Campaigns destroyed by catering to whims…

[Malk]

Right on bild91, i am always open to outside suggestions, heck im the dm and i end up with more splat books and third party stuff than most of my players, i love options and ive never seen them be too much. I have enough confidence in my players to let them play something that seems slightly overpowered cause i know they wont disrupt the game in with it. I can imagine doing a core only game and having a great deal of fun with it, in fact we had to do that when only the phb was out hehe, but i like seriously customizable charectars.

 

[diaglo]

3d6 six times in order for stats.

i state it up front just so the players know what to expect from me as a referee.

 

[diaglo]

double post.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

3d6 six times in order for stats.

i state it up front just so the players know what to expect from me as a referee.

You are a cruel puppy, Diaglo... A cruel, cruel puppy...

 

[WARPED1]

I only allow books I own, or have read alot that my players own.
I'm pretty much a core DM, but Monte's "Way of the Sword" I like...........

 

[Painfully]

It reads to me like both parties are at fault here. The DM doesn't appear to have a firm grasp of what he wants in his campaign world, and the players took advantage of the DM by not being clear about their characters and their abilities.

The responsibility falls on the DM to keep balance in check. I'd say that is where things broke down. The DM was not fully informed in some cases, and approved things without proper review. As a DM, you have the ultimate control over your campaign world. Your players can only abuse it as much as you let them.

Every DM I know has a policy of having PrC, feats, spells, or anything else submitted for review before they get approved or disapproved. It's a policy that works as well as the DM who reviews the matierial.

 

[Orius]

11) I KNOW WE'RE FIRST LEVEL AND ALL BUT CAN I HAVE A +5 VORPAL SWORD OF DRAGON SLAYING?
I have learned from experience not to bend on certain things. When at 1st level (or any level for that matter), you have what your starting gold can buy. PERIOD. [snip] That's what they're for. I don't care if you have a magical sword/armor/etc as a family heirloom, it gets left with Gramps back at the family farm. It's hardly fair to the other gamers to have one player stacked to the hilt because of the fabled family magical garter belt of giant strength or for a player to have a 'freebie'.

Oh, I agree completely. What some people who are arguing against "tyrannical DMs" are forgetting is that the DM has to be fair to all the players. That includes not giving special priveliges to some players while giving to others. After all, the players who come in without the munchkined-out characters would complain they're not being treated fairly. It's not just a matter of weaponry or equipment, it's a matter of abilities too. You can't have one player that has distinct advantages in the game compared to the others.

 

[Chimera]

I'm open to suggestion, but I have my limits that do not bend.

After describing my next campaign (moderately low magic, Humans and Dwarves only (a Gnome or Halfling only as a rarity), extremely xenophobic of other races), one potential player asked me if he could play an Ogre. No. Then a Troll. No. Orc? Um, you obviously don't understand - HUMAN OR DWARF. How 'bout a half-Dragon? A Half-Celestial? A half-Fiend? No, No, No and I guess you aren't playing...

Just as well. If he's unable to understand the basic premise and the word "no", then I don't want to play with him. He'd be a constant nightmare of demands.