Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="moritheil" data-source="post: 2176974" data-attributes="member: 30610">It's not a strawman argument - S. has repeatedly said that the DM *must* hand out "gimmies," in his language.  Go back and read his arguments.I fail to see how repeatedly rewarding the group for doing something stupid makes the game more fun, but then, as I said, I don't play in your campaigns so I don't know how they work.In your quote, you argue that the fighter PC did a good job and should not be punished.  I don't disagree that he did a good job fighting to the last.  The wizard, however, dropped the ball, or took a big risk that played out poorly.I never argued that the PC "did not need" level appropriate equipment.  My argument is that the PC does not deserve FREE level appropriate equipment.  If you like to run campaigns with a semblance of logical continuity, all that "high level equipment" should come from somewhere.  You absolutely must be careful to avoid giving the impression to players that you, the DM, will always bail their butts out when they do something stupid.  (And by "they," I mean the players collectively.)  Saying that the fighter didn't fireball, the wizard did, and the fighter shouldn't be affected adversely is like saying the team rogue botched disarming a fireball trap, but it shouldn't damage the fighter right next to him because he wasn't the one to make the roll.  It doesn't work that way; the entire party can and should suffer when one guy messes up something important.  Unless, of course, you run a highly cinematic game where the DM fudges things so that nobody is ever in serious danger of death except at dramatically appropriate moments.  That, to my mind, is more of a Vampire or In Nomine flavor than a DnD game.Is my angle on the situation clear now?</blockquote>

Verification