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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ColonelHardisson" data-source="post: 413511" data-attributes="member: 363">It does - or can - depending on the individual game. The assumption the game makes is that everyone's campaign world will be different. "Default" games are exactly what I am saying is the problem. The fact that many seem to think that if something isn't explicitly stated within the rules, it doesn't apply or exist is exactly the type of thinking I was ranting about.No, I didn't. PCs can do what they like, within the limits that the DM imposes. These limits are often in-game restrictions, cultural or monetary or whatever limits you can think of, imposed within the campaign world itself, not delineated by the bare rules. My entire point is that too many people get stuck on what they feel the books imply (ignoring all the stuff about making the campaign world one's own), and have the individuality of the campaign world rules-lawyered out - for example, since there isn't a restriction on multiclassing in the PHB or DMG, then there can't be any, at least in the minds of quite a few people. If, as a DM, I say Lidda can't take that level of wizard because it doesn't work that way in my world, she can't take that level of wizard - I don't care what the books say. If I say that the vocal and somatic components of a Fireball spell are to sing "Yankee Doodle" and do the Bunny Hop - that's the way it works in my world. Doing more such in-game thinking is what I am talking about.I don't understand your point. The completely average human will have, basically, all 9s or 10s. In-game, how many of them will have the wherewithal, or desire, to study magic for such minimal gain? In some worlds, sure, some might. But, if I say someone can only take a level of sorcerer if they've gone to a wizard school which costs 50,000gp, then that's how it works in my world. Now who's gonna take that level just to pick up a few 0-level spells? Saying that it works a certain way because it says so in the rules is metagame thinking, no matter how you spin it. To boil it down - my original point was that indidualization of the game is as easy as simply describing how things work, rather than continually questing for "fixes" to the actual game mechanics. The D&D magic system can cover everything from technomages to Gandalf, depending on how they are described by the DM. I don't think everyone treats magic the same way I do - in fact, I was decrying the fact that too many use the magic rules the exact same way, describing them exactly as described (and I am explicitly saying that I don't mean the actual game effects) in the books.</blockquote>

Verification