Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8517765" data-attributes="member: 7032025">First, Voldemort is not not the only wizard to use it in the series, I can think of at least two others, but it does not change the fact that, practically, it's an NPC only spell.Whatever the reasons, it's what it comes down to.That has nothing to do with the fact that he had a huge impact on the setting.Unfortunately, Lord Soth proves that a death knight can have a critical impact on a setting all on his own.As long as we agree that one of them was not restricting some powers to NPC, I am sure that we agree it's well done... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Actually, we had a very interesting kobold character in our biggest campaign ever, he ended up being the god of scalebearers when almost the whole adventurers guild (it was a really special setting) ascended.Actually, they forgot that one, and they gave PC kobolds the same powers as monsters through a stupid class power....If "advocating" means pestering the DM for advantage or trying to impress that "by RAW they are entitled to" whatever, no, they don't. Call me a tyrant...After that if, in character, their character pesters NPCs it's absolutely fine, as long as they are prepared to deal with the consequences.Actually, we completely disagree here. If, as a DM, I say "no evil PC" (which is a common campaign restriction) and your PC willfully commits an atrocity, and as a DM I judge that it turns him evil and therefore an NPC, that specific character in that campaign becomes just that, an NPC, which I control as the DM. You can find yourself another character to play, or leave the campaign and recreate the PC somewhere else, but the real character is still part of the campaign, as a NPC.And maybe it's not one that, as a DM, I want to master, and especially not one that the other players want to have in their game. So it's fine, it's a new flow, but controlled by the DM.Actually no, I don't. This is why I love 5e and its "rulings over rules". When I create such a ruling, it's local and adapted to the circumstances. As I'm pretty sure that these exact circumstances will not happen again, I am free to rule again as I wish for the next set of circumstances, which will be different.And it really does not work as well, noone does that in the genre so I don't in my campaigns either.Or I just create a mythic dragon with special abilities and it works splendidly.It's the same for me, the rule that "only the chosen emperor-god of Zap can cast the debilitating death spell" applies equally to everyone, it just happens that none of the PCs can ever become the emperor god of Zap, since they are not chosen by the evil gods that govern him.I'm not even sure what you are referring to, but the Wheel of Time has a fairly consistent magical system, which actually follows fairly closely what happens at high level in campaigns, with PCs becoming powerful, then taking on responsibilities, then needing to abandon them for a time, etc. And the same thing with anti/counter magic thingie, which suddenly pops up to create obstacles, then becomes wielded by the characters, before some anti-anti-magic things pop up.After that, while I agree that the middle books are quite slow, it's still one of the best sagas of the genre, and the final (Brandon Sanderson again) is absolutely epic.</blockquote>

Verification