Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 445531" data-attributes="member: 172">And what is wrong with that? I address the points that concern me the most or I take the most exception to, naturally. It's not that I ignored your points, I just didn't feel it worth my time to address the other points as I obviously did not feel them particularly relevant and/or compelling. But you said "whatabout" and I answered, so let's not dwell on it.What it does in 3e is already irrelevant to this discussion, as we already all well know what rules the book provides, and we also have the reasoning behind why those rules were excluded from 3e. The topic of this discussion is WHY some of use find those reasons are particularly ill-founded.There may well be. But your argument about "where does all this gold come from" essentially treats magic items like this tremendous black hole in the drow elf economy that is unreasonable. In the context of the game, it doesn't work that way. Drow elves enslave others to do their bidding, mining the resources they need to make what implements of war that they need. It's not like they even ever have to use gold -- the GP rating is a rating of power, not ready cash.Who said anything about roleplaying restrictions? The statement that you were replying to was directly in reference to the attitude that gold must change hands for magic items to exist, as if the gm were some infinite bank in a game of monopoly.Am I? I don't remember quoting you at all to be "misquoting" you to begin with. But since you bring it up, the statement I was responding to is: "I just don't really like the "because the DM said so" approach". That's a pretty extreme statement where I am standing, one on par with the design approach behind Synnibar, which purports that the GM should have extremely limited licence. Not that I think you really beleive that or run your game that way (I wouldn't know - perhaps you do) but you statement did sound perfectly on-par with Synnibar to me in attitude. I suspect you were using a little hyperbole or exagaration yourself, but if you use such argumentative techniques, don't be surprised when I take it at face value to demonstrate how silly your characterization is.Now to be fair, I do belevie that the GM should meet certain expectation of players, else why should the players play. But I consider giving dark elves items that players cannot take full advantage of to be well within a DM's reasonable license. As the initial poster said, this is tantamount to not allowing a player to harvest any of a number of capabilities from enemies.</blockquote>

Verification