Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Am I too strict?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Helldritch" data-source="post: 8024523" data-attributes="member: 6855114"><p>The players in both my campaign do not feel this as a debuff to the wizard. They see it as a continuity from previous editions. Only one player brought this up and this is his first wizard in 6 years. The player is rather on the power gaming side with a lot of rule lawyering mixed in. Yes my interpretation is strict and more like a house rule but we did away with down time for many reasons.</p><p></p><p>You have to understand that the rule was unanimously accepted by all of them six years ago. That player was not concerned by this until he made his first wizard in six years. He had agreed because he felt he was gaining something for nothing. Now that he is the one with the "tax" as he calls it, he wanted it to be thrown away. As I said earlier, we did voted again and the other players voted to keep the rule (5 to 1 and no I don't vote on these matters unless there is a tie).</p><p></p><p>From what I can see, there are 3 sides on the appreciation of this rule.</p><p><strong>1) The rule seems not to go far enough for some.</strong> In fact, some DM seems to have done away with the two free spells per level. As Oofta said, free of charge but not of shipping. In my case, the spell is free but not the copying. I am not in the camp of those that accept that the spell appear out of nowhere in the book. I am more of the type: The character has a flash of insight, so he learns two spell spontenaously. I see the two spell per level are there to ensure that the character has some spell to work on. The side bar is for every spells, even those that are gained through leveling. To get other spell, the wizard must pay for research, the right to copy from another caster, a captured spell book, a scroll, a boon, a reward for a quest or anything else that comes to your mind.</p><p></p><p><strong>2) The rule is a bit stretched but acceptable if the players are warned ahead of time and if they agree.</strong> Fortunately for me I am a democratic DM and my players voted on all optional rules. Even tough the rule acceptance was luke warm at first, most player would not have it any other way. The versatility of the wizard is such that they prefer it that way (save one, obviously). The gain of instant leveling without downtime or training was too good to pass.</p><p></p><p><strong>3) The rule is an absolute digress from the rule and I am a monster for doing so. </strong>I do admit that this reading of the rule is a very strict one and I agree that it should fall on the house rule territory. Many think that I have imposed this rule with an iron fist where nothing could be further from the truth. It was voted upon by all players. Players know it before making a wizard. The only strictness is in the application of the rule. No exception for anyone. </p><p></p><p>Now since players knew and voted for it, I don't feel that I am a monster. Not since I have seen that some agree (with various degrees) with me. The rule was there to force the players to vary arcane caster so that we would see more of the warlock and the sorcerer. It failed but not entirely. After discussion with both groups, players were clear, If I remove this rule, we will only see wizards as arcane casters (again only one dissent in that statement).</p><p></p><p>I asked if I was too strict because that one player made me think that I was. I wanted the advice on that ruling and I got it. I did not want to be judge on how I DM as some did. I wanted the appreciation of this house rule. </p><p></p><p>To those that explained their views on the rules, gave an opinion on it and gave examples: Thank you.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Helldritch, post: 8024523, member: 6855114"] The players in both my campaign do not feel this as a debuff to the wizard. They see it as a continuity from previous editions. Only one player brought this up and this is his first wizard in 6 years. The player is rather on the power gaming side with a lot of rule lawyering mixed in. Yes my interpretation is strict and more like a house rule but we did away with down time for many reasons. You have to understand that the rule was unanimously accepted by all of them six years ago. That player was not concerned by this until he made his first wizard in six years. He had agreed because he felt he was gaining something for nothing. Now that he is the one with the "tax" as he calls it, he wanted it to be thrown away. As I said earlier, we did voted again and the other players voted to keep the rule (5 to 1 and no I don't vote on these matters unless there is a tie). From what I can see, there are 3 sides on the appreciation of this rule. [B]1) The rule seems not to go far enough for some.[/B] In fact, some DM seems to have done away with the two free spells per level. As Oofta said, free of charge but not of shipping. In my case, the spell is free but not the copying. I am not in the camp of those that accept that the spell appear out of nowhere in the book. I am more of the type: The character has a flash of insight, so he learns two spell spontenaously. I see the two spell per level are there to ensure that the character has some spell to work on. The side bar is for every spells, even those that are gained through leveling. To get other spell, the wizard must pay for research, the right to copy from another caster, a captured spell book, a scroll, a boon, a reward for a quest or anything else that comes to your mind. [B]2) The rule is a bit stretched but acceptable if the players are warned ahead of time and if they agree.[/B] Fortunately for me I am a democratic DM and my players voted on all optional rules. Even tough the rule acceptance was luke warm at first, most player would not have it any other way. The versatility of the wizard is such that they prefer it that way (save one, obviously). The gain of instant leveling without downtime or training was too good to pass. [B]3) The rule is an absolute digress from the rule and I am a monster for doing so. [/B]I do admit that this reading of the rule is a very strict one and I agree that it should fall on the house rule territory. Many think that I have imposed this rule with an iron fist where nothing could be further from the truth. It was voted upon by all players. Players know it before making a wizard. The only strictness is in the application of the rule. No exception for anyone. Now since players knew and voted for it, I don't feel that I am a monster. Not since I have seen that some agree (with various degrees) with me. The rule was there to force the players to vary arcane caster so that we would see more of the warlock and the sorcerer. It failed but not entirely. After discussion with both groups, players were clear, If I remove this rule, we will only see wizards as arcane casters (again only one dissent in that statement). I asked if I was too strict because that one player made me think that I was. I wanted the advice on that ruling and I got it. I did not want to be judge on how I DM as some did. I wanted the appreciation of this house rule. To those that explained their views on the rules, gave an opinion on it and gave examples: Thank you. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Am I too strict?
Top