most of those kinds of rolls are so low-consequence that it's better to just keep the game moving along. It's also a great way to lean into the chaos the dice can cause. Failures make things funny!
@@TitterpigRancherI love that rule. You may need to revise slightly during high level play where 30 dc are routine. Reliable talent gives a minimum of 10 plus all your normal bonuses.
In previous interview they said that it was perfectly fine to add or remove HP from a monsters.
My take on this is concerning the « balance » topic.
don’t ask too much balance from a designer who say that is fine to change monsters HP during a fight!
Lots of variables
So I am going to disagree wiht one of these up front, but I am not disagreeing with the ones you think I am.
The DM is NOT a storyteller.
If you try to be a storyteller, you will more than likely railroad your players down a specific path instead of leaving things open for them to truly shape the narative.
The best description I have heard is the DM is a Scenario creator. You create scenarios for your players, and you adjust them based on how they react. This allows you to not get locked into an idea and just run with it no matter what your players are doing.
sure, it would be wrong if you said "the DM is the ONLY storyteller." The DM is one of the storytellers at the table, and usually the one who kicks things off. Then the players get to tell part of the story, too.
The advice sounds fine. I love d&d mostly for the stories and if a player doesn't know things are fudged and the game is more interesting for it, I think it's good.
well said
D&D isn't storytime
@@adampender2482depends on the table. Plain and simple.
On fudging the dice:
If I put the players in a TPK situation (due to overestimating them or underestimating the enemy, bad dice rolls don't count) I will fudge.
If the players put themselves in a TPK situation (due to stupidity or by being murder hobo's) I have no mercy.
great way to look at it. I agree
I dislike fudging dice, and personally would not want to game with a DM that does it. Why? For me, I don't find a point in playing if you're just going to invalidate the impartial rules decider (the dice). However, once that outcome is set... and especially if it is unfavorable, I have, as a DM, offered alternatives to failure. Do you want to succeed? How badly? What are you willing to sacrifice to turn the impartial fate derived from the dice in your favor? It keeps the dice relevant - while engaging the player in a tense story moment. A loss still occurs, but the player (with DM guidance) gets to decide what shape that loss takes.
As for the villains... I cannot say I have never altered them mid-battle, but as a general rule I do not.
thanks for the input
I think giving a villain extra hp mid fight really depends. Is it a monster you homebrewed and balanced poorly? In that case you're playtesting it and should make changes to it so it doesn't ruin the game. If it's just the party playing well and beating down a monster that's been thoroughly playtested (like a published monster or one you've run many times before), then it's kind of taking away the reward for playing well. If it's a playtested monster that you're running poorly and the players are playing poorly and are still having an easy time of it, then I think it's kind of up to the DM.
fair enough!
Yup. That is one instance where in my eyes fudging is fine.
You’re a normal dude who hombrewed a monster in a day for their players.
In those instances I would say that best practice is nerfing or buffing an ability that has yet to be used on the fly.
However once something is used… don’t touch it.
For the TPK advice....great advice in teir 1...though try to avoid tropes like NPC's saving the day or divine intervention (though npc's assisting lightly can give the players the space they need to pull it out)...some modules (I can think of one I am running currently) do have tpk traps that would hit tier one, but that should be discussed in session 0 and everyone should be okay with it. However tier 2 and up if they players get themselves into a tpk risk situation you should let them sink or swim on their own. Anything else is a disservice to your players IMO. Again discuss this at session 0 along with what you want to do in the event of a tpk
fair enough! thanks for the comment
If it's written on the character sheet, you don't need to remember it. Sometimes the CS is also a good hint for beginners at what a character can do.
Fair enough!
Great video BTW. I will definitely be looking forward to more content. Thanks!
... gonna suggest stop using CP as a name. Same reason Cyber Punk shouldn't use CP as a shorthand.
you think people will confuse the two?
@@wizardsling shouldn't matter. Best to just not use the abbreviation which is commonly used to refer to something criminally sick, both to distance the topic from that, and as a general politeness to the person.
@@zhornlegacy7936 after some googling, i see you're referring to child porn, i assume? obviously i don't mean that. i never heard it abbreviated that way. either way, too late to change the video now. that's not how youtube uploads work
I always add HP or change abilities mid-fight if it seems too easy or too hard. DMS NEEVR CHEAT!!! You're there to share a compelling story and some fun and interactive fights. Nothing wrong with making things flow better for YOUR games. Okay, that's my 2 cents lol
I totally agree that if you and your table are having fun, then you’re doing it absolutely right
you forgot the best part of the video, the Gelatinous Cube Proposition!
Oh yeah! That was a good moment
Deciding not to tpk s party isn’t fudging dice. It’s making a decision that the monsters are just mindless blood thirsty stat blocks who do nothing but kill. It’s come up with a creative way to prevent something. Funny enough I disagree with Perkins methods of avoiding a tpk, I think there’s better solutions that would make more narrative sense. But I still agree with the jest of it.
I don't fudge rolls, but adding hitpoints midfight is usually realizing ypu balanced the combat wrong and fixing it. The goal is to make them game more funn not less. No player wants a boss to feel too easy. The is to some extent a correct number of hitpoints for a boss to have and adding or removing hitpoints to get closer to that point is a skill and fixing it is preferable to leaving wrong because you already wrote it down.
DMing is both an art, and a science, eh?
If a DM hates that their boss gets one-shot but is okay with TPKs, more specifically throws things to prevent one-shoting the boss but is against "act of God" or sudden rescues fro ma TPK, then the DM is a bad DM. They are clearly 'DM vs Player', not 'DM is a player too'.
Let's be fair, most BBEGs would prefer to capture the heroes because then they can be taunted, or "questioned" (where allies are, capabilities, etc etc). They are less able/likely to talk if they are dead and even if you leave one alive they may not be the one who knows the info the BBEG needs. And if the TPK happens against bandits? Well, slave trade is easy and good money for said bandits.
Thanks for the comment!
Giving the BBEG extra hp is fine but personally i just give BBEGs resistance to all dmg.
sure, that works too!
What's with the misleading title but mostly agreeing with CP? He said raising the hitpoints was one possible option, and whether that's the right option totally depends on the specifics of the situation.
i don't think the title is misleading. some people would indeed find his advice very controversial.
Chris Perkins....Yeah lets make D&D more complex. Glad I was around in the golden era of D&D back when TSR owned it. Better adventures bc of the authors who wrote them and better art.
WOTC/Hasbro could even do fresh adventures for 5e they just watered down and remastered( not for the better) most of the old adventures that TSR done back in the 80's.
It's like trying to polish an old terd.
I summarize DM rules as: 1) Keep the story moving and 2) Everyone has fun.
As for the details: No, you may never fudge/lie about a secret dice roll. Don't *ever* do it. If you can never lie about it, then why is it rolled secretly? Don't worry about that detail. All you need to know is that NO DM may EVER fudge the dice. Got it? Got it?
Can you give the BBEG more HP? You *can*, I suppose, but why would you? The BBEG doesn't understand the fight they're getting into? If they're so outmatched that they die in one round, why are they fighting at all? Did the party *really* foil his plans that hard? Or has he just been sitting there for ten sessions waiting as the party carves up his minions? What kind of an idiot are they, and how did they get any amount of power in the first place? If it's a trap, and the party is supposed to think they can win, and then boom demon summons... then let that be the explanation. If the BBEG doesn't have a trick up their sleeve, how BBEG-y are they really?
TPKs - It's not going to happen. You don't need to worry about it. It's functionally impossible in 5e anyhow, unless you just bust out world-ending spells or deity level powers. If the encounters are even remotely close to the CR threshold of the party, they'll (mostly) survive.
Thanks for the comment
"The rules are there to serve you not the other way around" Exactly why I quit 5e. Honestly not sure how I lasted so long in it, considering it also has the same issue that got me to quit 3.5/pathfinder; the internet killed playing the game and fixated everyone on playing the rules/system/builds, and as the DM you end up having to strictly adhere to all the little rules and can no longer make callings or really let anyone do anything outside of what those little rules let them do
Absolutely true statement. I have players exploiting every rules hole and acting like they figured it out themselves instead of from the latest dungeon dudes video.
@@36samsonfirst pathfinder game: I guess I'll approximate my old dragon disciple characters from NWN, turned out great for the DM since dragons weren't around and my character was unexpectedly a herald of their return. Playing the game I'm like "I am Ur'hak thr barbarian!" Like 3 sessions in the DM asked for my character sheet and burst out laughing because I had 2 higher intelligence than anyone in the party and most of the knowledges I could pull off... as a barbarian/sorcerer. I ended up working at a library because my character broke down weeping when he saw so many books in one place
Second game: Cool, we're doing pirates? Okay I'll make a character that is focused on being a great captain. Oh we're all on a ship right now, no reason not to just be a deck hand, oh there is a pirate city, cool I'll be from there but not wanting to follow in my father's dread footsteps I left my mother in that city and made way to be an honest sailor. Was the build good at anything other than profession? Not really, but the roleplaying turned out to be super great
Third character? Yeah Minotaur cartographer exploring the world to map it.
Fourth? Little old lady oracle that just wanted to mother those she could see within 30ft
Blast of a time. Shield bashing/throwing infinite loop builds on reddit killed the game as I saw the builds online. 5e came around and seemed so refreshing until I went through a bunch of games and it quickly became a rules lawyer game focused on internet builds on coffeelocks. Just sad.
whatever floats your boat!
Your thumbnail made me think you would do more than just summarize the other video.
I believe I did what it says on the tin. Ymmv
RPGs have 2 rules - 1) Have fun, 2) Make it memorable. Everything else is guidelines to help you achieve that. Rules lawyers can go play accountancy or tax planning :)
well said!
You might want to think of a different shorthand way to refer to Chris Perkins.
obviously I didn't mean what you're implying.
I'm really different. I would prefer to know everything before getting started. Once the game starts and the DM "forgets" to tell me important information or things I could have done, it starts to make me hate the system and not enjoy the game.
fair enough but there's so much to learn in 5e, you would have to spend days studying it to "know" everything before you begin
TOTALLY DISAGREE with scarce descriptions! It's a recipe to piss off players when they never saw the altar in the top corner of the room.
Reeks of "I got you" old school dnd.
Never fudge dice. It forces you to become a better DM. If you're going to fudge, let the players know it could happen.
If you don't want to tell your players, fudging could occur, I think you know it's wrong, and your players will call you on it. Otherwise, why does it need to be a secret?😮
Okay
DM’s are not referee’s. No referee is allowed to decide which rules they want to follow, change or ignore. It is impossible to referee a game that you are participating in. A referee is someone who is not directly participating and is only watching to ensure that the rules are adhered to and arbitrate on matters arising from play. Since rule 0 means there only one person aka the DM gets to decide what rules will be enforced there is no way that same person can also referee their own rules. The idea that a DM is a referee is one of dumbest fallacies sines WoC took over D&D. Let me be clear no DM is a referee. You will have good DM’s who value players helping to craft the story and you will have bad DM’s who do not value any change to their story.
Joo keep using dat word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I've been mostly a forever DM. TPKs are just not fun
i agree, unless you have a solid plan for what comes after and the table has buy-in. I'm not a fan of shrugging and telling everyone to roll up new characters
Calling him CP to abbreviate his name is not something you should do 👀
There is another thing abbreviated with that and it is very bad and illegal for those who don’t know.
ok
when saying No to a player just decide what the game's GONZO Level will be if this is violated it becomes a No. it's that easy. this should be handled in session zero if you do one or in the initial campaign brief.
heh gotta monitor the gonzo levels :)
As a 1e/2e dm for 41 years please tell me what these things are you call storylines and magic item shops?
Get with the times, old man :)
@@wizardsling with all due respect I'll pass. I prefer the game Gygax created
Controversial? The rules are guidelines, not law.
Guidelines can be controversial
"Roleplaying, not acting" Huh?
That what I call it
2014 DM guide author. Yes, for all camps, that's all you need to know.
you speak in riddles, friend
For people who play 5e...Everything is controversial.
yeah, can't argue with that :)
Attack players with the horrible broken builds/exploits that constantly appear on youtube shorts to assert dominance.
heh
Simply this. It is a Game. That's it. What Chris says is not divine. I don't care what he has to say. I do care that he makes a living off people who really don't have their priorities straight. Do you this with the game Monopoly? Do you spend money, time and energy on figuring out what you are doing to do in Yahtzee? Especially when people are starving and homeless, no, let's spend money on a game that gives us joy. Do you really pursue to better your life with this game? Whoopee.
I don't follow
I wish you wouldn't call him CP.
Okay
... do not abreiveate anything to CP
Okay
But the 5e DM Guide is the absolute most worthless DM guide ever written. You don't even need it. Moreover, Perkins really fucked up when he tried to translate The Tomb of Horrors to 5e by not specifying a character level that would be appropriate for it to have maximum scary effect...I don't see what you or he says as controversial, but at least some of it is stupid from a pre-WoTC (i.e., TSR, more fantasy literature-based than video game-based RPG) point of view...Recommend you read Gygax's "Role Playing Mastery" and compare what Gygax said to what Perkins said. What Chris Perkins says has little bearing on my life.
fair enough
I'm not watching this because you called THE Chris Perkins "CP".
Okay
If you're going to just make up the result anyway what's the point of rolling dice?
TPKs are a part of the game. Sure you can have your villains show mercy sometimes, especially if the characters try to negotiate. But literal divine intervention is going to kill your game.
I respect my players enough to roll with the dice and see what happens. It leads to far more varied story telling than just faking it.
To each their own if course. I just wonder why people play D&D when they don't want what it was originally designed for. Gary Gygax woukd design dungeons to literally kill characters off.
I got my 5e players to play Basic Expert combat and they loved it. Maybe an in built lack of stakes is why there are so many videos about how to make 5e combat not as boring.
gygax also said you don't technically need any rules, but the purists ignore that remark.
@@wizardsling Of course you don't need any rules. It's a game not your job. And I too homebrew a little.
But what's the point of playing D&D if you don't want to generally follow its rules? At that point you could either play a system that's closer to what you like or just play Calvin ball with no pretense of a ruleset.
D&D is designed around combat. Otherwise you wouldn't have a whole book based around monster stat blocks. If you're getting rid actual stakes for combat you've got rid of what makes it fun.
"No TPK" is just an admission that your table would be better off playing a different game that's designed around other stakes. It'd be like playing risk but with no invading or diplomacy but with no communicating.
@@mnm1273 well i would disagree that the threat of a TPK (and therefore deadly stakes) is what makes it fun for EVERY table. Your table, sure. I also enjoy tense and high-stakes combat. But some tables just want their characters to do cool stuff and that's what makes it fun for them. There's a lot of room in D&D for all types
@@wizardsling His job is to sell D&D. He needs to make it look like the right answer for every table. But that's just not accurate.
If TPKs scare you'd do better with a game system that's actually designed with that in mind. If Deus Ex Machina is a tool you're even considering consistently using to kill off the stakes of the fight maybe you need to realize the game design isn't working in tandem with your DM style.
Perkins's "6 rolls" of the DM are reasonable. The advice about extra HP for bosses, and avoiding TPKs is garbage.
If the party is steamrolling the BBEG it's either because of bad prep on the DM's part, or dice chance favoring the party in some way. Or some of both. Same for a TPK.
As for bad prep, the DM should take his/her lumps and learn from it.
As for 'bad dice'... The game is predicated on using a fair degree of random chance to determine a wide variety of outcomes. If you're not willing to abide by that randomness simply because you don't like an outcome, why the hell are you playing the game?
@@wizardsling Never said it was. Problem is, opinions from someone like Perkins carry far more weight than they should, and everyone exposed to them tend to adopt them as *the* official, approved way.
I've been playing this game for over 46 years, far longer than Perkins' entire gaming career. I've seen at least as much variety and change in the game as he has, and can say definitively that his 'solutions' to the questions posed are not necessarily the optimum ones. It varies by game and the people who are playing it. Yet his position at WotC gives lots of other people the belief that his answers are better than any others. Not true. He's entitled to his opinion, sure, but when one man's opinion suddenly becomes the next best thing to gospel for so many othes, I object.
@@wizardslingThere is no wrong way to play, but there is 100% a wrong table to play in.
A high fudge likelyhood table is a bad table for me as a player and GM. A high fudge table is a great table for others.
I personally believe fudgers should find a game where death isn’t the main consequence for losing in combat. Do they have to? No. They can play whatever they want however they want and have their own fun.
Though I am curious, would any fudgers be ok with their GM doing it? I imagine so. I 9’ the other hand would be deflated and would rather game at another table.
I fudge (albeit rarely), and I would be fine with my GM doing it. As long as I and the rest of the table are having fun, who cares.
@@wizardsling Having fun is always the main key. The burden of role playing is always on the players. The DM can do it all he/she wants with NPCs, but if the players aren't that unto it then it doesn't happen much. Melee is where the rubber meets the road. If the DM is well prepped, and the players are on the ball, then dice randomness is the only ghost in the machine. The DM should keep the tension at a good level. If that means adjusting a baddy'd HP or fudging a dice rill or two, fine. Let the players feel good about the win. If their actions and/or the dice are so bad that they end up with a TPK, let it happen and use it as grist for future story.
But there is not one, officially approved best way to handle that, which is where I cringe when guys like Perkins speak like there is, and their statements are proclamations of absolutes. Every game, table, player, and DM are different and blanket comments like Perkins makes just don't fit.
giving extra hp to a villain IS cheating to down a bbeg in the first round the group probably used their biggest spell / most expensive ressource and we're not even counting the obstacles they faced before getting to the guy
and giving all the hp you want to a bbeg just because the dices were on the player side just make the entire encounter pointless
also don't bring "it's better for the story if I keep adding mid fight more hit point" there is no story if you just deus ex machina this sh%t by that point there is no story you just want to make a point
the players won't cheat meaning that when they are out of ressourses they are out
in those case I would even argue what is the point of even trying at all? powercreep SUCKS in both ways you got a character with a big armor class? their saves must be shit target those instead of making a bloody dmpc god
chris perkin is just a sadist and it is a known fact
thanks for the comment
Nice video, but Kinda clickbait
Ok
So, he never read the fundamental books that led to Table Top Roleplay. Let alone Ptolus by Gary Gygax, The Book is 20+ lbs. AND , never roll behind a screen. Be adaptable, Manage the game session by time, that way all parties know there is a limit to their actions and cater to their OOC questions later if you have the time.
Thanks for the comment