Literally the entire point of a mimic is that they are a lie. A mimic isn’t really anything special if the DM just tells you it’s there.
The only thing irresponsible would be if the party was very clearly not strong enough to be able to handle it, but that’s not about new or veteran players that’s just about knowing how to design a fight.
This isn’t a DM describing a chest sitting in the middle of a room and stepping back to let the player react however they will, it’s the DM telling a new and inexperienced player that the chest won’t hurt them. That’s just a lie and if the player acts on it, their experience isn’t going to be surprise at the existence of camouflaged monsters existing, it’s going to be “the DM lied to make me look foolish and hurt my character”.
Man, I don’t know who hurt you but you really gotta let it go. Maybe D&D just isn’t for you if you don’t like knowing everything ahead of time. Do you also get mad at movies with twists?
Frankly, I’d be more pissed that veteran player treated me like child and told me the surprise. Baby’s first mimic is a formative experience.
I’ve explained in specific detail how describing a scene is a different thing than telling the player an outcome, but you have this weird belief that encountering a chest that’s actually a monster is some character building moment like a frat hazing ritual.
This isn’t personal grudge. I’m just trying to help other people learn how to run good games. And part of that is realizing that the DM is both describing things (that could be deceptive in the game world) and an authority at the table with real people who should interact with them honestly when describing options and outcomes. If the DM says “that chest won’t hurt you” it’s the same as them saying “you can jump that gap safely”. If they then say “ah hah, you actually fall and take 2d6 damage”. That’s just a shitty DM.
With both your stance and how you’ve reacted here, I hope you either learn that or aren’t anyone’s introduction to the hobby.
It’s a fucking mimic, dude. Explain to me how the DM is supposed to use the fucking thing while also telling everyone it’s there. Explain how a responsible DM designing a dungeon is evil because they said “the chest looks like a chest” in reference to an encounter they are confident in the party’s ability to handle. This is not a rhetorical question.
It’s D&D, sometimes you fail at things and they don’t go the way you planned. You don’t know the answer beforehand, that’s part of it. If you want a perfectly safe environment where nothing bad ever happens that’s fine, that’s your right and there are groups and systems that go into that, but saying that DMs who don’t expose their fucking mimics are evil liars is wild behaviour.
I’ve literally already answered your question directly and quite explicitly. If you’re not willing to read the conversation I don’t see any value in continuing it. This is really more revealing I should have abandoned it much earlier rather than giving your weird responses the benefit of the doubt.
No you haven’t, you’ve just said that them placing a chest in a room and not saying anything is them lying, but I asked how they could use a mimic, surprise and all, properly. “Don’t do it at all” isn’t an answer to my question.
Do you also think it’s irresponsible for the DM to not tell people about upcoming plot twists? I played a campaign and literal years went by where we didn’t realize that our plucky mage friend was actually the BBEG all along, should we draw and quarter our DM for his transgressions? We’re playing Curse of Strahd right now, should I go buy the module and read the whole thing so I can metagame the entire time?
You have trust issues, fine, but don’t put that on everyone else. In your session zero you can say that you don’t find mimics to be very fun and that’ll be that but don’t go calling others deceitful liars over their own choices.
Literally the entire point of a mimic is that they are a lie. A mimic isn’t really anything special if the DM just tells you it’s there.
The only thing irresponsible would be if the party was very clearly not strong enough to be able to handle it, but that’s not about new or veteran players that’s just about knowing how to design a fight.
This isn’t a DM describing a chest sitting in the middle of a room and stepping back to let the player react however they will, it’s the DM telling a new and inexperienced player that the chest won’t hurt them. That’s just a lie and if the player acts on it, their experience isn’t going to be surprise at the existence of camouflaged monsters existing, it’s going to be “the DM lied to make me look foolish and hurt my character”.
Man, I don’t know who hurt you but you really gotta let it go. Maybe D&D just isn’t for you if you don’t like knowing everything ahead of time. Do you also get mad at movies with twists?
Frankly, I’d be more pissed that veteran player treated me like child and told me the surprise. Baby’s first mimic is a formative experience.
I’ve explained in specific detail how describing a scene is a different thing than telling the player an outcome, but you have this weird belief that encountering a chest that’s actually a monster is some character building moment like a frat hazing ritual.
This isn’t personal grudge. I’m just trying to help other people learn how to run good games. And part of that is realizing that the DM is both describing things (that could be deceptive in the game world) and an authority at the table with real people who should interact with them honestly when describing options and outcomes. If the DM says “that chest won’t hurt you” it’s the same as them saying “you can jump that gap safely”. If they then say “ah hah, you actually fall and take 2d6 damage”. That’s just a shitty DM.
With both your stance and how you’ve reacted here, I hope you either learn that or aren’t anyone’s introduction to the hobby.
It’s a fucking mimic, dude. Explain to me how the DM is supposed to use the fucking thing while also telling everyone it’s there. Explain how a responsible DM designing a dungeon is evil because they said “the chest looks like a chest” in reference to an encounter they are confident in the party’s ability to handle. This is not a rhetorical question.
It’s D&D, sometimes you fail at things and they don’t go the way you planned. You don’t know the answer beforehand, that’s part of it. If you want a perfectly safe environment where nothing bad ever happens that’s fine, that’s your right and there are groups and systems that go into that, but saying that DMs who don’t expose their fucking mimics are evil liars is wild behaviour.
I’ve literally already answered your question directly and quite explicitly. If you’re not willing to read the conversation I don’t see any value in continuing it. This is really more revealing I should have abandoned it much earlier rather than giving your weird responses the benefit of the doubt.
No you haven’t, you’ve just said that them placing a chest in a room and not saying anything is them lying, but I asked how they could use a mimic, surprise and all, properly. “Don’t do it at all” isn’t an answer to my question.
Do you also think it’s irresponsible for the DM to not tell people about upcoming plot twists? I played a campaign and literal years went by where we didn’t realize that our plucky mage friend was actually the BBEG all along, should we draw and quarter our DM for his transgressions? We’re playing Curse of Strahd right now, should I go buy the module and read the whole thing so I can metagame the entire time?
You have trust issues, fine, but don’t put that on everyone else. In your session zero you can say that you don’t find mimics to be very fun and that’ll be that but don’t go calling others deceitful liars over their own choices.
I literally explained how a good DM would describe a mimic you illiterate moron.
You’re gunna have to point this illiterate moron to that exact part. I just keep seeing “if they don’t say it’s there then that’s bad.”