D&D 5E So Was That Z Fellow right?

[Nevvur]

How do you normally decide who gets the magic item? Do you usually Dice off?

I followed the guidelines for magic item distribution which state:

• If all the players at the table agree on who takes possession of a permanent magic item, that character gets the item.
• In the event that one or more characters indicate an interest in the item, the character who possesses the fewest permanent magic items gets the item.
• If the interested players have the same number of permanent magic items on the characters they played during that session, the item’s owner is determined randomly by the DM—usually by rolling a die.

The item in question was Goggles of Night, and multiple people expressed an interest in it, so it went to a roll off between two players who had zero magic items, neither of who was the damage MVP.

 

[Parmandur]

Oh, I'm totally posting in order to get the last word.

Well, just so we're clear. I wouldn't want to be adversarial about it.

 

[Shasarak]

I followed the guidelines for magic item distribution which state:

• If all the players at the table agree on who takes possession of a permanent magic item, that character gets the item.
• In the event that one or more characters indicate an interest in the item, the character who possesses the fewest permanent magic items gets the item.
• If the interested players have the same number of permanent magic items on the characters they played during that session, the item’s owner is determined randomly by the DM—usually by rolling a die.

The item in question was Goggles of Night, and multiple people expressed an interest in it, so it went to a roll off between two players who had zero magic items, neither of who was the damage MVP.

Well I am glad that the poor guy did not do anything wrong and that it all worked out in the end.

 

[Hussar]

Fun for you maybe. All I can say is that it sounds like anti-fun to me.

You brag about making "challenges" that only target their weaknesses. Are there ever any challenges that involve something they are good at, or is that reserved for the characters that are built according to your pet preferences?

But D&D can support a variety of play styles, and if you and your players enjoy that type of game, who am I to judge? (Oh right - an internet denizen. I judge everyone. )

Of course some challenges will play straight into the PC's wheelhouse. But, then, those aren't particularly challenging because they play to the PC's strengths. Fair enough. My point is, in a specialist group, you wind up with some challenges being pretty easy while others become much more difficult. A generalist party will generally have similar difficulties with all challenges on the other hand.

But, hey, variety is the spice of life. Only focusing on the PC's strengths will result in people thinking that X or Y is overpowered because it comes up all the time and the negatives never occur.

 

[Caliban]

Well, just so we're clear. I wouldn't want to be adversarial about it.

Sure. But this does prove I was totally right about why you are posting.

 

[Parmandur]

Sure. But this does prove I was totally right about why you are posting.

Well, that and to share how I would deal with an intentionally disruptive PC character if it remained a persistent issue.

 

[pemerton]

I don't really see why building a PC in accordance with the rules, with the goal of achieving mechanical synergies, is disruptive. I mean, when player's of casters do it, it's called "creative casting"!

 

[Caliban]

Well, that and to share how I would deal with an intentionally disruptive PC character if it remained a persistent issue.

Nope. You originally posted to brag about how you would purposely bully a player by targeting and killing their PC if you didn't like it instead of talking to them like an adult. i.e. throwing a DM Tantrum. That was settled awhile ago, no need to keep posting about it.

You keep replying to me to try and get the last word in. Unlike you, I'm at least honest about it.

 

[Oofta]

Nope. You originally posted to brag about how you would purposely bully a player by targeting and killing their PC if you didn't like it instead of talking to them like an adult. i.e. throwing a DM Tantrum. That was settled awhile ago, no need to keep posting about it.

You keep replying to me to try and get the last word in. Unlike you, I'm at least honest about it.

Now now, keep that up and you might be accused of using the dreaded StrawMan!!! argument. You know, the one where you accurately interpret what someone is saying and give them plenty of opportunity to correct your impression and then accuse you of using faulty logic.

 

[Sadras]

I don't really see why building a PC in accordance with the rules, with the goal of achieving mechanical synergies, is disruptive. I mean, when player's of casters do it, it's called "creative casting"!

It is very common to have spells removed from the spell list that may be deemed to disruptive/powerful for the table/GM or setting.