Do you make changes with 3e Rogues?

[hong]

I expect the casters to buff the other PCs at least as well as themselves

What happens if your expectation is unfulfilled?

 

[Fenes 2]

What happens if your expectation is unfulfilled?

I play only with friends. If a PC is unbalanced, or disruptive, I talk to the person responsible - i.e. the player. "I am just playing my egoistic PC" doesn't hold water for me - we are in this game to have fun, not to deny others their fun.

So, if a spellcaster is just buffing himself and neglecting the rest and if that results in an overpowered PC, then I will most likely tone his power down, maybe boost the other PCs a bit.

People who cannot accept that they have to show some consideration for all players are not people I play with.

I prefer to solve problems not in game, but face-to-face.

 

[hong]

I play only with friends. If a PC is unbalanced, or disruptive, I talk to the person responsible - i.e. the player. "I am just playing my egoistic PC" doesn't hold water for me - we are in this game to have fun, not to deny others their fun.

Fair enough. I would hold a game designer to a more rigorous standard than "this will not cause problems if playing with reasonable people", though.

 

[Fenes 2]

Fair enough. I would hold a game designer to a more rigorous standard than "this will not cause problems if playing with reasonable people", though.

Well, "standard" D&D has guidelines for expected PC-Wealth and CRs etc., so if you follow those guidelines you should not have too many problems with game balance. (Unless you have an experienced minmaxer in a group with not so experienced minmaxers or even newbies or people who focus on roleplaying aspects.)

I just wanted to mention that it is possible to run D&D with low-magic.

 

[hong]

Well, "standard" D&D has guidelines for expected PC-Wealth and CRs etc., so if you follow those guidelines you should not have too many problems with game balance.

Um, what is a fighter or rogue going to do with all that wealth, if not get magic items?

 

[Fenes 2]

Sorry if I was unclear, I meant that the game as it was designed - i.e. with magic items really easy to acquire - the classes should be pretty balanced barring other differences. So I will not lay blame on the designers that they did not take into account that tehre are a few players that dislike the "standard" D&D magic item proliferation and play in a low-magic campaign.

 

[Desdichado]

There's nothing that chaps my hide more than a DM that tells me I have to share the wealth with the other PCs and be a team player, even if it's not my character concept to do so. I'd leave that game after one session of that. It's not reasonable to expect that everyone wants to play the way you have scripted out for them to play, despite the fact that you use that word to describe it.

As a DM, which I like to do as much as play, I take it upon myself to look at the ramifications of changing the rules, and making sure it remains balanced for everyone no matter what choices the players make. I also make it my responsibility to make sure all players are equally engaged and having fun, regardless of what characters they (or anyone else) is playing. I also take it upon myself as sacrosanct that I will not tell any player what kind of personality is allowed for them to play as their character. Telling a player that their character's can't be selfish because that doesn't work for me is one of the biggest DM red flags I can think of.

 

[Fenes 2]

There's nothing that chaps my hide more than a DM that tells me I have to share the wealth with the other PCs and be a team player, even if it's not my character concept to do so. I'd leave that game after one session of that. It's not reasonable to expect that everyone wants to play the way you have scripted out for them to play, despite the fact that you use that word to describe it.

As a DM, which I like to do as much as play, I take it upon myself to look at the ramifications of changing the rules, and making sure it remains balanced for everyone no matter what choices the players make. I also make it my responsibility to make sure all players are equally engaged and having fun, regardless of what characters they (or anyone else) is playing. I also take it upon myself as sacrosanct that I will not tell any player what kind of personality is allowed for them to play as their character. Telling a player that their character's can't be selfish because that doesn't work for me is one of the biggest DM red flags I can think of.

I think it is very reasonable to expect that my group should decide what kind of character concepts are allowed in any game before we start it, and that I as the DM have a right to veto any concept that would not suit my game and make it no fun for me. It is my responsability that every player has fun, and that includes, for me, to make sure no single player ruins it for the rest - which is something some character concepts easily can achieve. In my low-magic campaign a selfish cleric would be dominating any battle, ruining the fun for others, so that concept is disallowed. Any player that is not willing to be a team player (his PC can be a lone wolf as long as everyone has fun) is not welcome at my table.

 

[Desdichado]

That's fine, it's your game and if your players are happy, more power to you. I just pointed out (not that anyone asked me either way) that I'd never do that, nor expect that. I'd never play in such a game, and I'd never DM that way. In fact, I'd consider that to be a DM cheat -- a DM that went somewhat half-baked into the low magic arena but didn't really plan well for it and is punishing the players as a result.

But like I said, if y'all are fine with it, more power to you.

 

[mmadsen]

Um, what is a fighter or rogue going to do with all that wealth, if not get magic items?

Buy a palace, hire an army, surround himself with dancing girls, fill his stables with the finest horses, etc. What have successful warlords, pirates, and conquistadors done throughout history?