Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Haltherrion" data-source="post: 5445360" data-attributes="member: 18253">In general, the referee invests a lot of time in the game. He or she is essentially tasked with executing a vision of a world and along those lines, restrictions on races, classes and gear are, to me, perfectly reasonable. Just because the game designers thought to include something in a ruleset doesn't mean it needs to be in your game. They are trying to create a flexible system that can accomodate a wide range of styles and settings, you are trying to execute a specific style and setting.&nbsp;In particular, I have no trouble banning psionics, something with its own special flavor that often does not mesh with a setting. I have occasionally allowed it when a player has made a case for it (shades of your first player, i.e., diplomatically) and always regretted it. No one I game with would be put out by such a restriction themselves and they also understand that they can always ref the next campaign and set their own ground rules if they really want a particular element included.&nbsp;As for your specific example, I'm as human as you are and would also respond to the diplomatic approach versus the irritating approach but in this case where they were asking for something very similar, it would be better to be consistant. That said, if the one you allowed happened to ask first, I also wouldn't feel too bad about saying, &quot;I just want to try out one psion in the game at this time.&quot; If she asked second, it would be much harder to let her take a psion having refused the first player.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Haltherrion, post: 5445360, member: 18253"] In general, the referee invests a lot of time in the game. He or she is essentially tasked with executing a vision of a world and along those lines, restrictions on races, classes and gear are, to me, perfectly reasonable. Just because the game designers thought to include something in a ruleset doesn't mean it needs to be in your game. They are trying to create a flexible system that can accomodate a wide range of styles and settings, you are trying to execute a specific style and setting. In particular, I have no trouble banning psionics, something with its own special flavor that often does not mesh with a setting. I have occasionally allowed it when a player has made a case for it (shades of your first player, i.e., diplomatically) and always regretted it. No one I game with would be put out by such a restriction themselves and they also understand that they can always ref the next campaign and set their own ground rules if they really want a particular element included. As for your specific example, I'm as human as you are and would also respond to the diplomatic approach versus the irritating approach but in this case where they were asking for something very similar, it would be better to be consistant. That said, if the one you allowed happened to ask first, I also wouldn't feel too bad about saying, "I just want to try out one psion in the game at this time." If she asked second, it would be much harder to let her take a psion having refused the first player. [/QUOTE]

Verification