Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mort" data-source="post: 8228565" data-attributes="member: 762">1. Sleep and long rest are not the same thing. Elves trance for 4 hours but their long rest time is the same as anyone else's -nowhere does it say otherwise;2. slots are slots BUT if the player is going to abuse this - the DM can easily say pact magic is an exception as Warlocks in general are not casters; or easier;3. The very common houserule that characters can only benefit from 2 short rests in a row and require a long rest to reset this;4. If the player complains ask if they'd rather you ban multiclassing, a clearly optional rule.Hey look, more warlock multiclass issues - it's a pattern.This one is simple - each bonus is added to 1 missile and 1 missile only (if you're generous you can have the curse and the invoker bonus added to different missiles). Is that RAW? Don't care, it avoids a very clear rules ambiguity exploit.Just say nope - sorry, 1 simulacrum at a time. Is that RAW? Again, don't care it prevents a clearly unintended and tortured rules exploit.The point is the truly horrific optimizations require tortured rule application and (usually) fitting together of classes/abilities that were not intended - if it breaks, just say no.But the TRUE point is: everyone has to be playing in good faith. Everyone at the table should be there to have fun, while not stomping on the fun of others at the table.That's the main reason that the OPs situation (as presented) is truly problematic. When he had a conversation with the 2 players, their response to &quot;Maybe tone down the blatant optimizing, at least the ridiculous parts?&quot; weren't met with &quot;Hmm, let's have a conversation,&quot; Or&nbsp; &quot;That seems unfair, can we help the other players get to our level?&quot; but instead with &quot;haha NO, non-optimization is stupid&quot; or even &quot;Just tell them to get good!&quot;It seems like both a clash of styles AND clear bad faith gaming - which is much harder to deal with.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mort, post: 8228565, member: 762"] 1. Sleep and long rest are not the same thing. Elves trance for 4 hours but their long rest time is the same as anyone else's -nowhere does it say otherwise; 2. slots are slots BUT if the player is going to abuse this - the DM can easily say pact magic is an exception as Warlocks in general are not casters; or easier; 3. The very common houserule that characters can only benefit from 2 short rests in a row and require a long rest to reset this; 4. If the player complains ask if they'd rather you ban multiclassing, a clearly optional rule. Hey look, more warlock multiclass issues - it's a pattern. This one is simple - each bonus is added to 1 missile and 1 missile only (if you're generous you can have the curse and the invoker bonus added to different missiles). Is that RAW? Don't care, it avoids a very clear rules ambiguity exploit. Just say nope - sorry, 1 simulacrum at a time. Is that RAW? Again, don't care it prevents a clearly unintended and tortured rules exploit. The point is the truly horrific optimizations require tortured rule application and (usually) fitting together of classes/abilities that were not intended - if it breaks, just say no. But the TRUE point is: everyone has to be playing in good faith. Everyone at the table should be there to have fun, while not stomping on the fun of others at the table. That's the main reason that the OPs situation (as presented) is truly problematic. When he had a conversation with the 2 players, their response to "Maybe tone down the blatant optimizing, at least the ridiculous parts?" weren't met with "Hmm, let's have a conversation," Or "That seems unfair, can we help the other players get to our level?" but instead with "haha NO, non-optimization is stupid" or even "Just tell them to get good!" It seems like both a clash of styles AND clear bad faith gaming - which is much harder to deal with. [/QUOTE]

Verification