Cleric's turning ability + paladin's turning ability

[werk]

Then again, you would be a whiny little idiot anyway, so I think after you got the beat-down from me, you'd probably get some fromt he other players, and then a free ticket out of the window. Because, if I would say this to you, you would be just like the guy we're talking about.

Before you insult people, read the whole thread:

I read the thread, and did not insult you or threaten you like you did me.

You have the honor of being the second person on my ignore list and I urge all readers to report his post please.

Thanks

 

[Kae'Yoss]

wow Kae'Yoss, calm down. That was a bit excessive.

And his "I hate you, want to hit you, you are retarded and heavy handed" was not?

If some dm was going to write that down to me I would likely simply leave the game.

That would be OK. If I would do that to you, I'd want you to leave, anyway.

Being unable to explain why someone made a change to the raw and having to resort to such tactics is one of the big signs of a bad dm in my experience.

In my experience, some people just don't get it, no matter what you do. My patience has its limits. After that, people get thrown out of the game. No more explanations. And I really won't explain why I did not change the RAW to acommodate the power gamer.

A house rule is one thing, especially if it has a reason behind it. But if the dm thinks he is playing by the raw and not then showing the dm, at the appropriate time (which is different for each group it seems), what the actual rule is leads to too many other problems.

I may be wrong, but the way styker said it the guy was being a real pain and "won't believe anything unless he sees it". It might be stykers words, and the guy did ask with all courtesy, but he might as well be really like that.

Anything not houseruled would be raw, if the dm is not specifying the houserule and goes against the raw then it destroys my ability to play the game.

Except, of course, that he wasn't going against the RAW. He was playing by the rules. You don't get another 3+cha turning attempts each time you get another turner class.

As a simple example, lets say that we come to a 30' drop off and I am a 10th level character (some games start this high, or maybe falling damage has never come up before). I decide to jump down and use my jump and tumble skills. The dm then says that neither jump or tumble allow anything like reduction of falling damage and he believes that raw damage for falling 30' is 30d6 and because I was wearing fullplate and carrying my medium load it is maximised so I am now very dead. From a 30' fall, after destroying the raw, and claiming they are playing by the raw.

So much writing, all unnecessarily. See, I don't disagree with you. DM's changing the rules on a whim just to screw you is a bad thing. I have experienced it first hand and know what I'm talking about.

But we aren't talking about a DM changing the rules on a whim. We're talking about a player who use the rules wrong (and I suspect that he did this for powergaming reasons) and who talks back to the DM when he tells him how the rules are. No intentional changing of the rules in that one.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

and did not insult you or threaten

No? Please tell me how to interpret the following statements:

This strategy would get either hard feelings or hard knuckles from me as a player

I was under the impression that you said that if you were a player, you would hit me for it. I'm not a native english speaker, and some of the nuances still escape me, so please tell me how this is supposed to be interpreted.

Talk about socially retarded heavy handed DMing

Again, tell me who you were addressing here. The one who wrote the above-mentioned down (that would be me), or someone completely different?


You know, hiding the insults behind the old "If someone would say what you just said to me I would call him socially retarded, heavy handed and he'd get hard knuckles" routine isn't as subtle as it seems.

 

[Scion]

I dont see any line like that, but perhaps I missed it, feel free to point it out. (ahh, I just found what you are talking about and yes, I feel that you are way overstating your case. saying that such a call would be socially retarded is a bit off putting, but does not push to the point you took it)

In this case I see absolutely no reason for the dm to be snippy. The player sees this, 'cleric: gains 3+cha mod in turnings per day', 'paladin: gains 3+cha mod in turnings per day', and then thinks, 'well hey, I multiclassed and took enough levels in paly, that must be one of the perks'. Then the dm comes in and says he is wrong about that, the player asks why and to be shown in the rules.

At this point no one should be upset, no one should think that they are being unfairly punished. All that should happen is finding the appropriate text and saying, 'here is why'. Getting out a piece of paper and writing, 'I am the dm' on it would be the wrong thing to do. Very wrong. Horribly wrong. Slapping someone in the face whenever they ask a simple question is just a Bad Move (tm) imo.

So yes, from a players point of view it could be changing the rules at whim, especially if the dm could find nothing to back up his claim. The player saw something that makes sense without further rules input, the dm said it was wrong. One of the two is incorrect, just because one is the dm is completely unimportant.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

At this point no one should be upset, no one should think that they are being unfairly punished. All that should happen is finding the appropriate text and saying, 'here is why'. Getting out a piece of paper and writing, 'I am the dm' on it would be the wrong thing to do. Very wrong. Horribly wrong. Slapping someone in the face whenever they ask a simple question is just a Bad Move (tm) imo.

So yes, from a players point of view it could be changing the rules at whim, especially if the dm could find nothing to back up his claim. The player saw something that makes sense without further rules input, the dm said it was wrong. One of the two is incorrect, just because one is the dm is completely unimportant.

Look at this:

Someone knows where i find this rule because that stupid players says that just believe what he see.

Let's just assume that the wording was the player's, not the DM's. It doesn't sound like a request that the DM tells him where to find the rules. It sounds like a player demanding stuff from the DM.

I'd say since the player claims the rules to be this and that, he should come up with the reference. It really didn't sound like the player wasn't sure, thought it a perk and then assumed that they stack. It came across like the player was damn sure that he was right, the DM was wrong, and if the DM wants to have it his way, he should better come up with something to back him up. And it's not the players' place to demand anything. At the end of the day, the DM is the one who has the last word about any rules.

Besides: It makes much more sense to have the two abilities stack instead of having the abilities twice, since it's the same ability.

 

[Scion]

It sounds more like a whiney dm, but I wouldnt interpret it in either direction, just someone asking a question. (note, this is not an attack on the dm in question, just a response to a different comment)

Also, two feats with the same name can stack. Two different arcane classes do the same thing but do not stack directly, although you get the benefits of each.

In this case we know that the levels stack, it says so directly. The only question would be about the number of times one can do it.

From the players perspective at least giving up several levels of turning ability plus other abilities in order to turn more often might seem like a natural progression.

I dont think it is unreasonable to ask the dm to clarify what he is saying. Seeing is believing, as they say.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Actually, to me, it sounds like a player saying, "But it says I get X+Y uses of Turn Undead. Does it say anywhere that I don't?"

The DM, in this case, sounds much worse off - especially since his is the only PoV we've got, and his typing skills are lacking.

 

[Henry]

Frankly, everybody should lay off all personal insults, because it makes for a friendlier thread. If someone insults another poster, it's better to just report it than return fire; otherwise, whether a comment is misunderstood or not, it gets out of hand quickly. I didn't like either comment, frankly, because it brought absolutely nothing to styker's question.

Now, if we can do away with people talking about punching one another out, I'll be glad to let this continue.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

his typing skills are lacking.

We shouldn't judge him because of that. It could just be that English isn't his native language.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

We shouldn't judge him because of that.

Lacking any other information, it will inform my views.

If, instead, the initial post had read, "One of my players and I are having a rules disagreement. He thinks he gets X+Y turning attempts per day, and I think he doesn't. However, I can't find the exact rules in the text. Can you help me find it so I can show my player?," I'd've had a much different view of the situation than "my dumb player says ..."