Power Attack!?!?!?!?!?!?

[Berk]

Now have we forgotent the spirit of the game?

The MM races are just guide lines for you to follow when creating your encounters. Are all creatures that your party faces going to be a mirror image of its cousin standing next it. I don't think so!

We, as people, are all created differently. So, what makes you think that all the creatures listed in the MM, or any other book, are created exactly alike. Yes, some creatures will happen to have similar stats, and even similar feats. But, come on, what kind of world are you creating for your players?

Sounds pretty stail to me.

As easy as it sounds like your world is, I would definitely have to decline any future invitation to play on grounds of possible boredom.

Sorry, that is just the way I feel.

If this is directed towards me I just wanna let ya know that I started this thread more as a rant on how poorly put together most monsters are in the MM. Specially for their god awful CR's, skills and feat selections. I personally almost always roll up stats for every monster that happens to be a planned encounter. If it's a random encounter the party will meet the atypical monster, but sometimes with some changes done to them. Cuz it is every DM's creator given right to change stats on monsters and what not as they see fit.

And for dcollins;

No quote, no sale. "Here's a quote that doesn't say you don't get to do it" is irrelevant. If you're asserting a positive right to make some adjustment, the onus is on you to present a rule providing that right. Feel free to respond in an even bigger font this time.

Bottom left of page 11 of the DMG, core rulebook II, under Altering The Way Things Work. Every rule in the Player's Handbook was written for a reason. That doesn't mean you can't change them for your own game.

Same book page 21 under Modifying Races. Sometimes you may wish to modify one of the common races. Further down under the same topic it says, "It is perfectly acceptable for you to say, "In my world.....".

Same book look at page 100 and read under Tailored or Status Quo under the Encounters heading.

There are a ton of passages that explain in just the DMG itself that the DM can change whatever they like to suit their own needs. Even if you call it metagaming. With your point of view then whenever a DM rolls up an encounter for the party and that encounter has a 5th level mage in it and the dm picks the spells and feats and all as he see's fit then they are metagaming.

Also with your point of view all NPC's have to be as they appear in the DMG. Can't roll up any NPC's, cuz we can't change them from how they appear in the DMG.

 

[Mark Chance]

Compliance Demanded; Amend at Once

No quote, no sale. The core rules do have a section on monster PC's. You get to select a monster -- not alter the monster statistics to your taste.

Forwith, all D&D/d20 campaigns must be brought into immediate compliance. Anyone found using monsters with statistics altered to suit personal tastes will be persecuted with snippy, self-important messages.

Ha!

 

[Jeremy]

No quote, no sale. "Here's a quote that doesn't say you don't get to do it" is irrelevant. If you're asserting a positive right to make some adjustment, the onus is on you to present a rule providing that right. Feel free to respond in an even bigger font this time.

It's a direct quote that says not to do it the way you and nobody else thinks it should be done. "One feat" does not mean "the feat listed in the MM". "8 skills" does not mean the "8 skills listed in the MM".

If it had, it would say so. E-mail the Sage at Dragon Magazine, or Wizards Customer Service, or the guy who wrote the DMG, or whom ever you like. Better yet, play it your way. But at least be fair. If ogres, hobgoblins, orcs, and trolls must choose the feat they have in the MM, so should everyone. All elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings, and humans should be forced to take the warrior class before any other and be forced to take the one feat and selected skills put forth in the MM. Fair's fair.

Your point of view makes no sense in light of the rules, it makes no sense from a rules perspective. The only posible validity I can see to it is as a way to either force carbon copy uniformity in your world (which I can't see why you'd want to, seems awefully boring), or to limit your players to being stereotypical if you are so gracious as to allow them to play something not in the PHB. If the second is your intention there are many more rules-supported ways to limit them if you are big on rules, and an infinite number of non-rules supported ways to keep everything balanced if you want to get creative.

Buy what ever you like. You have yet to provide one iota of ANYTHING to the contrary or even give an alternate interpretation of the text on DMG 24. You keep dodging that and picking something I say to disagree with and completely avoiding giving your own interpretation of the text.

Fine. You disagree with me, but I haven't heard you disagree with the rule I quoted so that's good enough for me.

If you haven't read it by now you aren't going to.

I think I'm going to go enjoy something slightly less akin to beating my head up against a stone wall.

 

[Berk]

I think I'm going to go enjoy something slightly less akin to beating my head up against a stone wall.

*wince*
=o) =o)

 

[Avatar of the North]

For the forth time. DMG 24. Other Statistics for Monsters heading PARAGRAPH TWO

For example, an ogre with no class levels has 4d8 HD, a base attack bonus of +3, one feat, and 8 skill points (plus intelligence modifier...

now how isn't that a hard rule there? does it say you MUST choose a specific feat. NO.

 

[dcollins]

And I repeat: "Here's a quote that doesn't say you don't get to do it" is irrelevant. If you're asserting a positive right to make some adjustment, the onus is on you to present a rule providing that right.

Anyone want to actually make a relevant response to this? No? Anyone want to continue whining that as players they should get anything the want for character creation options? Yes? Then feel free to keep responding in an even bigger font this time.

 

[Jeremy]

Irrelevant? Does not pertain to the subject at hand? It directly addresses the subject at hand.

What pray tell is your interpretation of that text? Seeing as you've completely avoided my post again and the points it raises, and again utterly failed to back up your assertion with any text.

If you are not going to provide evidence to support you, nor offer alternate interpretations of my evidence, then what shall we value your opinion by? You're right because you say so?

 

[Mark Chance]

Here's a rule in a normal font

If you're asserting a positive right to make some adjustment, the onus is on you to present a rule providing that right.

Chance Rule #1: "I'm the GM. It's my game. I get to do whatever I want."

That one rule trumps everything. If you disagree with that rule, refer back to Chance Rule #1.

Ha!

 

[Berk]

for the second time

Bottom left of page 11 of the DMG, core rulebook II, under Altering The Way Things Work. Every rule in the Player's Handbook was written for a reason. That doesn't mean you can't change them for your own game.

Same book page 21 under Modifying Races. Sometimes you may wish to modify one of the common races. Further down under the same topic it says, "It is perfectly acceptable for you to say, "In my world.....".

Same book look at page 100 and read under Tailored or Status Quo under the Encounters heading.