A powergamer in a non-powergame.

[Greylock]

Failing Ride checks? How does one fail a Ride check unless they are trying to use maneuvers, weapons, or fancy jumping tricks? Every player is considered, per the PHB, to at least be able to get on, ride, and get away with an appropriate mount.

 

[scourger]

Congratulations! You're playing D&D, and you're a powergamer in a storyteller's campaign. Been there. Done that. Best advice: just enjoy it while it lasts.

 

[Piratecat]

Well, I feel your pain, and it might just be a bad match for your style. I also expect that your frustration is causing him to become more entrenched, in the same way that people in a parking space take longer to pull out if you're there waiting for them.

In this sort of a game, I tend to restrict my PCs to stuff that is very difficult to nerf: fighters, for instance. Not a solution, but sort of a reaction to minimize my frustration with house rules. I'm of the opinion that DMs should make rulings that make the game more fun for the players, and I suspect that your DM has a different philosophy because he's story-driven.

 

[Dragonblade]

To put it bluntly, I think your DM sucks.

I have played in such games before and I think house rules that "nerf" the standard rules is crutch used by a bad DM to mask their bad DMing. Sorry, but I don't buy the whole he is a storyteller BS. You can be a storyteller DM and still allow your players to play the game as written. And wanting to play the game as written is NOT being a munchkin or a powergamer.

If I play D&D, I expect to play D&D. That means, we use the rules in the books as written. House rules should be designed to enhance the enjoyment of the game and the players. My personal philosophy is no house rule should ever take something away from the players without giving something back in return.

 

[Cedric]

I've very, very rarely ever played in a game I didn't enjoy. I am lucky right now to be in a game I like quite a bit, but that hasn't always been the case.

Basically, I manage by:

- Checking my preconceptions at the door
- Adapting my style of play to the GMs campaign
- Finding my niche or area of focus that allows me to comfortably fit into the game
- Concentrate on having fun with the game, not just the rules of the game

I realize that is kind of generic advice, and no, it's not ALWAYS going to work. But I can guarantee this, if you are playing with people you like, you can like the game. You don't even have to like everyone in the game, just 1-2 people.

Those few times I have been without a regular game, have firmly reminded me just what I am willing to put up with to have a game.

In the end, some of the most strange, outrageous or odd games I've played in have left me with some of the best stories and memories. Sometimes they are memories of how great the game was...sometimes they are memories of how broken the game was, lol.

Cedric

 

[Treebore]

Well, it doesn't sound like your DM is open to reasoning, so play until you can't take it anymore. Then start getting sick, or too tired, radiator exploded, tires were ALL flat when you went to drive over, etc...

Then when he starts complaining let him know you'll do your best to be there, again and again. Sooner or later you'll get to quit.

Its too bad he isn't open to discussion.

 

[Cedric]

To put it bluntly, I think your DM sucks.

I have played in such games before and I think house rules that "nerf" the standard rules is crutch used by a bad DM to mask their bad DMing. Sorry, but I don't buy the whole he is a storyteller BS. You can be a storyteller DM and still allow your players to play the game as written. And wanting to play the game as written is NOT being a munchkin or a powergamer.

If I play D&D, I expect to play D&D. That means, we use the rules in the books as written. House rules should be designed to enhance the enjoyment of the game and the players. My personal philosophy is no house rule should ever take something away from the players without giving something back in return.

See, I respect your opinion, but I disagree.

I think most of it depends on the skill of the GM. Some of the most skilled GMs I've ever played with changed the game radically...and it was definitely NOT a crutch for them. They could have run the game right out of the book, but chose not too.

Even if I was skeptical of their changes at first, in the end, I came to very much appreciate them. Now, I will agree, that there are some BAD GMs out there who change a lot, because there are parts of the game they can't handle.

I think it's unfair to lump all GMs into this category though.

 

[frankthedm]

Things Too Powergame-y For This DM
- Improved Feint

Wow, that is pretty bad. It can be usefull, but the fact BAB is a factor really balances it out.

- 3.5 Power Attack's "x2 if wielding with both hands" rule

I agree with the DM on this one. Wotc added too much to PA in 3.5

- Taking armor or weapons off of fallen bad guys about half the time -- armor is "too heavily damaged because of what you did to him" and weapons are "obviously of (orc) make, so you'd be executed as an (orc) sympathizer if you were seen using them". This is more likely to occur when the weapon does extra flaming damage or when the armor is heavier than anything we've got.

Wow, that is pretty cheesy. If you are fireballing or lighningbolting the foes, I could see the DM declaring the foe's gear not surviving attacks the npcs don't, but since i have a hunch your party is not, the BS stink is pretty strong.

- Reminding my allies (OOC) to pick up the equipment I'd dropped in the fight before getting knocked out. The allies dragged me off, and when I brought it up later, the DM gave them spot checks to have seen it, then ruled that they hadn't.

You were KO’ed, asking the DM rather than telling the PCs may had been a better idea.

Things the DM is Fine With

- 6 level 3 PCs, equipped with no magical equipment and no armor heavier than chainmail (once PC had this -- everyone else has studded leather) against 10 bad guys, all of whom shoot flaming arrows. 9 of the bad guys were, I believe, level 1 or level 2. The 10th was, and I'm guessing here, level 7-ish -- +13 to hit while wielding a +3 flaming scimitar, and with around 90 hit points.

The 3rd level flaming arrow spell could have done that effect http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/spellsFtoG.html#flame-arrow . Or were those arrows wrapped with oilrags and lit aflame?

The level 7 sounds like a foe that is supposed to be driven off with concentrated firepower It could have been a +1 flaming scimitar that the bad guy’s 12th level cleric overlord hit with a greater magic weapon an hour before.

- Having a bad guy use overrun as a move action rather than a standard action, so that he overruns one PC, runs to the second, and then attacks.

That is exactly how overrun is supposed to work. Woct nerfed it right after 3.5 was released to prevent people from charging past allies, which wotc desired to taker away from combatants. It is a fine maneuver and exactly the way overrunning should work IMHO.

- Using special homebrewed combat maneuvers to declare that an opponent isn't actually flanked, so my rogue cannot sneak attack. Note: there is currently no combat maneuver that lets my rogue sneak attack when he otherwise wouldn't be able to do so. There's a maneuver that lets somebody flank when he's not actually flanking, but it explicitly says that it doesn't work with Sneak Attack.

3E gave rogues way too many ways to get sneak attack, but that is going a bit too far since from my experience, a homebrewed magic system is often used to deny rogues magical ways to get sneak attack.

- Declaring that when my rogue was reduced to 0 hit points in a fight on the docks, he was thrown off the docks due to flavor-text, and the flaming warhammer he'd just gotten sank and was lost because of said flavor-text.

What “flavor text”? High winds, swaying planks and crashing waves are not ‘flavor text’.

or winning because of the assistance of the DMPC who is a better archer than the PC focusing on archery, gets old.

I can’t stand DMPCs. Absolutely hate them. I made the mistake of having one a decade ago and have resolved never to again.

 

[takyris]

Wow, that is pretty bad. It can be usefull, but the fact BAB is a factor really balances it out.

Do you mean that there's a BAB requirement? (I don't see one.) Or do you mean that the opposed roll lets the target add his or her BAB?

You were KO’ed, asking the DM rather than telling the PCs may had been a better idea.

Actually, the way it went was me waking up and asking to borrow a dagger from someone, saying, in character, "Unless someone remembered to get my warhammer and my bow..." At this point, the DM called for retroactive spot checks, then determined that I'd lost both.

I kept my mouth shut until I could say something in character.

The 3rd level flaming arrow spell could have done that effect http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/spellsFtoG.html#flame-arrow . Or were those arrows wrapped with oilrags and lit aflame?

No idea. I'm assuming the latter, since magic is incredibly rare in this world. When we the party asked how to make our arrows flame, we were informed that it was a tactic we could use in ambushes, when we had ample time to prepare, but that we couldn't have all our arrows soaked in oil all the time.

Evidently the bad guys chasing us were preparing for an ambush.

The level 7 sounds like a foe that is supposed to be driven off with concentrated firepower It could have been a +1 flaming scimitar that the bad guy’s 12th level cleric overlord hit with a greater magic weapon an hour before.

No magic of that sort in this world. "Driven off" would be fine, except that he fought to the death. Firing from a distance was difficult because of the house-ruled changes to range penalties (noted above). And since we now have the scimitar, we know that it was, in fact, a +3 scimitar with a seasonal (three-month duration) fire rune to make it flaming.

That is exactly how overrun is supposed to work. Woct nerfed it right after 3.5 was released to prevent people from charging past allies, which wotc desired to taker away from combatants.

He also used a luck roll to reroll the bad guy's opposed strength check, then tossed in one of his poker chips when even the rerolled result wouldn't have succeeded and declared that because of his house-ruled combat maneuevers, it now succeeded.

Also, he was calling it Bull Rush at the time.

I'll try overrunning somebody in the next fight, and we'll see if the same rule revision holds true for PCs.

What “flavor text”? High winds, swaying planks and crashing waves are not ‘flavor text’.

If high winds, swaying planks, and crashing waves had been mentioned, I'd have brought them up.

The flavor text was the amount of damage that I was hit for and the fact that I was knocked unconscious. That's it. No Awesome Blow, no knockback rule, no nothing. Just, "Hey, since he's already unconscious, it'd be cool if this knocked him into the water."

 

[Nightfall]

Tak,

Well still I'm not entirely suggesting quitting, but I think you'd like my games! Maybe.