Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N0Man" data-source="post: 5081151" data-attributes="member: 64066">I have a couple thoughts here...Gygax obviously had this notion of balance too.  I don't buy into it, but I understand the argument.  However, this notion of balance frequently breaks in two very common scenarios.The first common scenario is that often when starting out at level 1, many campaigns just don't last until the levels where the weaker class gains the advantage to offset the early disadvantages.  This is often due to character deaths, real life cutting the campaign short, it was only planned for the low levels, or character deaths and simply not surviving to the high levels.  The second common scenario is when the DM starts you out at higher than level 1.  It's well intentioned in order to make starting less randomly lethal, and also to allow some of the weaker characters (in the above balance scheme) to be more useful and more balanced.  The problem is that now they start more balanced and only get stronger over time.  The "over time" required to have balance is never achieved.You might argue that the existence of both of these scenarios constitutes "overall", but is it really balanced if it's a balance that compares separate games and campaigns?This is a pet peeve of mine.  Not specifically for races (which I've never played a race), but when a DM allows players to choose something they find interesting and that the DM personally doesn't like (either by flavor, or for their campaign world), and the player is punished for it.If you don't like something as a DM, then outright ban it.  This might get into arguments of DM entitlement vs Player entitlement, however if you are *effectively* banning something by punishing them constantly for the choice anyway then have the stones to just ban it.  Either that or just tell them straight up, "you can play that if you want... but I'm going to make it so annoying and not fun that you will regret it the entire time and become an example so that the other players don't make the same mistake." It reminds me of the pains I felt trying to play a Wizard in a world that the DM decided he wanted to be a fairly low-magic (but not no-magic) world...</blockquote>

Verification