Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 5781403" data-attributes="member: 29398">Er...are you saying a DM may not (in your view) decide how such things work in her own game irregardless of what the rules do/do not allow?&nbsp; If yes, we have a serious argument.&nbsp; If no, please clarify.If I've designed a world where Hobbits don't do magic and Elves can't see in the dark, then that's what I'm going to run.&nbsp; You can play in it or not, as you wish; assuming I'll have you in.And I wouldn't say my players &quot;obsess over racial flavor&quot;; but they accept the world as it is (despite their characters' best attempts to destroy it now and then, but that's another story) and if they want it to be different they'll design their own world and run that.The DM is in the right here for several reasons:1. Internal consistency within the game.&nbsp; If overpowered supplement X comes out a year after the campaign starts and someone wants to play something from it I'm either going to have to spend time dialling it back to fit in with the pre-existing game, or just say 'no'.2. Power creep has happened within every edition to date.&nbsp; 2e Players' Options and 3e Prestige Class supplements are by and large two excellent examples of it.&nbsp; Power creep is inherently evil if only because one of two things happens: the game balance starts to tilt more or less wildly in favour of the player characters (which gets boring for all involved after a while) or the DM gets caught in an arms race, redesigning monsters and game elements to keep up with the PCs (which gets tedious immediately, and accomplishes nothing in the end).Now if you are of the opinion that the game balance *should* be skewed more to the players' side, that's a different discussion entirely.3. Every time you-as-player bring in a new book/supplement/whatever and expect to be able to use it, realistically the DM has to go get one as well.&nbsp; That can get expensive...So far 3 out of 4 editions agree about the power creep; I haven't looked into 4e supplements much at all so the jury's out on that one.&nbsp; Only in 2e did the added-complexity issue become relevant.Lanefan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 5781403, member: 29398"] Er...are you saying a DM may not (in your view) decide how such things work in her own game irregardless of what the rules do/do not allow? If yes, we have a serious argument. If no, please clarify. If I've designed a world where Hobbits don't do magic and Elves can't see in the dark, then that's what I'm going to run. You can play in it or not, as you wish; assuming I'll have you in. And I wouldn't say my players "obsess over racial flavor"; but they accept the world as it is (despite their characters' best attempts to destroy it now and then, but that's another story) and if they want it to be different they'll design their own world and run that. The DM is in the right here for several reasons: 1. Internal consistency within the game. If overpowered supplement X comes out a year after the campaign starts and someone wants to play something from it I'm either going to have to spend time dialling it back to fit in with the pre-existing game, or just say 'no'. 2. Power creep has happened within every edition to date. 2e Players' Options and 3e Prestige Class supplements are by and large two excellent examples of it. Power creep is inherently evil if only because one of two things happens: the game balance starts to tilt more or less wildly in favour of the player characters (which gets boring for all involved after a while) or the DM gets caught in an arms race, redesigning monsters and game elements to keep up with the PCs (which gets tedious immediately, and accomplishes nothing in the end). Now if you are of the opinion that the game balance *should* be skewed more to the players' side, that's a different discussion entirely. 3. Every time you-as-player bring in a new book/supplement/whatever and expect to be able to use it, realistically the DM has to go get one as well. That can get expensive... So far 3 out of 4 editions agree about the power creep; I haven't looked into 4e supplements much at all so the jury's out on that one. Only in 2e did the added-complexity issue become relevant. Lanefan [/QUOTE]

Verification