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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 7983390" data-attributes="member: 53980">I in fact do. You made a proposal for a rite your warlock does. I counter proposed with a slight adjustment. You then replied, and I quote, "the DM finding RP loopholes to arbitrarily nix a perfectly reasonable action". Frankly, it seems to me like you think that the warlock-patron relationship is only allowed to be defined by the player, with no DM input allowed. Don't get me wrong, I don't impose restrictions on warlocks as some others have suggested. If you tell me that you did your patron a solid in your background and they gave you powers in perpetuity, I'm cool with that. If you tell me that you still owe your patron 3 favors, I'll try to work that into the game in a fun way that doesn't screw your character (although it may inconvenience them a bit). But you don't get to dictate to me that because your patron thinks you're their keenest minion that they give you a 1 Wish a week allowance. Maybe I just say no. Maybe I say that I'll allow it but that the warlock owes their patron a major boon for each Wish. The hex chicken is along the same lines. You can propose that your patron has that rite, but as the DM I run the patron and can say whether that is appropriate. As I've stated before, I'd allow you to precast hex and I'd allow you to perform the rite. I just wouldn't let you perform the rite in order to precast hex. As far as I'm concerned, you're trying to use RP to justify gaming the system. And as far as I'm concerned, gaming the system ruins RP, so for the good of the game (and the enjoyment of everyone else involved, which does include myself) I don't condone that sort of thing.</blockquote>

Verification