Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Knightfall" data-source="post: 4341017" data-attributes="member: 2012">True. But can they even get it legally? If anybody can buy alchemical items, then, sure, you have a free-for-all on how alchemical gunpowder gets used. However, if the world isn't created equal, then arcanists might keep the knowledge for themselves.I guess it all depends on how a DM designs his campaign world. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" />I was speaking specifically about a D&D world not a world of fantasy fiction beyond the scope of the game. And, yes, there are roleplaying games that are designed with that need for a heredity "spark" to use magic. I guess I just don't considered that kind of limit when talking about a general D&D game.I've never ran a game where a player can't choose to be a wizard/sorcerer or psionicist because the player's character just doesn't have that "spark" based on family lineage. (I'm more of a let the player choose what they want sort of DM when it comes to the "core rules" of D&D.) Yes, a NPC with a high Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma might not have the "spark," but that doesn't mean they will choose to use a firearm in a magical world just because they can't use magic. (I admit it's an option; however...)I would think the average NPC would choose to pick up and use a sword rather than use a strange (alchemical) weapon that might blow up in their face. Most people would understand the concept of how a sword works (the sharp end goes towards your foe) but a firearm might confuse even the smartest/wisest NPCs.Like I said before, I guess it depends on how the game world is run. I wouldn't limit a player's choice of class just because he/she designs a character background that doesn't include a heredity "spark." YMMV.All good points. I see where you're coming from. It sounds like you build characters based on the "fluffy" bits of a game world's background, which is great. I wish I'd had more players like this in the past but beggars can't be choosers.A lot of times I end up with players that insist on playing a specific type of character that goes completely against the background I design for a campaign world, which can be both challenging and annoying. I know one player who prefers to play the same "type of wizard," always.It didn't bother me to much because I didn't mind his character being some extraplanar human from another time and world that just popped into the campaign world due to a miscast teleport spell. But in a campaign with a need for that heredity "spark," such an outsider might not be possible. How would you include such a character in a "magical spark" campaign? (I'm truly asking; Id like to hear your ideas on this matter.)Ack. Not a good example. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Psionics is a unique concept depending on whether or not you define it as being different from magic. I do for my campaign worlds, but I still don't define who can take psionic classes based on heredity.Note that I do limit psionics based on a specific campaign concept, but it has more to do with dividing different D&D elements into different campaign flavor for different campaign regions. On one continent of World of Kulan, psionics is more prominant than magic, while on another it is nearly unheard of by the masses.However, if someone really wants to play a psionic character in a campaign set on that second continent, I won't forbid it. I will make them roll dice to see if they have that 1 in a 100 chance of being a psion, but if the character doesn't fall into that 1% bracket, then they have to play a wilder. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":]" title="Devious    :]" data-shortname=":]" /></blockquote>

Verification