Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 2585735" data-attributes="member: 22779">Oh happy day.  Heh.  The international post finally pulled through and I just received Dragon 335 in the mail.  Yay.  Now, I don't buy that many supplements actually, but, I have been subscribing to Dragon for the past year.  So, opening it up, I leafed through the mag and I realized that there was a nifty little point that is very salient to this thread.  The basic premise to this thread as I understand it, is that supplemental rules favour the players and take away authority from the DM.So, leafing through Dragon, I got to the Class Acts section. Now, here's a section of Dragon that's pretty much straight up targetting players.  While DM's might find the odd goodie in here, it's players that this is for.  Now, what did my eyes behold but a variant monk class- Chaos Monks.  Essentially a chaotic monk.  Cool idea, not bad execution.  Certainly the framework for creating a unique character.  The reason I bring this up, is the first section, third paragraph, jumped off the page and bit me on the nose.Here we have a rules supplement that specifically puts the power to veto an idea squarely in the hands of the DM.  Looking back at past issues of Dragon over the last year, I see this same thing repeated time and again.  "This is a rule variant- ask your DM if he wants to use it" or something to that effect.I would say that, at least Dragon, certainly isn't taking any power away from the DM.  When the rules specifically state that the DM must approve something before it can be used, you cannot really ask for more support than that.</blockquote>

Verification