Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RigaMortus" data-source="post: 817164" data-attributes="member: 1077">???You lost me hereWe aren't talking &quot;default rules&quot;.&nbsp; We are talking, &quot;rules the players are ALLOWED to know, as set by the DM.&quot;&nbsp; Remember?&nbsp; Remember DocM specifically mentioned which rules he wants his players to use, and which ones he didn't?&nbsp; Specifically, what's in the PHB is allowed.&nbsp; What's in the DMG and MM is not.&nbsp; Players using info from the MM would be meta-gaming and is looked down upon by him.Who cares if it's for 1 single creature, 1 specific tribe of creatures or all creatures universally?&nbsp; This is HIS world.&nbsp; They are playing in HIS world by HIS rules.&nbsp; The best part of DnD is to expect the unexpected.FWIW - I was playing in a campaign where the magical healing potions had a chance of making you vomit them back up (a Fort save) without any effect.&nbsp; They tasted vulgar but healed wounds just the same.&nbsp; No one knew this ahead of time except the DM.&nbsp; Did anyone bitch when they first tried to drink the healing potions and failed their save, thus wasting the potion?&nbsp; No...&nbsp; It was a fundamental change to the game world, which we did not know ahead of time, and it added a sense of &quot;newness&quot; for us.He threw a were-rat at them, that didn't react to magic weapons as a were-rat normally does...&nbsp; I'd say that qualifies as a NEW monster.&nbsp; Just because it has the name &quot;were-rat&quot; doesn't mean anything...I want to mention that I DO understand what you are saying.&nbsp; That changing DR as a whole doesn't just affect these were-rats, but will affect ALL creatures with DR in his campaign.&nbsp; I get that.&nbsp; I still think it isn't a big deal, nor is it &quot;unfair&quot; for him to do w/o first telling his players.&nbsp; It pretty much sets him apart from your average DM that just runs things strictly by the book.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="RigaMortus, post: 817164, member: 1077"] ??? You lost me here We aren't talking "default rules". We are talking, "rules the players are ALLOWED to know, as set by the DM." Remember? Remember DocM specifically mentioned which rules he wants his players to use, and which ones he didn't? Specifically, what's in the PHB is allowed. What's in the DMG and MM is not. Players using info from the MM would be meta-gaming and is looked down upon by him. Who cares if it's for 1 single creature, 1 specific tribe of creatures or all creatures universally? This is HIS world. They are playing in HIS world by HIS rules. The best part of DnD is to expect the unexpected. FWIW - I was playing in a campaign where the magical healing potions had a chance of making you vomit them back up (a Fort save) without any effect. They tasted vulgar but healed wounds just the same. No one knew this ahead of time except the DM. Did anyone bitch when they first tried to drink the healing potions and failed their save, thus wasting the potion? No... It was a fundamental change to the game world, which we did not know ahead of time, and it added a sense of "newness" for us. He threw a were-rat at them, that didn't react to magic weapons as a were-rat normally does... I'd say that qualifies as a NEW monster. Just because it has the name "were-rat" doesn't mean anything... I want to mention that I DO understand what you are saying. That changing DR as a whole doesn't just affect these were-rats, but will affect ALL creatures with DR in his campaign. I get that. I still think it isn't a big deal, nor is it "unfair" for him to do w/o first telling his players. It pretty much sets him apart from your average DM that just runs things strictly by the book. [/QUOTE]

Verification