Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="takyris" data-source="post: 1826157" data-attributes="member: 5171">Varies by campaign -- which includes players and GMs.If I meet some guys at a convention, and we sit down for a game, a) I don't care very much, since I can always just say what I found later, but b) I want stuff to be mostly equal -- a one-shot with strangers is not a good time for a GM to run a game that gives all kinds of great treasure to wizards.If I'm in a campaign where we're members of a mercenary team, then it's the responsibility of the team leader to make sure that everyone is taken care of.&nbsp; If I'm a fighter, and ain't nothin' been found but wands and scrolls, then I might be justified in going to him with a complaint -- but then, if the wizard uses all those wands and scrolls up in the big fight at the end of the dungeon, it's not like the wiz came out much ahead.&nbsp; So that's likely a wash.If I'm in a campaign where there are no magical shops and nobody can sell magical items because they're rare and unique, then I figure there's a pretty good indication of which way an item is supposed to go.&nbsp; Note: If I'm in a &quot;magical items are rare&quot; campaign, I also expect the GM to pay close attention to my character and not toss me a Axiomatic Greataxe with wonderfully descriptive flavor text when I'm playing a Neutral Fighter specializing in two-weapon combat with a hatred for Devils.&nbsp; If the GM is going to limit magical items, in the interests of making them special representation of the characters, then he'd better do his job right.In the average D&amp;D campaign, I'd say this, and I know it sounds fatalistic: If you have a good group of players and a fair GM, then any good-faith system is going to work.&nbsp; If you have troublesome players and/or a not-fair GM, no system in the world is going to make everyone happy.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="takyris, post: 1826157, member: 5171"] Varies by campaign -- which includes players and GMs. If I meet some guys at a convention, and we sit down for a game, a) I don't care very much, since I can always just [b]say[/b] what I found later, but b) I want stuff to be mostly equal -- a one-shot with strangers is not a good time for a GM to run a game that gives all kinds of great treasure to wizards. If I'm in a campaign where we're members of a mercenary team, then it's the responsibility of the team leader to make sure that everyone is taken care of. If I'm a fighter, and ain't nothin' been found but wands and scrolls, then I might be justified in going to him with a complaint -- but then, if the wizard uses all those wands and scrolls up in the big fight at the end of the dungeon, it's not like the wiz came out much ahead. So that's likely a wash. If I'm in a campaign where there are no magical shops and nobody can sell magical items because they're rare and unique, then I figure there's a pretty good indication of which way an item is supposed to go. Note: If I'm in a "magical items are rare" campaign, I also expect the GM to pay close attention to my character and not toss me a Axiomatic Greataxe with wonderfully descriptive flavor text when I'm playing a Neutral Fighter specializing in two-weapon combat with a hatred for Devils. If the GM is going to limit magical items, in the interests of making them special representation of the characters, then he'd better do his job right. In the average D&D campaign, I'd say this, and I know it sounds fatalistic: If you have a good group of players and a fair GM, then any good-faith system is going to work. If you have troublesome players and/or a not-fair GM, no system in the world is going to make everyone happy. [/QUOTE]

Verification