I gave a little, and now they want...

[Arnwyn]

All you need to play is the SRD, which is free. You don't have to buy any of the source books.

Every now and then somebody says this, and I can never figure it out.

No, all you need to play is not just the SRD. Are people still not aware that the SRD is missing some critical information?

(Of course, if the people who say this just mean it from the player's side of things (as opposed to everyone/DM), then I agree. However, people who say such things often forget to qualify it...

or had a dm who thought that i was a munchkin for wanting "cool powers"

You spelled that wrong. It's "kewl powerz".

 

[Pyske]

I will damned if I let a group of RPG players tell what my campaign (That I wrote and run) should and should not be!
[...]
Catering to the players whims and wants will eventually ruining any half way decent campaign and I speak from experince!

Interesting. Care to tell the story (perhaps in its own thread)? My experience and preferences tend toward the polar opposite.

. . . . . . . -- Eric

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

On handling social situations:

Here's how I handle it, and it has worked pretty well. The player's actions (ie, the roleplay) determine what happens; the skill check determines the success of that action.

So for example, if the player wants to negotiate with the mayor, he doesn't just say "I negotiate with the mayor, my Diplomacy roll is 18. -- if he does, I ask "So what do you say?". We carry on a conversation for a while, and at a point I think is appropriate, I have the player make a diplomacy check, and the success/failure of the check determines the course of further roleplay.

That way, the player isn't penalized if he/she isn't particularly persuasive (and vice versa, the charismatic, intelligent player playing a character with Int and Cha of 8 has outcomes appropriate to the character's abilities), but the outcome is based on the character's skills (and ot the player's). It also forces RP -- if you don't RP it, it's not happening.

For exception RP, I'll award a bonus/penalty of +/-2 to the skill check -- over time, I've found this approach tends to encourage RPing to character abilities, without intimidating players because they're not as smart/wise/smooth as their character.


As to the PrC, I'd recommend looking at what the player wants, and having him explain what it is that the PrC offers that is critical to the character concept that isn't available in the mechanics you allow. Negotiate from there.

 

[billd91]

Sorry Bub, The DM is one telling the story and running the game. NOT the players! The DM is the final judge and his is the final opinion that matters!


I will damned if I let a group of RPG players tell what my campaign (That I wrote and run) should and should not be!

This is an attitude I would call a problem in RPGs. If the DM consistently acts this way with no input from the players, they can and should get up and leave. If it's the DM "telling" the story, why would I even be there as a player? Why should I play in a game that doesn't allow me any input into the kind of game I'd like to play? Why should any player subject themselves to that.
If you had an adventure more or less planned out but all of the PCs went off in a different direction looking for some other task to do, what would you do? If you had a big dungeon adventure planned but they wanted to political intrigue in the town, what would you do? Force them into the dungeon?
I'm not saying that players have equal power since they aren't the ones arbitrating what goes on in the background of the campaign, but if you don't take their input on the kind of game they want to play in general (hack and slash, light-hearted romance, powergaming, etc) then they won't be that interested in playing will they? Or they feel trapped into the only game in town...

 

[tsadkiel]

Can I make a suggestion? Take a look at the material the player wants to use before you say no. You've been very vague on the PrC the player wants to use, so I really don't know if they're trying to avoid roleplaying through the use of special powers or if they want to add a little flavor to a character type that is frankly underserved by the D&D rules as written.

If it's the latter, then I sympathize with your player's concerns. Honestly, I think being limited to "+2 to two skills" feats would make it more likely to reduce role-playing to just dice rolling than feats which give a social character more options. A fighter isn't limited to feats which just give bonuses to dice rolls; why should a diplomat be so limited?

 

[Evil Eli]

I am sorry, maybe I should claify. I do not Rail Road or use the Plot Wagon on players. I like to write my adventures and campaign settings as livng open worlds. The players have free choice about how they want to run there characters and what kinda of game they want. They want poltics and urban adventure, I got it.They want ot explore dunegons and ruins they can do that too.

What I don't like is players who do the following:

- You Panethon sucks because your gods don't have the right Domain Combos.

- What do you mean there are no Drow, your game sucks.

- Why can't we play humaniods? I want to play an Half Dragon-Ogre!

- What do you mean no Prestige Classes????

- What do you mean that Elves can't be clerics and Humans can't be Wizards?! That sucks !!?? What kinda of Dm are you!

- What no Half-orcs and No Barbarians. Come on man I want to run my fav , Grog the Destoyer again

- We can only use the core books!?! Forget it, I spent all of this money on D&D stuff and I want to use it.


'


and you wonder why I am bitter.

 

[Creamsteak]

The way the rules are written in the DMG, Diplomacy is just a flat skill roll, but you can modify it with specific roleplaying stuff anyway. The DMG, I believe, lists favorable and unfavorable ways of affecting the DC. If you want to penalize players that "have nothing to say", perhaps just a -10 penalty to their little roll?

 

[Hjorimir]

Railroading players into a planned course and making rule policy in your campaign are completely different topics.

 

[billd91]

I am sorry, maybe I should claify. I do not Rail Road or use the Plot Wagon on players. I like to write my adventures and campaign settings as livng open worlds. The players have free choice about how they want to run there characters and what kinda of game they want. They want poltics and urban adventure, I got it.They want ot explore dunegons and ruins they can do that too.

What I don't like is players who do the following:

- You Panethon sucks because your gods don't have the right Domain Combos.

<snip>

and you wonder why I am bitter.

I suspected your initial comment wasn't quite as extreme as it sounded.
The fact remains that games are cooperative in nature and DMs do have to cater to the players to some degree to have a good game. The players too have to agree to certain ground rules like many basic setting assumptions and to trust the DM to be impartial and have an interesting setting for them to explore in the way they'd like to explore it.

But I'd still also say that DMs generally shouldn't slam the door on changes to some of those ground rules if a player has a really good idea or would like to try something out that's a little different and can fit into the setting with only a little squeezing, rewriting, or modification.

For example: no barbarians class... but perhaps a barbarian culture, or no barbarian culture but a berzerker class of religious zealots using the barbarian class as a boilerplate
no elven clerics... but elven lay preachers who have a slightly adjusted set of class skills, or allow them to take a couple levels of adept NPC class
no drow... but perhaps a particularly degenerate clan of elves living in the depths of the forest

And so on and so on...

 

[jasper]

I'm going to take a different tack on this. The player is not necessarily wrong. It's not just your game. You do not and should not have all the power as DM….billd91
HMM bill are you saying you want to play the red baron when the other players and DM are playing cowboys and Indians?

Some Dms including me have going tired even back in the days Hong enjoyed of saying I the Dm. My world has this that and one other thing. And then having a player want to bring in Superman to a cops and robber game. And player batting their pretty eyelashes and say please oh please mr dm can I have superman. He has this cool power and that cool power and I won’t use my x-ray vision. Then as soon as the DM back is turn. Superman is scoping out the girls locker room, and for out of no where is were a ring of spell turning and has a kryptonite proof plate mail. And innocently ask why didn’t I remember all the cool stuff. Sorry. No.
I am the Dm. If I don’t have the splat book and I feeling nice I may let you run your super duper spew splat book character. But I reserve the final nay and final no that your cool super duper character no longer fits. Thanks for the memories but roll up a new character according to the core rules.

For example a drizzit lover wanted to play a drow imc. I told her yes…BUT the neck tie party would begin immediately if she was discovered on wood elves lands. And it would be up to the party to save her.

The dm sets the limits. Aka Core or the door. Core and wotc, or enter your favor splat books here. When a player whines to bend the rules my xp has proven bad idea.