Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 5348476" data-attributes="member: 5143">They can trade magic items with each other, but since the DM controls what magic items the PCs get, the DM can make sure he doesn't hand out any items that let the PCs fly if he doesn't want them doing that.  Or he can keep certain powerful items out of his game by never giving them out.Right now, as a DM I have no recourse when one of my players shows up with a build that does nearly 100 points of damage without rolling while the average of the rest of the group is 20 damage with a 50% chance of hitting.  This has already happened in a game I play in.  The DM was not happy with the situation at all because it made combat no fun for anyone.  We had to ask the player to stop playing the character.  He wasn't happy because the character was completely legal and he didn't think he should have to.I'd like to be able to head this off in advance and simply make it not legal.I'm fairly certain it was their intention.  They pretty much said it to us directly when I was in the room with them at GenCon.  They want DMs to get control of their games back from the players who had pretty much gained control.  But I hadn't heard of that designer's article.  I'd love a link if you have it.  I want to know what was said.I don't mind allowing interesting ideas if the PCs come up with it.  But I don't like being able to skip through interesting things I had planned because they cast one spell I didn't think of.  This is the entire reason most of the non-combat spells were removed from 4e.  Because they often took the control away from the DM.As a rough example, there was a Living Greyhawk adventure back in 3.5e where the point was to get the unconscious King away from the people who were trying to take over the kingdom.  Part of the fun of the adventure was that they needed to escape the city while they guards were looking for them and the King and wanted him and them dead.In order to allow this adventure to happen, the author had to write a Anti-Magic Field around the King just to make sure the PCs couldn't use a single spell solution to what could be a fun role playing challenge.  If it wasn't there, then the PCs could have simply cast a teleport spell and leave without any difficulty.  Or they could have simply magically healed the King and they wouldn't need to run.The adventure was much more fun(IMHO) when the PCs had to find material to disguise themselves and the king, had to come up with an explanation for the guards at the gate as to why they were dragging an unconscious guy around with them, and then had to survive the ambush on the road by enemies of the King.Sometimes, not every answer to a problem is a fun answer.It doesn't have to be prepared by the DM.  I just hate magical solutions to problems because they are never creative.  They should be the last resort rather than the first solution to a problem.If I put a locked door in front of the PCs, I don't care if I hadn't considered them climbing to the second floor of a building and sneaking through the window, I'll allow it....If they can succeed in a couple of rolls to do so.  At least it required a slightly inobvious solution to the problem.  On the other hand "I cast a Knock spell" is about the most obvious solution to the problem there is.  It requires no more effort than looking at your character sheet to see if you have that spell.When magic IS used it should be special.  It should be because you did something special to get that magic.  Simply looking through a list of 1000 items for the one that solves your problem and saying "I craft that one" or "I buy that one" isn't special.Of course magic makes things easier.  That's because it's magic and it can do anything.  But just because magic makes something easier doesn't mean players have a right to that magic.  There are many non-magical ways of solving problems.  And there SHOULD be some things the PCs just can't do.  Part of the reason I like 4e over 3e is because there actually ARE some things they can't do.  In 3e, I could be pretty much assured that they'd have the magic to do whatever they wanted after about level 12.  Often before that.</blockquote>

Verification