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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 6143113" data-attributes="member: 1210">Yikes....Okay, first, I need to fess up: I just hit the pcs in my game (who are about 20th level) with a 120 point attack during our last game. The villain in question is a possible end of campaign villain who they provoked into meeting them in battle. She has a robe of the archmage, which lets her maximize her damage on an arcane attack, and she's from a previous universe (and the days of 1e) so she has a bunch of "archaic" (by which I mean 1e-style) powers. So, for instance, she has a 20d6 fireball.Which, admittedly, is above recommended damage even at her level (which is... 33? I think), and the combo is ruthless.Now, there was an attack roll involved, and half damage on a miss; and my group is six levels higher than yours. Nonetheless, there's a certain level of parallel here, so I have to say, I've done something (a little bit) similar to your dm's 150 points of God damage... so bear that in mind when evaluating my perspective. (For the record, none of the pcs died, and they pulled out all the stops to make an amazing escape.)Wow, what poor grace. I don't know what kind of relationships their pcs had with the warlock, but it sounds like the players let their personal butthurt get in the way of playing the game.Jim sounds more and more like the type of player who drags the game down and makes it less fun for everyone else. I don't know if he's as bad as you make it sound, but if he was in my group, we'd be discussing whether to drop him.Jim expects a certain style of dming that he wasn't getting. In many, possibly most, dming styles, you certainly can just make up rules as you see fit, and in some styles, you must.The dm is never constrained to follow what's in the book just because it's in the book.Okay, this is the crux. If Jim isn't enjoying the game, he needs to stop playing and do something else that's fun for him instead. But this whole "You must cater to my fun requirements!" attitude just screams to drop him from the group before he has another fit and ruins a campaign in the middle of things instead of just throwing a tantrum in the end.I disagree with your reasoning. Maybe he's decided that he's happy to be in the afterlife. Why return to a hard life if you feel fulfilled?Depends on the campaign. If the "you must be willing" clause is a cosmic absolute, then no, probably not. If it's not absolute enough to apply to the gods, then maybe, depending on the nature of the gods. Or maybe the clause only exists in the raise dead ritual because whoever first invented the ritual was highly ethical, and circumventing the limitation is as simple as researching a new, original, different ritual.The dm can do what he wants, at least in my playstyle. The question to me is really more like, "Is it a good idea to give a pc infinite power for part of a campaign?"I've done it- the pcs in my old campaign at the time of the apocalypse assembled an artifact that gave them absolute mastery over (when fully assembled) matter, energy, life, dead, time and space. And they still failed to save the world. So, can the dm do this? Clearly, the answer is yes. Should he? YMMV.First of all, your ruling exactly matches the rule (obscure though it is) as it was in 2e; there was even a higher-level version of water breathing that would allow you to speak and circumvent the problem! (Cf. Of Ships and the Sea.)Overall, Jim sounds like a frankly horrible player. It sounds like he needs to let go of his fixation on how he thinks the game 'should' be. He might actually be happier playing a game where he doesn't know the rules.</blockquote>

Verification