some how I doubt (but I will concead if it is the case) the DM said "Hey this mod is no skill checks all player skill" so bad analogy...
of course it can... it is entirely dependent on the players getting in the right mind set... so it could work or could blow up horrid,.
wait no one said he didn't like mysteries... just he wants mysteries to rely on in game resources not out of game knowledge...
nope happens all the time both as a player and a DM... when I DM I throw out more hints or ask for int or wis checks...
yea, but imagine if your DM made you loose a fight because you couldn't out fight him (as apposed to out think in a mystery) even if your character was better then you at combat...
I don't mind liner I mind only one way... and it seems very one way..
so if I was playing in that mod as a Barbarian with an 8 int and 9 wis... what would you say if I figured out the mystry? is that the same?
no it is dumb because your advice was to do exactly what I did...
again... you are argueing something else not my example... I did exactly what you suggested, so no brats...
what are you talking about... who suggested that? We could eat at a place that serves seafood and non seafood, we could eat out with our friends at different reastrants, or I could over 6 months 3 times eat at this place that serves no entrée I like... but at no point was it ever suggested that she not eat anything...
but did he expect you to play and enjoy golf even if you do not enjoy it? I bet he didn't I bet he would love if you tried even if you didn't like it...
not what happened in the game or the dateing... are you reading what I wrote?
no his was below that and there's above...
wait you believe that 3.5 core is balanced? so a Druid and Monk are totally on par? if so you are in denile and we will have to just forget this whole train of thought...
I entirely agree, but since you can make a MORE balanced game from supplimints then core I find that a hard postion to defend...
Human barbarian 1 Cleric X where x= all levels after first... I have seen it core only ruin many games by power gamers...
and I disagree DMs may have final say but they should rarely if ever have to use it, and no where near as much as is thrown around this thread...
I know very few people who allow third party stuff, but that is not what we are talking about. We are talking about routinely showing up saying "Hey can I play this basic concept" and the DM basicly saying "No, I don't like it so neaither should you"
are we talking about the same thing? Even if I take every page of every book in 3.5 that has warlock stuff on it takes up a lot less then the phb gives to spells. ANd no one has to learn all of them. You start with 2-3 powers, then as you level I don't get one every level... so less then 20 powers the DM needs to know over 20 levels...
I really have no idea what you are talking about, it is not a different mode of character building it is just like building a fighter or rogue... a lot less complex then any other caster...
But it was your analogy and the DM didn't say there were no mod rolls he said there were somethings that didn't get one hardly the same thing.
And that is true about every encounter some work out great some not so much this could be a failure of the DM to explain things it could be a failure of the players a failure of the dice. What I question is getting angry over it at the end of the day it is game nothing more yet I have seen players and DM lose their cool over things. If you find yourself yelling at the table then you need to tke a deep breath and step back.
Then why was it dumb advice to? Compromise is at the heart of every human relationship. It is not always possible for example huge difference of being highly allergic to seafood and risking an attack and not liking how it tastes. In gaming terms you have friend you enjoy gaming with when they DM you know that they don't handle powergamers well so so you can compromise with the DM and agree to change your concept if the DM can't handle it or you don't powergame.
No he didn't expect me to learn to play though we did go out several times and he taught me rudimentary skills. BTW that was a hell of a lot more fun than standing around watching people play golf. Seriously watching paint dry would be more entertaining. I know he hated opera when it was in a foreign language and ballet just bored him. But he stood inline overnight to get tickets to see Mikhail Baryshnikov to surprise me for our anniversary. He even sat in on some role playing games something else he didn't really like. He wanted to see what it was the made me like it so much. Healthy relationships should be give and take and that includes gaming groups too.
No I never said it was perfectly balanced I said it was not broken. 3.5 and older editions require input from the DM to provide balance. I have seen what happens when they try and perfectly balance a game it was called 4E and imo that was the most unfun version I ever played. I am of the school of gaming that says give the DM the power to balance the game for his table because he knows his table better than the designers of the game. You don't have to agree with that and that is perfectly fine but it does make me wrong it makes me view gaming differently.
Actually he said the player does not like mysteries and you know what I would hate to play with players who would rather roll and be told what te answer is. As a player who loves mysteries I want to figure out for myself. So shouldn't I be allowed to have that opportunity in the game? Isn't part of the social contract of gaming is to allow everyone at the table to have fun? I hate dungeon crawls but some people like them so when we are in one I hide my boredom and play the best of ability because I know that eventually we will be out and doing stuff I like more.
You cannot make more balanced game by allowing every supplement in without banning somethings. And again I didn't say you couldn't make a broken class with core I said that it is harder to do because you are limited in your choices.
First of all this is thread and things get taken to extremes to make points. I have yet to have an issue with a player at my table over this and the things I ban. I had a player who wanted to play a warlock a class that is problematic from a world view in my game. Since warlocks are burned at the stake if caught using their powers she came up with the idea to also have levels in sorcerer to hide her warlock abilities. She didn't ask me to change my world to fit her concept she fit her concept to my world. And she thoroughly enjoyed playing a character living on the edge. The other players were asked by her if they minded this character because it could impact on theirs and they fully supported her playing it. But then when she had her world sorcerers were considered evil by the wizards guild so I played a sorcerer with a few levels in wizard to hide my sorcerer power. This is what I am talking about the player finding away to make a concept work in the DM worlds without making the DM have to change it.