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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dragonblade" data-source="post: 5661594" data-attributes="member: 2804">I'm going to disagree with an element of this.Essentially, while the DM is the final arbiter of their game, I believe that at least PC power progression should be largely independent of DM fiat.For example, in 3e whether or not your PC has all the magical gear and hence bonuses and such necessary to take on certain challenges is entirely dependent on the DM awarding the appropriate amount of treasure. Likewise, classes like the wizard have an entire element of their class (acquiring new spells) left mostly up to the whim of the DM.I dislike being at the mercy of the DM for these sorts of things. Thus I tend to gravitate towards rules like inherent bonuses. That way you can be confident your PC has the right bonuses for the challenges appropriate to your level.If you have a good DM, its not a problem, but with a bad DM its a nightmare. It also makes character planning difficult when you never know what the DM is going to give you. I have had the unfortunate experience of playing with a lot of bad DMs over the years and thus prefer systems that provide PC abilities/powers/etc. on a predetermined and set progression that doesn't involve the DM.Likewise, I dislike mechanical bonuses and awards that are left entirely to DM discretion. While their certainly should be some DM discretion in the awarding of things like action points, fate points and the like, there should also be discrete rules governing their acquisition or renewal that are DM fiat independent. Especially if they are literally used to power core abilities of the PC.</blockquote>

Verification