A
Anonymous
Guest
That was me.
Anonymous said:No, the narrator is completely within his rights to disallow or allow anything in his game. Thats completly fine. However, Shadow claims he asks player what class they wish to play, if anyone says shianti THEN he disallows the class (giving them a choice of reduced levels or not taking the class). This sort of thing should be made clear in the start of the game, no? Otherwise it IS forcing things a bit, 'arbitarily' or not.
A game is a collective group effort and certain things should be made clear at the start, if and when possible, (though possible exceptions definately occur)
DuskFox said:Anonymous said:No, the narrator is completely within his rights to disallow or allow anything in his game. Thats completly fine. However, Shadow claims he asks player what class they wish to play, if anyone says shianti THEN he disallows the class (giving them a choice of reduced levels or not taking the class). This sort of thing should be made clear in the start of the game, no? Otherwise it IS forcing things a bit, 'arbitarily' or not.
A game is a collective group effort and certain things should be made clear at the start, if and when possible, (though possible exceptions definately occur)
I don't know about you, but when I'm plotting out a campaign, I don't spend too much time thinking about which classes I want played and which I don't, but if someone comes to me with something I don't want played, I usually say so at that point. I'm pretty sure that's where he's coming from.
Xex said:DuskFox said:Anonymous said:No, the narrator is completely within his rights to disallow or allow anything in his game. Thats completly fine. However, Shadow claims he asks player what class they wish to play, if anyone says shianti THEN he disallows the class (giving them a choice of reduced levels or not taking the class). This sort of thing should be made clear in the start of the game, no? Otherwise it IS forcing things a bit, 'arbitarily' or not.
A game is a collective group effort and certain things should be made clear at the start, if and when possible, (though possible exceptions definately occur)
I don't know about you, but when I'm plotting out a campaign, I don't spend too much time thinking about which classes I want played and which I don't, but if someone comes to me with something I don't want played, I usually say so at that point. I'm pretty sure that's where he's coming from.
Thats where we differ, because I always see what classes will fit any given game I might be running and what might not. Call me draconic, but if I am running a game after 5050 and adhering to canon, then I might take into consideration that it might not be a good idea to allow the kai class, since lone wolf is the only kai running around then.
Alos, I prefer to give out all needed information beforehand, rather than just fling it out in the midst of a game, when possible. Again, maybe thats a bit too much planning ahead for your taste, but to each his own.
Balgin Stondraeg said:The only bad example I've ever seen of this was in an AD&D campaign. My magician had just attained a lofty new level (he now had 3 of them) and chose to learn te Detect Invisibility spell.
The GM instantly informed me that I was perfectly allowed to do that but that there would be no point as there were no invisibility spells in this campaign and only a few creatures would have it as a natural ability (that could not be detected by the spell anyway).
The Gm then consistantly threw things like that at us to hampre us and try and force us to play a combat heavy party of idiots (whilst we actualy roleplayed and had fun, despite the naff GM).
The campaign didn't last long, all the players were in aggreement that we had a hostile GM. We (the players) all still play together and have a great time.
My point is that the gm would only disallow stuff as soon as we actualy mentioned wanting to do it. If we kept such plans secret we would then be told "but you never mentioned this before and I would've told you it wouldn't work". I'm afraid the GM did seem to want to force us down linear playstation style console platform game storylines whilst still expecting us to be able to enjoy roleplaying.
Well we enjoyed roleplaying (and resisted being forced, much to the GM's eternal frustration).
The Wolf said:That's gnomist!
Heh. Interesting story of your experiences there Balgin. I have to admit that I don't think I could have stuck it out with such a GM, but then again we'd have probably done exactly as you did and RPd regardless of the combat monkey in charge.
Xex said:Then you should be thankful the gnome druid, whome you hid behind, did not shapeshift into a snail or something. :shock: 8)
cornichon said:No fricking way I'm gonna let a Shianti sorcerer PC get into my campaign.
Given Dessi mages are WAY much more powerful than other classes (i.e. from Level 3 and up), and given Shianti sorcerers are much more powerful than Dessi mages, they would just unbalance the game.
For me Shianti sorcerer is rather like a prestige class for Dessi mages: once they've attained level 20, they can try and study Greater Elder Arts...
Xex said:cornichon said:And without willpower the dessi, as well as the shainti, are powerless.
Xex said:They are 'helpless' because non of their abilities function. Not only that but they take a further penalty to their actions, and since without willpower they can only attack in melee at their normal bab(which is pretty pathetic) , with the penalty they cannot hit the proverbial side of the wall.
The brotherhood wizards loose endurance at a much lower rate than the dessi lose willpower. Also, the brotherhood wizads have the counterspell ability, whichc means they can usually nullify most things the dessi throws at them.
As for the potions, thats very debatable. The ability is extremely open to narrator and player interpretation; how powerful it is is simply how powerful the narrator allows it to be.
Xex said:cornichon said:No fricking way I'm gonna let a Shianti sorcerer PC get into my campaign.
Given Dessi mages are WAY much more powerful than other classes (i.e. from Level 3 and up), and given Shianti sorcerers are much more powerful than Dessi mages, they would just unbalance the game.
For me Shianti sorcerer is rather like a prestige class for Dessi mages: once they've attained level 20, they can try and study Greater Elder Arts...
The dessi are not WAY more powerful than anyone...(well except the sage of lyris ..but then, who isn't. :lol: ) At least playtest the classes before leaping to uninformed conclusions.
Xex said:And without willpower the dessi, as well as the shainti, are powerless.
As for the dessi, their wizards staff is powerful, true, but in later levels its power begins to pale before the brotherhood spells (which by the way can also do critcial hits). Also, the willpower drain of the staff is very high; you can blow through your willpower way way before the brotherhood wizard gets near to draining all his endurance. And without willpower the dessi, as well as the shainti, are powerless.
Xex said:They are 'helpless' because non of their abilities function. Not only that but they take a further penalty to their actions, and since without willpower they can only attack in melee at their normal bab(which is pretty pathetic) , with the penalty they cannot hit the proverbial side of the wall.
The brotherhood wizards loose endurance at a much lower rate than the dessi lose willpower. Also, the brotherhood wizads have the counterspell ability, whichc means they can usually nullify most things the dessi throws at them.
As for the potions, thats very debatable. The ability is extremely open to narrator and player interpretation; how powerful it is is simply how powerful the narrator allows it to be.