NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="seasong" data-source="post: 573084" data-attributes="member: 5137">1) Player-driven content. Depending on the campaign, I can vary from almost entirely player-driven content to no player-driven content at all. Incognito falls on the no player-drive content at all side of things, but recognizes that other people do it differently. Fair enough.1a) Without player-driven content, all content is limited to what the DM has time to put "sufficient effort" into. This restricts certain kinds of content, simply because, practically speaking, the DM can't do it for one player and have time for the others as well. Custom PrCs is one of these things. This is a practical consideration, based on (1), above.1b) If the DM can't do it for all players, it's unfair. This is true. And with incognito's stance on (1), and the practical considerations of (1a), that means a fair campaign run by incognito will not have any custom PrCs in it.Incognito, let me know if I've misrepresented the above.I'm not going to argue with incognito about the above points. I think that we've already established the disagreement, and the only argument I can make is that he shouldn't run his campaign the way he does... which I am most unwilling to do. After all, I run some of my campaigns that way, and it would be hypocritical to suggest otherwise.2) Player motives are suspect. Some people may have awesome players whose motives during character creation are pure as the driven snow, but incognito hasn't met them. This means, and I quote here:"If the levels in core class you are currently in does not provide enough toys for your player, the class is either front loaded, or you are a power gamer (or munchkin)."This is half-right. If it doesn't provide enough toys, it is front-loaded, no bones about it. This is an issue that plenty of core classes have. However, and I'm quite serious, players wanting to advance in cool ways when they've earned the experience to do so, and all past levels have set a standard for a particular coolness of advancement, are not powergamers.Powergamers (and munchkins) are those who try to exceed the previously set standard, exceed the other players, and exceed the DM's expectations. A player who is simply dissatisfied with the front-loading of the class does NOT equal a powergamer (or munchkin).The key to all of this is in the words "enough toys". Incognito clearly feels that a +1 to BAB and another Remove Disease per day is "enough toys". And if the previous levels set that as the standard, I would agree - players value consistency more than a particular rate of advancement. But the previous levels set a very different standard, and that is a fault in the system, not the players.On to the quoting <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I am. I'm also, for the most part, a non-D&D roleplayer. However, we're discussing theory, and I'm not bringing my alternate rules campaign into this - I'm talking entirely within the set rules of D&D straight up, no ice.My arguments (for example, advancement consistency, discussed above) hold water in or out of D&D - they are in the lofty realm of theory.A PrC, however, is not a change to the system. As above, this has nothing to do with my arguments.By-the-book, a player can totally hose the balance of the game. It's as simple as that. A blanket rejection of PrCs will not fix that. If you want a balanced game, you must screen characters, and personally, I can screen PrCs as easily (if not more easily) as I can screen subtly designed core class Smackdowns.I also make sure my players know - screw with stuff too badly, and I'll take it away. Since they know that going in, we don't have problems.To put this another way: Sticking to core rules and no PrCs does not provide what you say you want. It does not nod to balance or reason. It only nods to arbitrary decisions.That's why a DM exists - to make the case-by-case decisions, and make the game something better than a computer-RPG.</blockquote>

Verification