D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[AlViking]

Wizards laugh until they encounter bookworms and watch their spellbook end up pulp. (Although, most of the time it was failed fireball saves or sudden dunks in water that caused spellbook ruination.)

I still remember the fear in the wizard player's eyes as I had them roll saving throws for their equipment, including their spellbook, when hit by a fireball. Good times.

 

[The Soloist]

I still remember the fear in the wizard player's eyes as I had them roll saving throws for their equipment, including their spellbook, when hit by a fireball. Good times.

We had a Paladin death after he survived a Red dragon breath's attack but was killed by the explosion of a Potion of fire breath in his backpack!

 

[Faolyn]

You don't consider a custom race a house rule? Race is not part of the rules of the game?

Okay. I do. Guess that's just one more thing we disagree on.

Changing the PC-playable species options from what's in the PH is a houserule all day long.

Yes, I differentiate between house rules and homebrew. They are different things because additional species are not new, altered, or removed rules. If you decided to play 5e, but included AD&D-style limits on what classes a particular species can take (e.g., no dwarf wizards), that's a house rule.

 

[AlViking]

Yes, I differentiate between house rules and homebrew. They are different things because additional species are not new, altered, or removed rules. If you decided to play 5e, but included AD&D-style limits on what classes a particular species can take (e.g., no dwarf wizards), that's a house rule.

I don't see why they would be different given the definition you gave. There were no official rules for the races requested. I think the vast majority of people would not consider creating a custom race different from any other house rule.

I also disagree that's a house rule. It's a player race option. Depending on what edition you play, they may even be completely "legal" to play. 3x had those ECLs and all the templates, for instance, and 3x and 5e both have shifters, which can easily be reskinned as a werewolf. What you're doing is deciding what options are available as PC races, not choosing a house rule.

A house rule is defined as "unofficial modifications to official game rules adopted by individual groups of players." D&D's rules don't say what races are or are not allowed in the game; they just give the stats to the most common ones used throughout the editions.

Even if this had happened during 3.x or 5e they did not want to play a shifter, they wanted to play a literal werewolf, immunity to non-silver or magical weapons and all. The half-dragon-half-vampire never existed in any book that I know of. The only rules for kind-of-sort-of vampires that I know of are in third party products.

Meanwhile even if they do exist in some official book I would consider what species are allowed or not to be a house rule even if you do not. I think most people would, there's not really a need for the distinction any more than if I ban a specific spell.

 

[kermit4karate]

We had a Paladin death after he survived a Red dragon breath's attack but was killed by the explosion of a Potion of fire breath in his backpack!

Haaaa!!! That's classic!

 

[Mort]

Part of the reason I've never used rust monsters is that it's already hard for fighter types to compete with wizards at high levels. Lose that sword, your armor and shield? That can hurt. The wizard losing his belt buckle? Not really much of an issue until his pants fall down. Meanwhile the monk makes fun of them both.

I'm not big on threatening gear, but in this particular case the group had found a large amount of adamantite and had the means to turn it into adamantine

Part of the reason I've never used rust monsters is that it's already hard for fighter types to compete with wizards at high levels. Lose that sword, your armor and shield? That can hurt. The wizard losing his belt buckle? Not really much of an issue until his pants fall down. Meanwhile the monk makes fun of them both.

I'm not usually a big fan of threatening equipment.

But in this case it was there was a huge deposit of Adamantite - which would be a massive haul for the PCs. It was dwindling because the rust monsters where (rather rapidly) devouring it. So it was a risk vs. reward calculation for the players. And frankly at the level involved the reward far outweighed any risk but it was amazing how much they agonized (Though it had been previusly established that magical metal was also devoured unlike the default in the MM).

 

[bloodtide]

I still remember the fear in the wizard player's eyes as I had them roll saving throws for their equipment, including their spellbook, when hit by a fireball. Good times.

I do this all the time. Of course, few wise wizards keep their spellbooks on them....or are silly enough to jump into things.

Part of the reason I've never used rust monsters is that it's already hard for fighter types to compete with wizards at high levels. Lose that sword, your armor and shield? That can hurt. The wizard losing his belt buckle? Not really much of an issue until his pants fall down. Meanwhile the monk makes fun of them both.

2E/3E did have plenty of anti magic monsters that could do things like eat spells...

 

[Remathilis]

I still remember the fear in the wizard player's eyes as I had them roll saving throws for their equipment, including their spellbook, when hit by a fireball. Good times.

Spellbooks are the #1 reason I prefer sorcerers to wizards. I've had bad experiences with DMs intentionally targeting spellbooks. I literally saw one DM in 3e ban sorcerer because he thought they were too powerful because he couldn't destroy their spellbook/take away their spells. (You can also guess how many paladins kept their powers in that game).

 

[AlViking]

Spellbooks are the #1 reason I prefer sorcerers to wizards. I've had bad experiences with DMs intentionally targeting spellbooks. I literally saw one DM in 3e ban sorcerer because he thought they were too powerful because he couldn't destroy their spellbook/take away their spells. (You can also guess how many paladins kept their powers in that game).

It's been many, many years since I targeted character's equipment. When deciding how to run the game I ask myself if I were the player would it add to the game for me. So, for example, I don't want it guaranteed that my character will survive especially if I do something stupid. But destroying equipment? I would just find it annoying. So even though I was joking about a caster losing their spellbook, putting it at risk would just mean they would have a separate spell book they kept safe elsewhere (which is expensive).

Meanwhile I have stripped a paladin of their powers when they had innocents killed. Long story short, some people were being irredeemably transformed into monsters, but several could have been saved if she had bothered to check. She agreed it was appropriate and eventually did get her powers back.

 

[Remathilis]

It's been many, many years since I targeted character's equipment. When deciding how to run the game I ask myself if I were the player would it add to the game for me. So, for example, I don't want it guaranteed that my character will survive especially if I do something stupid. But destroying equipment? I would just find it annoying. So even though I was joking about a caster losing their spellbook, putting it at risk would just mean they would have a separate spell book they kept safe elsewhere (which is expensive).

Meanwhile I have stripped a paladin of their powers when they had innocents killed. Long story short, some people were being irredeemably transformed into monsters, but several could have been saved if she had bothered to check. She agreed it was appropriate and eventually did get her powers back.

This guy (played briefly in college with him) claimed he was a very old school DM. One of his favorite tricks was to cripple a PC if they got too powerful. And by powerful, it usually meant they could stand up to his amazing NPCs who were supposed to be awesome and powerful. He targeted spellbooks, forced alignment/code conflicts that would cause divine characters to lose their powers, and if you got a too awesome set of magic items, you better be sure he was busting out Disjunction, Crystal brittle, or other item destruction. He also would lock you in dungeons with vampires to de-level you if you got too powerful. There is a good reason I have negative reactions to a lot of those "old school killer DM" boasts