D&D General DM Says No Powergaming?

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Not loving the over-generalization here. I don't enjoy power gaming, and it's not because I'm a poor DM, not because I am running a pre-made module (90% of my adventures are home-brew). It's because I think power gaming is usually detrimental to running a game that is focused on character and story development, which is my whole thing. And I'm the one doing all the work.

And sure, you can be a power-gamer who is big into roleplay. But I haven't run into many. YVMV.
This is a common fallacy, so common it has a name: The Stormwind Fallacy. It's been disproven again and again.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

This is a common fallacy, so common it has a name: The Stormwind Fallacy. It's been disproven again and again.

Again, it’s not a problem for me, but if he says powergamers tend not to share his priorities in the game, how can you say he’s wrong? How can he be “disproven”? He’s not making some absolute claim that powergaming is incompatible with roleplaying—the “YMMV” is right there!
 

bedir than

Full Moon Storyteller
Again, it’s not a problem for me, but if he says powergamers tend not to share his priorities in the game, how can you say he’s wrong? How can he be “disproven”? He’s not making some absolute claim that powergaming is incompatible with roleplaying—the “YMMV” is right there!
This. If someone ignores a session zero, and walks up saying that they are centering their own interests via powergaming rather than the group's style of play that's a sign for that individual, not all powergamers.

Again. I don't care if people power game. I've done it.

Play the way that makes you happy. Find a group where that fits. It's easy.
 

iserith

Magic Wordsmith
Just curious -- Show of hands: Who here is secretly mad that Paladins no longer have the 'The DM gets to steal your powers for not sharing their morals' stipulation?
Perhaps this made some sort of sense in a different game, particularly if the paladin enjoyed a level of power that others did not have and the trade-off was that you had to act rigidly according to a set code. But that's just not a thing in D&D 5e, even if there is some verbiage that suggests the possibility a paladin could fall. (On the other hand, a paladin falling and redeeming themselves is a pretty good story, but one that should be worked out between the player and DM in my view.)
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
Perhaps this made some sort of sense in a different game, particularly if the paladin enjoyed a level of power that others did not have and the trade-off was that you had to act rigidly according to a set code. But that's just not a thing in D&D 5e, even if there is some verbiage that suggests the possibility a paladin could fall. (On the other hand, a paladin falling and redeeming themselves is a pretty good story, but one that should be worked out between the player and DM in my view.)
I'm just wondering because so many people see the warlock and go 'ah, half an excuse to make the same mistakes.'.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Really? That easy? You can't even imagine a situation where it would be a game-changer to have an entire church/cult and their members hunting you down? Even if you're powerful enough to beat them, that would be a huge consequence to betraying the person that gave you magic.

Not in 5e they can't.

Not in 5e. The classes are purposefully designed that the magic Clerics and Warlocks get isn't revocable.

They "try" to turn you into a monster. That doesn't mean they succeed. The DM could build in a side-quest to cure the curse/find a magic item that stops it. It could be a fun side quest. "You lose your class features and are useless to the party" isn't as ripe for drama and in-game tension.

What's more interesting, being a fugitive former-member of a prominent church/cult that's being hunted down by their former allies that also has to figure out how to end a curse or be turned into a monster in a certain time-frame, while also dealing with the main plot of the campaign, or just being a dude without magic because the DM/Paton has absolute authority to take away your magic at any moment.
Does the fiction say their powers are irrevocable? In 5e? In 4e I'm pretty sure they did say that, but I believe they walked that bit back in 5e.
 



Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
It doesn't say that they can be taken away and Jeremy Crawford has said that they can't (or that it wasn't intended that they could be taken away in 5e).
Can't tell you how much I love "truth" delivered via interview, social media posts, and PR videos.

I also recall a fair number of people irritated with Crawford's take on his own rules. But I'm sure its much easier to accept a ruling from on high if you happen to agree with it.

But fine. We'll have to leave this a table issue then, since apparently PCs need to be protected from mechanical consequences for their actions.
 

Redwizard007

Adventurer
I had a super snarky response all queued up, but others have covered that. Thanks, folks.

"Powergaming" is bologna. Pure and simple. If A DM isn't up to handling feats, or flight, or gasp multi-classing because they are still learning the system or how to run a game, fine. I hate it, but I can deal with that. Ateast i don't have to DM again this session. If it's because they can't figure out how to challenge reasonably optimized builds then I'd rather not be at the table anyway.

The simple truth, is that nothing is as OP as a 5e wizard except another 5e wizard. You can rant all day about Twilight Clerics, or Hexblade dips, but neither comes close to a Divination Wizard. Sharpshooter or the Lucky feats do nothing but bring martials a littlecloser to parity. Banning flying races only to see arcane casters take to the air at level 5 is even more ridiculous, yet how often is Wizard a banned class? Where is the gosh darn consistency?
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top