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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bacon Bits" data-source="post: 7846370" data-attributes="member: 6777737">No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm not concerned with encounter difficulty or character death, for example.I'm not interested in mechanics that encourage toxic play styles, and most of the mechanics I mentioned generally encourage that most toxic of play styles: fun at the expense of other players. I'm not interested in zero-sum fun mechanics. It's what Matt Coleville touches on in his <a href="https://youtu.be/JoYR3eCFqoA" target="_blank">Wangrod Defense video</a>. Matt doesn't talk about it there, but the DM is just as capable of being a wangrod as anybody. I'm not interested in mechanics that encourage wangrods, and am less interested in any game that includes such mechanics by default.As long as it's hit point damage I'm much less concerned, but in general this should not be possible. My primary contention is with circumventing hit points as the mechanism for survival in combat. It's a pillar of the game and we should not introduce such mechanics easily. Yes, a level 19 rogue with a flaming scimitar can do 24d6+5 (89) damage. I'm not really concerned about that firstly because the other martial classes can do similar damage more reliably with feats and class abilities.Obviously nobody concerned if Goblin #4583 gets decapitated by the PCs. It's only going to be there for 2 combat rounds anyways. But, no, I'm not really interested in giving the PCs or NPCs vorpal swords or swords of sharpness. I've seen both in play, and they're not really a compelling mechanic after the first couple combats.I wouldn't work in our games due to how we handle XP, but I have no inherent problem with this as a major item reward any more than I have a problem with the +2 ability books, though I have never either come up in-game. I would never use them as randomly generated treasure.I have no problem with magical or divine rewards.I'm not a huge fan of Deck of Many Things, and much less of a fan of Rod of Wonder. The former has ended campaigns before, and the latter derailed a campaign I was playing in about 10 years ago so much that the DM removed the item by fiat (he was more sick of it than I was). All the warnings they give about these items are correct.Even if I were to put DoMT into my current campaign, the following cards wouldn't work as presented: Balance (we ignore alignment for mortals and I'm not interested in denying player agency in this kind of character change), Fool or Jester or Sun (we use milestone XP), Comet (we use matched leveling). The following cards would derail the campaign from the current narrative: Donjon, The Fates, Flames, Rogue, The Void. That's half the deck, and it includes several cards from the 13 card deck.I'm not really interested in save or die or instant death anywhere in the game as much as it can be avoided. Again, I'm an opponent of circumventing hit points because hit points are designed to be the primary source of survivability in the game. I'm not rolling damage dice if someone leaps off a 1,000 foot cliff or is crushed in an avalanche, but as a mechanic for character actions it should not be available.There is no problem at all. We're never going to play together, so your evaluation of my opinion is not particularly relevant. I don't care if you think my opinion on game design is internally consistent, and if you want to run a game with such mechanics I don't really care. I'm not trying to sound like a jerk, I'm just pointing out the obvious: Neither one of us sits at the other's table.I'm just not interested in the game as whole being published and presented with mechanics that, IMX, lead to toxic gameplay styles.Edit: Clarity.</blockquote>

Verification