StametsActions meet consequences
Janx“I guess I’m confused. Are we having fun, or it are we playing Unwinnable Logic Simulator against an adversarial DM?”
Because a true BBEG would conquer an area, then overwhelm us with 100% of its conscripted fighters…
I think it depends on the game and setting. If the DM wanted to make things realistic, this tracks. If the DM wants people to just play murder-hobos without consequences, then that’s fine too.
It’s role playing. Get your fantasy out.
But a DM’s job is to at least try and introduce the idea of consequences to the player’s actions.
And this seems like a reasonable response in all honesty.
A DM’s job is to make sure everyone has fun. If they want to make things realistic or they don’t want people to play murder-hobos, they should talk about it. And if they and the players can’t figure out a game that would make all of them happy, they split up and find new groups instead of playing a game that makes everyone unhappy.
I dunno man. I’ve had a lot of conversations with players that go like “do you think your character is the first to come up with this hijink? If it works, why doesn’t the entire setting revolve about this infinite damage trick you’re trying to sell me?”
Like, if it was as easy as casting Charm Person on the king to become the new ruler, other people would already be doing that. Therefore, there must be reasons why it doesn’t work.