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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9252482" data-attributes="member: 6785785">What convention? Why is the GM not considered to be overturning convention with the no magic thing?Again, your view seems to rely on the GM deciding the world elements ahead of time and then the players are meant to make characters within that setting, per the GM’s dictates.But that’s not how it must be done.Who says they won’t? If a PC has some kind of unique aspect to them, why does that somehow make them more accomplished than others? I don’t agree with this at all.Leg up on what? I don’t get this competitive angle you’re going with.Meh. There are background options in5e that give similar benefits. There are any number of things you can come up with for characters to have a reputation or to be renowned in some way.Again, if all of this is done together, why would you expect a problem?So maybe they should work to make their characters as interesting as the last mage? Maybe the GM should work with them to give them opportunities for that to happen?This all sounds terribly dramatic and interesting! SHOOT IT DOWN!!!Two decades only? It’s been going on way longer than that.GM’s should, I think, consider the group’s fun and cohesion when making their setting. While it's entirely possible for them to think that it's benign to come up with a setting concept that's different from what would normally work in a given context, they should also be ready to abandon that idea if others express reservations about them...and that includes the players.Listen… one mage is closer to zero mages than it is to many mages. It’s simple.This is like saying the point of dinner is the table.Your decision to caricature the games of others says more about your own game than it does theirs.</blockquote>

Verification