Confirmed: Magic items and summoned monster stats in PHB

[Cadfan]

OK, thats entirely different from how you framed it originally. Had you responded with that, I wouldn't have blinked much (though it still comes across a bit as a statement 'and so I'm going to punish you by not running a game this week'). But instead you responded with 'The DM decrees that your scheme fails', followed by some justification for same. Thats why it came across as adversarial- it was just an decree from on high, not an honest discussion with the players.

Huh. See, one of my best skills as a DM, I think, is my ability to make good fiat rulings on the fly while simultaneously putting off the need to decide or justify those rulings until the next session. The trick is to make sure the players never know it happened.

Player: I can't figure out why this castle is still standing. Its big, wide, has no roof, and its supposed to be holding back an army of dragon riders. Why don't they just fly over the walls at high altitude, past the siege engines, and land in the middle? That's what we should do. We can take this thing down in a single battle.

Me: That castle has stood against the dragon rider clans for over four hundred years. They must be doing something right. *I smile confidently.* Why don't we work out the plans for deploying your forces today, so that I can work out battle details over the weekend? It will save me a lot of ad lib bookkeeping during the game.

Player, sweating nervously: Uh... I vote we engage in reconnaissance. Lots of reconnaissance. And we send an envoy to the dragon rider clans and ask them about their past experience doing battle against the plainsmen. The more I think about it, there must be something really dangerous in that castle if its stood for so long against the dragon rider clans.

Me: Well, work out the details, and issue the relevant orders. Maybe I'll email you guys the results of your reconnaissance over the weekend, so you can plan ahead a bit more. This is going to be pretty climactic.

Player: Sounds good.

Me: *runs home and thinks up a reason the dragons don't fly over the stupid wall*

 

[Raven Crowking]

If the players are trying to break the game, I see no reason why I shouldn't attempt to foil them. Trying to make a million gp on a get-rich-quick scheme is trying to break the game. They know they're not supposed to have that kind of wealth without actually earning it. I can't imagine a group who would attempt such a thing, though, precisely because if they had the idea, they'd probably say to themselves either:

No, that would never work, because it would break the game if it did (see Wall of Iron).
or
No, that would never work, because someone else would have thought of it by now.

Either of which is fine by me if it keeps my game from careening off in some direction that doesn't involve heroic adventure.

You should never feel like you have to DM a game that you do not enjoy. However, neither should you ever imagine that players trying to get a handle on the world are trying to beat you personally. Nor is trying to maximize profit while minimizing risk bad play.

Yes, as a DM, it is your job to put roadblocks in the way. Frustrating player desire is one of the important parts of DMing, because much of the joy of rpgs comes from overcoming that frustration.

Saying that the decanters don't work because of X, which means that the players have to do Y to "earn" their reward is fine. Saying that Cabal Z, who control the water caravans and by so doing control the area try to stop the PCs (and again, force them to earn their reward) is fine. Letting those PCs grow rich and then retire as famous and powerful NPCs is fine.

Saying "Yes, I did that just to foil you 'cause I'm the DM and your ideas are pathetic" is not fine.

IMHO, of course.

YMMV.


RC

 

[TessarrianDM]

1. Having magic items in the Player's Handbook keeps players from having to reference other books if they are the only items the player character can possess. Otherwise, it is no different from the current system of having items scattered throughout multiple books which may or may not be owned by one or more members of the group. You still need access to the relevant information, wherever it may be located.

2. My players have never been allowed to summon or shapechange into something they had not already worked up the statistics for (although I have been less restrictive about summon spells since I began using DMGenie).

3. Keeping track of ammunition can be quite important at times. We are currently engaged in a running battle with a tribe of frost giants with ogre and winter wolf allies. It has lasted (so far) 32 rounds. The ranger has been firing 1-4 arrows per round and has already emptied his Quiver of Ehlonna; he has had to arrange for resupply from the only other member of the party who carries a longbow (via a message spell), move to where the other player dropped his quiver, and retrieve it, taking him out of the fight for a couple of rounds. This aspect of the game has created more excitement for the player, as he has to make tactical decisions based on his rapidly dwindling ammo supply. It is no different than the spellcasters having to decide when or what spells to cast, whether they should use charged or single-use magic items, etc.
Admittedly, this is rarely an issue, for most of our combats do not last this long, and access to wind walk and teleport make resupply relatively simple.

 

[Voss]

Huh. See, one of my best skills as a DM, I think, is my ability to make good fiat rulings on the fly while simultaneously putting off the need to decide or justify those rulings until the next session.

I tend to be uncomfortable with fiat rulings. It tends to point out the holes in logic or prepardness on the part of the setting designers or DM. Not to mention it revs up memories of the Gygaxian 'DM is out to get you' playstyle, and you have to start looking for insta-death traps every ten feet.

And, I hate to say it, but your player in your example seems horribly gullible. And to a certain extent, it comes across as punishing the players for coming up with a solution. Why not reward it, with the understanding that you can make it challenging with the resources that exist within the castle? For example, if they land in the middle of the castle, once the fracas starts, they can get attacked from all sides.

 

[Voss]

1. Having magic items in the Player's Handbook keeps players from having to reference other books if they are the only items the player character can possess. Otherwise, it is no different from the current system of having items scattered throughout multiple books which may or may not be owned by one or more members of the group. You still need access to the relevant information, wherever it may be located.

Well, here's the thing, within 3-4 months of release(with martial power and the treasure book), let alone a year (with PH II and etc), this multiple book problem is going to be a problem again. It doesn't actually solve anything.

 

[MaelStorm]

...Why couldn't they have chosen to mix things up a bit with the first base classes? Why is it difficult to believe some classes such as the bard need more time to design to be a valued party member under the new, or at least more strict, role assumptions?

For the missing space in the PHB, I have a theory.

Yes making money was part of it, they plan to unfold 3 power sources per PHB and that would have been a fourth one with two more classes. But the problem is that they want to release one Power sourcebook for each source, you would have to create a fourth splatbooks before the release of the second PHB. A fourth sourcebook would have delayed the scheme of 1 PHB per 12 months with 3 power source, to a 1 PHB every 15 month with 4 power source, and they didn't want this.

Of course this is all conjecture, but it is my 2 cp.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

2. My players have never been allowed to summon or shapechange into something they had not already worked up the statistics for (although I have been less restrictive about summon spells since I began using DMGenie).

Okay, they have to have the stats. Does anything else determine the availability of summons? Do you have all the creatures on the lists in your world? Or might you say "No, sorry, Xorns don't exist." How about the monsters added in later MMs with the note that they can be summoned with spell Y?

What determines the availability of polymorph forms? Can players browse the MM to pick the forms to use? Do all of those creatures exist in your world? How about MM2-5, Fiend Folio, and other books?

As I noted, I generally see "defining what exists in the world" to be the DM's job.

 

[kennew142]

Okay, they have to have the stats. Does anything else determine the availability of summons? Do you have all the creatures on the lists in your world? Or might you say "No, sorry, Xorns don't exist." How about the monsters added in later MMs with the note that they can be summoned with spell Y?

IMC characters with summon spells start off with knowledge of a limited number of creatures they can summon. They have to research the summoning of other creatures, or find another spellbook with the summon monster spell and a different list of monsters allowed.

What determines the availability of polymorph forms? Can players browse the MM to pick the forms to use? Do all of those creatures exist in your world? How about MM2-5, Fiend Folio, and other books?

As I noted, I generally see "defining what exists in the world" to be the DM's job.

This has always been a difficult one in my mind. I used to say that characters could only assume forms of creatures they had seen, but the various knowledge skills make that harder. I have lately been using the concept that a magician must learn each form separately, although I allow them all to be assunmed with the same spell. Learning it can be through research or through interacting with a living creature. I like the idea of using the polymorph spell to duplicate the form of a newly encountered monster. Once the magician has done it the first time, the form is added to those known.

I agree that the GM should exercise creative control over what creatures are available for summon X spells, as well as what forms they may assume with the polymorph spell. None of this argues against the player having access to the appropriate rules in the PHB.

 

[Zamkaizer]

"These decanters certainly are exquisite," observes the cabal official to the wizard, letting the water pool in his hand before overflowing into the basin, "obviously the work of one who is as fine of a magician as they are a sculptor." "I must warn you, though, that this town can be quite dangerous - one must always be wary of thieves." A thoughtful expression crosses his face. "Perhaps my organization would be willing to purchase these wonderful fruits of your labor - our guildhall is rather well guarded, and these would make magnificent decorations."

His eyes meet the warlord's. "After all, we wouldn't want any harm to befall you or your property..."

"I'm sure you will think over it." With that, he turns toward the door, gesturing to the companion he entered with. The companion, standing in the corner till now, steps beside the official, the heavy robes he wears despite the searing heat concealing all aspects of his person, save for a golden falchion resting at his hip. It is not until they've crossed the portal and into the bustling streets that you notice the damp trail left behind by the the robed one.

 

[jaer]

The idea was stated earlier that putting the treasure list in the PHB takes the power out of the DMs hands and gives it to the PCs. It was also suggested that WotC couldn't know what the majority of players wanted. Most of the anti-PHB magic item statements seem to be coming from DMs who feel they are loosing control...but for every DM, there must be 3-6 players or so...wouldn't they desire the move?

As a DM, I like controlling what my players have, but as levels get higher, I become a little more lax. They always need to clear item purchases with me, but I can't think of anything I haven't allowed. I may have told them they couldn't get it where they were, but they would make a point of traveling somewhere if it was something they really wanted.

As a player, my DM plays a very fast-paced game. Danger and evil is happening all around us, and he does a great job of keep suspence high and keeping us feeling the need to be on the move. If the undead horde are scheduled to attack on March 4th (in game) and we do nothing about it before then, they attack. If we spend all of Feb (in game) fighting them, we might defeat the horde before they attack. We rarely have time to make magic items that take more than a day or two (we COULD make magic items, but we wouldn't have stopped the undead! The plot moves too fast for us to take the time) and there are very few places to buy them other than the occasional wand or scroll or potion (often over DMG market price).

Now, we do get some awesome stuff from the DM, which he designs himself, but it also means that we are reliant upon the DM to give us things. My current fighter is massively longsword specialized...since I cannot be responsible for getting a decent longsword (no way to make one or buy one), my DM must make sure he gives me one or else all my feats are wasted. I am playing a fighter who used banded mail and a shield +1 through to 8th level (and just got a shield +2 at 11th) because I had no way of upgrading these items on my own. I got Gauntletss of Str +1 at lvl 3...and I'm still wearing them! I have 12k+ of gold because there hasn't been anything worth spending it on except to give the wizard some money to pen a scroll or two of stoneskin. And the only reason I don't have more is we haven't sold any of the magic stuff we no longer use (we have a small armory of +1 and +2 weapons).

As a player, this can be a little frustrating. I enjoy the game very much, but at times, I just want to spend some of my hard earned loot. There are small things I want that the DM hasn't doled out (like + strength items) and as a player, I would like more options to buy them.

I believe the general feel presented in the core books should reflect the desires of both the DMs and the PCs. The core game should not cater to DM wishes alone. It is up to the DM to house-rule their own look-and-feel if what the core rules present is not the type of game they want to run. Putting this info in the PHB seems very pro-PCs to me; I have no problem with that as a DM.