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="Not a Decepticon" data-source="post: 9809481" data-attributes="member: 7020527">We're playing a pirate game, the characters do not play morally clean types and setting itself, Mystara, leans more towards moral ambiguity and gray morality where no side is truly good and heroes and villains often depend on one's perspective. It would be hypocritical of me to demand players act like morally clean-cut, clean-shaven goody two-shoes.And mechanically the game does reward just focusing fire and killing enemeis as fast as possible and it is very hard to add external factors and obiectives that do force players in combat to do something else. Why should I punish my players or call them out on behavior that system was designed to reward?Also, as a player myself I have gotten tremendous pushback whenever I even bring an idea of playing a D&D character who doesn't kill. Not a pacifist, not someone who doesn't fight, just a character who is willing to beat up or even maim enemies, but doesn't kill people. Is okay with killing animals or monsters lacking sentience, but doesn't kill anyone who could be considered a person. The amount of vitroil I've got for bringing this idea to different people online multiple times while looking for group or asking communities about such concept, kinda makes me wonder if this game wasn't made TO play psycho killers.I started rewatching the video and as I suspected, you picked this out of context. Pointy Hat very clearly says it is a benefit that helps Warlock being multiclass friendly because their spellcasting works differently from everything else and you do not have an actual table showing you you just gave up 9th level spell slot by taking levels in a different class the way full casters do.Also funny thing that I'm 6 minutes in the video and he already multiple times acknowledged people who do not play Warlocks the way he is describing, sometimes humorously too. Yet you acussed him of telling people who play it different they're playing the game wrong, despite him going out of his way to not alienate them. Have...actually seen this video? Because I am starting to have a suspiction you are going off on what someone else told you is in the video. It gives me the same vibe as when RWBY fans were mad at Hbomberguy's video about the show, saying he complaints about issues from early seasons that later seasons fixed, while ignoring that twice in the video he makes a point he sticks to early seasons only because while he also doesn't likes post-Monty seasons, they have completely different share of issues that would need a separate video to criticise.If you don't have an actual counterpoint, you can just not reply to that part of the post, saying "nuh-huh" makes it hard to take your position seriously. Especially if you do it so many times in a single post.Except it goes against what RAW says of how patron is supposed to contact the Warlock before level 10, through agents and messengers, who by virtue of being middle men are inherently easy to ignore. Also, patron showing up before level 3 when the subclass is selected imposes on player agency to be able to choose what their patron is at level 3.So if player says "I don't know, I will pick up later" or multiclasses from different class into Warlock, I'm just unable to bring them anything to roleplay. A player who picked up Warlock 2 for a subclass and does not want to say what patron they want effectively never gets to interact with one and just reduces the class to "big number goes up".I'm trying to be compassionate to people who come to the game with assumption the DM is out to screw them over by assuming this comes from bad past experience that resulted in lack of trust. Would you rather I just treat people with this attitude as selfish and entitled?Your table experiences are so specific you could have literally 100% exact same thing you played through fine happen at antoher table and be seen as DM trying to mess with player agency.I'm just saying that by the way game defines things, you would be a Sorcerer and you just reskinned Warlock for mechanics. And quite lot entitled players are mad when NPCs want things from them or react accordingly to PC's actions and even mad when they're not allowed to ruin other players' time, seeing both as imposing on their agency. You yourself define patron being an actual npc and not just empty, meaningless set of mechanical bonuses, as  toxic.You can always roleplay, but things that were once built into the class to facilitate roleplay have been removed now for sake of "big number goes up".Who now has, as you can see yourself saying in a different quoteblock in this post, a "misguided sense of superiority over people who don't play like you"You treat the idea of patron not being rendered meaningless as DM tryign to get you, so I say it is relevant.You mean the "trying to screw them over with no way to stop them" regarding the patron part? That part?That part?Well you wanted to show how Celestial Patron does not need to be a god and both options you chose were directly tied to a god, so...And yet you are furious that someone on the internet made a video not catering to your preferences, one I am starting to think you didn't even watch. Also, this is a very entitled mindset, you see DM as your slave who has to bend the whole world to your idea instead of working together . Like, if I'm running a game in Mystara, where no fiends or celestials are allowed, I have right to say you cannot pick up Fiend or Celestial patron. I personally would let you have one of Immortals as your patron for Celestial or Enthropic Immortals for Fiend but that's it. You are treating the game as something you come to and are served by the DM and not a collaborative thing where anything that is not your way means DM is a jerk.The DM fixing the bad design on their table does not make the bad design disappear. RAW this means your character is level 3 and not suitable for level 1 game due to clearly having what devs deemed a part of level 3 subclass benefit.Except of course that player's handbook says you do not know your patron before level 3 and letting you know them earlier is a DM's chocie that may be seen as unfair by any other player using Warlock at the table.</blockquote>

Verification