Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2582951" data-attributes="member: 18280">The question is not a straw man.  It is, in fact, the crux of this thread.  When determining when it is appropriate to say "No", whose discretion does the DM rely upon?  If the DM relies upon his own discretion, then he is the ultimate arbitrator of that game.  If the DM does not, then he is not.KM says that the DM is allowed to say "No" in general because to do otherwise would make his position obviously untenable.  However, KM also disallows the DM from saying "No" in any specific incident to which that general rule is applied.What KM gives with one hand, he takes away with the other.Recognizing that this is, in fact, the case is not setting up a "straw man".  It is, rather, suggesting that KM's position is, itself, self-contradictory.If I am wrong, all KM has to do is agree that it is perfectly reasonable for a DM to limit races and/or classes based upon the internal logic of the setting.  Without some caveat that the players have to agree (in either an implied or acual sense).  I would be more than happy to come across KM espousing such an opinion without qualifier.See, like a scientific theorum, my argument is refutable in a practical sense.In any event, you do answer the questions above.    You and I agree perfectly on this point.  Where you and I disagree is whether or not this is what KM is saying.  I think, very specifically, that KM is saying that the DM cannot say no.  Or, perhaps more accurately, that a bad DM can say no, but a good DM will not say no, whether he can or not.Using your example of a bec de corbin:My campaign is low-magic, low-cash.  As a result, there are no magic shops.  There are individuals who can craft items, but they are not common.  To me, this is the difference between "magician as artisan" and "magician as factory worker".  Simply put, it will be more of an effort for you to find someone to make your magic weapon, and relative to what you have, it will cost more.  You have to be more invested in the idea of a magical bec de corbin to make it happen.EDIT:  Also, assuming that the general feats allowed are given at the beginning of the game, you can easily determine whether or not expecting to craft a magical bec de corbin is reasonable.  If you are given campaign background material, you can also take a reasonable stab at how difficult it will be to find someone else to do the same if you are not able to.  If you know that being able to obtain a magical bec de corbin is extremely unlikely, you are not required to make a character centered around that concept.  I am sure that you agree that applying the "RAW for a specific setting" concept applies to more than just racial/class choices.On the other hand, you cannot be a half-ogre.  Period.  There are no half-ogres in the setting.I am extremely upfront about the core choices offered, about the average level of wealth and magic expected, and about changes in XP that I have made.  I am not so upfront about, say, rules pertaining to the Cult of Mellythese (an evil spider goddess), such as prestige class or classes.  In game, the PCs can research such things, though, and find out about them.No one can be forced to play with people they do not wish to. You cannot force the DM to run a game. You cannot force anyone to run a game in a way you prefer. You may be able to compromise, but your two absolutely always-available choices are "Play in the game I'm running as I am running it" and "Don't play in the game I'm running as I am running it." This is not only true, it is self-evident.Sure, if the DM is a dink and runs "Dink way or the highway" games, he's going to spend a lot of time at an empty table. I've said this (or things like it) numerous times myself. The qualifier (if the DM is a dink), though, is all-important.Every player wants to increase his own fun. If they are not dinks, then they are not trying to do it at the expense of others, including at the expense of the DM. Including at the expense of the work put into the setting.This is really simple, and it is consistent.No one has to play in my game if they do not wish to.  No one has the right to tell me how to run my game.  No one has a right to play in my game if I don't want them to.RC</blockquote>

Verification