Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Benjamin Olson" data-source="post: 8317667" data-attributes="member: 6988941">Would that powergaming were a clearly delineated thing that could be &quot;just banned&quot;. Instead attempts to &quot;just ban&quot; it usually end up cutting off all sorts of completely unproblematic character building options (like say, all feats or all multiclassing) because they could potentially be used by someone for powergaming.Okay, perhaps I need to clarify that &quot;this class choice may have consequences&quot; is something that should be expressed in clear, frank metagame discussion with a player when they mention that maybe they are thinking about playing a Hexblade, not sprung on them as a &quot;ha ha I screwed you&quot; surprise.And I guess I'll add &quot;CAUTION: Do not attempt if you lack the most basic social skills.&quot; I was throwing out a suggestion on the presumption that people reading it knew how to communicate with players in a non-jerklike fashion. There is literally no DM suggestion that the wrong DM couldn't find a way to turn into a horror story if they have the right ineptitude. I will certainly concede that in the wrong hands, or just having the wrong relationship with the wrong player, making a Warlock patron of any kind obnoxious is prime fuel for being a jerk DM. My suggestion was really more about having a bit of fun giving the player character and lore reasons to have second thoughts about their munchkining character building decision when they are on the cusp of making it, not to keep harping on it to punish them for their decision after they have committed to it. So yeah, an obnoxious patron's relationship with a PC should improve (or at least become less obtrusive) once they have settled into actually being a Warlock.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Benjamin Olson, post: 8317667, member: 6988941"] Would that powergaming were a clearly delineated thing that could be "just banned". Instead attempts to "just ban" it usually end up cutting off all sorts of completely unproblematic character building options (like say, all feats or all multiclassing) because they could [i]potentially[/i] be used by someone for powergaming. Okay, perhaps I need to clarify that "this class choice may have consequences" is something that should be expressed in clear, frank metagame discussion with a player when they mention that maybe they are thinking about playing a Hexblade, not sprung on them as a "ha ha I screwed you" surprise. And I guess I'll add "CAUTION: Do not attempt if you lack the most basic social skills." I was throwing out a suggestion on the presumption that people reading it knew how to communicate with players in a non-jerklike fashion. There is literally no DM suggestion that the wrong DM couldn't find a way to turn into a horror story if they have the right ineptitude. I will certainly concede that in the wrong hands, or just having the wrong relationship with the wrong player, making a Warlock patron of any kind obnoxious is prime fuel for being a jerk DM. My suggestion was really more about having a bit of fun giving the player character and lore reasons to have second thoughts about their munchkining character building decision when they are on the cusp of making it, not to keep harping on it to punish them for their decision after they have committed to it. So yeah, an obnoxious patron's relationship with a PC should improve (or at least become less obtrusive) once they have settled into actually being a Warlock. [/QUOTE]

Verification