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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8194845" data-attributes="member: 6696971">This has been a ongoing conversation for decades.  GMs talk about how mid/high level (and certainly beyond) Spellcasters (lets say level 9+) are not relatively overpowered (compared with their martial counterparts and the obstacles the PCs face) because a GM is capable of either proactively or reactively deploy countermeasures to bring their power in check (and that this approach is (a) not adversarial and (b) appropriate GMing).  However, this conversation always struck me in that it was the inverse of the white room theorizing where we converse about how spellcasters dominate the trajectory of play and the bulk of the gamestate.  There is always the response that the "caster supremacy" argument never has to "show their work"; eg spells known, spell loadout, etc etc.  But I never see the alternative where GM's "show their work."  Its always just assumed that because a GM has unilateral access to unestablished backstory, unilateral access to the offscreen, and the ability to fudge rolls if their game isn't player-facing and they choose to do so.  Effectively, they have unbridled resources to deploy countermeasures at their discretion.However, we've never discussed how often or at what rate are GMs deploying these blocks/countermeasures?  So, then.  GMs out there who feel that it is appropriate and responsible GMing to focus this kind of overhead to passively and actively counter spellcaster PCs.  How often per session or how often per spell deployment are you countering spellcaster PCs via any of the below:1) Preemptively using unestablished backstory or unilateral access to the offscreen (NPC x has Antimagic wards on their lair/redoubt, Divination and Teleportation exclusion zones mandated by territorial governing bodies, spellcasting is outlawed or aggressively stigmatized, NPC x has a mage with an anti-spellcaster loadout, NPC x IS a mage with an anti-spellcaster loadout, NPC x has Magic Resistance, etc, etc).2) Reactively (and secretly) changing loadouts or defenses to counter a spellcaster PC after you've discovered they've got an obstacle/encounter trivializing or obviating spell gambit they're about to deploy.3) Aggressively using the endless resources at your disposal to actively harangue spellcaster PCs in ways that you don't harangue martial PCs (eg creatures that can steal spells or spellcasters that steal spells but none that steal armor/swords, Rakshashas and the like but limited Rust Monsters, spellbook and component pouch stealing Imps/Pixies).4)  Fudge a Saving Throw Roll or a To-Hit Roll against the Spellcaster.[HR][/HR]So then.Is it 1 x per session?  Is it 2 x per session?  Is it 1/4 spellcaster deployments (that would otherwise trivialize or outright obviate an encounter)?  Is it 2/4?  Is it 3/4?Which of the above 4 countermeasures do you use, why, and how much?</blockquote>

Verification