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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elf Witch" data-source="post: 1360855" data-attributes="member: 9037">I have seen and played with players like this and it makes me grind my teeth. I find it very challenging to go up against NPCs who are not pushovers and make you work for the victory. (okay sometimes it is fun to wade through a bunch of low level mooks <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> ) Some of the best games I remeber in terms of combat are the ones where I had used up all my spells including cantrips was low on hit points and really thought we were going to die and then in the end we pulled victory out of the jaws of defeat. Those are the battles you talk about. For some reason in 3e the rule 0 that stated that the DM was the final arbitrator seems to have gone out the window. And following the rules as written is the only sane way to play. It is impossible for one set of rules to fit every group.House rules fix this for example in our game we roll initiative on a D10 because we felt it made the feat improved initiative more useful. In my roomate's game that she runs she made favored classes the first class you started with. We use a criticial fumble rule too because we like the flavor of it. I know if I ever DM I am going to take a page out of the Kalamar setting and reguire clerics to have the same alignment as their god.I think house rules should be discussed among the group and that if there is a lot of resistance to it agre to give it a try and see how it works before making it a permanent rule.</blockquote>

Verification