Why do people take such a big issue with spell banning?

Jacob Marley · Sep 24, 2012

Ashtagon said:
And yet create water is very definitely on the spell list for water priests in the original 2e rulebook (and again in the revised 2e rulebook).

You are right on the specific example of Dark Sun (I had to look it up when I got home from work.). The broader point still remains, though: banning spells does not mean an incapable DM. It could mean a DM attempting to create a specific environment or a unique challenge for the players.

Treebore · Sep 24, 2012

Jacob Marley said:
You seem to be assuming that banning is occuring exclusively for power reasons as opposed to flavor or campaign reasons. For example, a game set in Dark Sun requires spells like Create Water to be banned. The alternative defeats the point of playing Dark Sun.

Well, if their "flavor" is to get rid of Raise Dead and the like, then I do not want to play, unless they have some kind of alternative system to replace it. Usually, their removal means the GM does not kill PC's, and that is a kind of game I have no interest in playing. If they have removed such options, and still run a deadly game, again nothing I want to spend my time on if I do not have the option to keep playing a character I like.

When I have seen Teleport spells removed, that has simply been because the DM didn't figure out how to effectively deal with them, or change them up a bit like I have in order to make them less problematic. Which indicates to me a DM unable to learn to master the system. So, again, not a game I am interested in investing my time in.

Banning spells to fit a setting can be a good thing, but it better be to enhance the flavor of the setting, not be an excuse to get rid of spells the DM has been incapable of learning how to deal with.

Dozen · Sep 25, 2012

Jacob Marley said:
You are right on the specific example of Dark Sun (I had to look it up when I got home from work.). The broader point still remains, though: banning spells does not mean an incapable DM. It could mean a DM attempting to create a specific environment or a unique challenge for the players.

This would be a good point only if the OP didn't ask about spells which get banned due to balance issues.

Ashtagon · Sep 25, 2012

Disclaimer: I am one of those GMs who bans player-cast raise dead and nerfs teleport up the wazoo.

Treebore said:
Well, if their "flavor" is to get rid of Raise Dead and the like, then I do not want to play, unless they have some kind of alternative system to replace it. Usually, their removal means the GM does not kill PC's, and that is a kind of game I have no interest in playing. If they have removed such options, and still run a deadly game, again nothing I want to spend my time on if I do not have the option to keep playing a character I like.

What do you see as the fundamental difference between a DM who never kills a character and a campaign where characters have easy access to raise dead? In both cases, death has no sting and thus loses its dramatic impact.

When I have seen Teleport spells removed, that has simply been because the DM didn't figure out how to effectively deal with them, or change them up a bit like I have in order to make them less problematic. Which indicates to me a DM unable to learn to master the system. So, again, not a game I am interested in investing my time in.

Let's say you are running a Lord of the Rings campaign. How do you continue the campaign where the party wizard teleports to Mount Doom with the One Ring? You have just about the same issue with every fantasy story ever written or filmed - at some point the party has to go on an overland trek, and easy transportation magic will often end the story.

I nerf teleport spells because they are a story-breaking power. They make it impossible to tell a wide swathe of stories.

Banning spells to fit a setting can be a good thing, but it better be to enhance the flavor of the setting, not be an excuse to get rid of spells the DM has been incapable of learning how to deal with.

So far, the only way to "deal with" teleport involves things that either break stories, or break fictional economies. I have yet to come up with a solution to player-access to teleport that still ends up looking reasonably like a conventional near-mediaeval world once you examine all con sequences. But if you have, please do share your wisdom.

Dandu · Sep 25, 2012

Let's say you are running a Lord of the Rings campaign. How do you continue the campaign where the party wizard teleports to Mount Doom with the One Ring? You have just about the same issue with every fantasy story ever written or filmed - at some point the party has to go on an overland trek, and easy transportation magic will often end the story.

I nerf teleport spells because they are a story-breaking power. They make it impossible to tell a wide swathe of stories.

Eagles OP!

Ashtagon · Sep 25, 2012

Dandu said:
Eagles OP!

I knew that youtube vid would get referenced. But in-genre, it's a lot easier to say that the eagle NPCs just don't want to carry you (or can't carry you) than it is to say every single place of adventure interest is shielded from teleport spells.

Dandu · Sep 25, 2012

"Why don't you want to take us for an airborne assault on Mt. Doom. Are you chicken?"

Yora · Sep 25, 2012

Dandu said:
Eagles OP!

Eagles are countered by flying beasts. Sauron has air superiority.

Treebore said:
Banning spells to fit a setting can be a good thing, but it better be to enhance the flavor of the setting, not be an excuse to get rid of spells the DM has been incapable of learning how to deal with.

That's not how settings work. There are lots of subtle details that come together for the final whole and you can't just cram everything in and expect it to still be what the creator intended. If someone wants to make a D&D setting in which everything that exist in D&D exist in the world, that's fine. But this is not a requirement to use the D&D rules to run campaigns in that setting.
If some people refuse to play such campaigns, that's their descision.

Dannyalcatraz · Sep 25, 2012

Ok...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5G4puptHvo]Krull - Ride Of The Firemares - YouTube[/ame]

Here are also fast travel/teleports in Amber, the Eternal Champion books, etc.

The trick, of course is this phrase: "easy transportation magic". If it is too easy, it can wreck stories.

Dandu · Sep 25, 2012

Yora said:
Eagles are countered by flying beasts. Sauron has air superiority.

Refresh my memory; what was Sauron's air corps composed of, aside from the Nine?

(Even assuming he had a lot of dragons or whatever in Mordor, a ride from the eagles would have bypassed all the orcs and etc plaguing the lands. Could have gotten to Gondor a lot easier.)