RigaMortus
Explorer
Creeping Death said:
I'd be leary of any campaign where the other players get to decide what kind of character I should make or play. I think it is up to the DM to accomodate the players, not the players to accomodate each other.
The druid is not fighting!!! LONG!
- Thread starter arbados
- Start date
I'd be leary of any campaign where the other players get to decide what kind of character I should make or play. I think it is up to the DM to accomodate the players, not the players to accomodate each other.
RigaMortus
Explorer
Mark Chance said:
Last time I checked, the DM had final say of what is "within reason."
If one player wants to be a Paladin but another player wants to be a CE Wizard, then it is not up to the players to decided who gets to keep their character and who has to change, it is up to the DM to tell them, "I am running an Evil campaign, your Paladin idea would not fit well with it" or "I am running a Good-based campaign, your CE Wizard idea would not fit well with it."
![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
Barkskin will be useless against my Deep Impact feat. That shouldn't matter. The Druid casts Barkskin even when the threat of a physical attack seems highly improbable . Like the when the sorcerer drows were casting damaging spells from inside an invulnerable glass hemisphere (the event that lead to my demise).
I hope you never change nature boy.
I hope you never change nature boy.
National Acrobat
First Post
As a DM I never let the players tell folks what they should play. Soliciting opinions is one thing but flat out telling people that they should accomodate the other party members is nuts. I give a general synopsis of what may not be appropriate, and let the dice roll. If there is obviously going to be a major problem between potential characters, I usually inform the one that may be the most detrimental that changing or altering their character idea may be the best idea. Ultimately though I let them keep it if they want, I just warn them that at some time in the future it may get ugly...
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
RigaMortus said:
That is a fair point, but I somewhat disagree.
A game is "owned" by every participant at the table. That is true in Monopoly -- where it is an unwritten rule that you do not throw the game just because you are losing; you would play your best until that inevitable bankruptcy out of a sense of loyalty and fairness to those still in the running.
An RPG campaign is owned by every participant at the table, although some are more equal than others. We defer to the DM as final arbiter out of respect and gratitude for his greater knowledge and personal time investment in the game. The key point is all the players own the game. As a cooperative, social game, it is the responsibility of every player to make reasonable efforts to be accomodating to other players' wishes (though not necessarily their PCs' wishes) and help them have fun as well. So while the 3 other players at the table should not order around the 4th player, there is a mutual duty to try and negotiate out such that all will be happy with the end result.
Extremes do not work. Saying "I am a roleplayer, so my character does what he wants and I don't care about your characters," would be an example of playing a roleplaying game poorly. So would be bullying another player about their PC's actions that are in character.
If players do not accommodate each other, in character logic will demand that most adventuring groups break apart. IME, most adventuring parties are bizarre, motley crews who couldn't organize themselves out of a paper bag. Players DO accommodate each other, all the time. That's why the game actually works.
Maitre Du Donjon
First Post
haven't read the whole thread.
It wan mentioned early on that the druid is afraid of dying / the player is afraid of losing his character.
How does the DM play daeth in the campaign? Is it irrevocable? If the player understands that dying, well, sucks, but isnt the END, perhaps he'd be willing to take a little more risks...
Maitre D
PS: Perhaps the issue was resolved 4 pages ago
It wan mentioned early on that the druid is afraid of dying / the player is afraid of losing his character.
How does the DM play daeth in the campaign? Is it irrevocable? If the player understands that dying, well, sucks, but isnt the END, perhaps he'd be willing to take a little more risks...
Maitre D
PS: Perhaps the issue was resolved 4 pages ago
likuidice
First Post
stuff
1) ok, a guy called sword dancer made a comment earlier regarding a frontline fighter (he was subsequently ridiculed and slapped down, but thats another story) and i not only understood his post, but also agreed with it,as i've stated earlier: its the psywarriors fault, plain and simple, the guy decides to whine for a medic when he's down to what i assume to be single digit, or low end at least hitpoints. I'm sorry, but its tough, if he's facing a superior opponent then he knows damn well that hes gonna need healing earlier than when he's on deaths doorstep.
2) the druid contrary to pretty much all the posts i've seen, DOES pull his weight outside and while in combat, he doesn't do melee, well neither does the wizard, or seemingly, the rogue, he uses his spells to provide ranged support, while the devoted defender and psywarrior kick ass in melee. thats the party balance, and if the character has stated that his role in combat is as support, then strategy should be planned around this, i've actually started playing a 3rd level druid in an online game just to see what their capabilities are, and i find them to be more effective at a distance than in melee.
3) people haven't paid attention, the rogue and wizard have been stated to have been providing long ranged support in this instance, its not an assumption, its been posted. in my tt party, we prioritise, if a man goes down, he becomes number one priority for EVERYONE, not just our cleric, or myself, the paladin. it is NOT one members job to dodge slings and bullets to get into combat and heal the guy, it is everyones, those that can distract, and beat back attacks, do so, while the healer goes to work, and i've seen very few parties that don't work like this. the priority in this situation should have switched to the fallen ally, for everyone, it didn't, and theres no way any of my characters would risk their lives knowing that theres not going to be any backup, unless they were alone. in fact, the majority of characters i've played would leave the party rather than continue to adventure with people they couldn't trust to go all out to save his ass, rather than killing stuff. there were plenty of options, looks like no one used any thing other than the "hey lets kill stuff" one.
4) we havent seen anything other than this example, so lets have some more.
5) if its a hack and slash game, my advice is to ditch the roleplaying druid, save him for a different campaign, and make some munchkin super character say, a cleric with persistent divine power, then you can fight as well as the front line fighters, and melee characters, and hey, you can heal as well...and provide long range support. if they outshine your character, turn the tables and twink away.
6) advice for both spellcasters, pack defensive, disruption spells, any of the wall spells work great, if the psywarrior, assuming hes been raised decides to yell "medic" when hes down to 2 HP then whack up a wall of stone and cut the two sides off from each other for a few minutes, while you heal up, plan your strategy in advance.
7) theres a great deal of antagonism in this thread, so lets just curb it, and show we can all act civilly toward one another, shall we? i hope that the other threads aren't as hostile.
1) ok, a guy called sword dancer made a comment earlier regarding a frontline fighter (he was subsequently ridiculed and slapped down, but thats another story) and i not only understood his post, but also agreed with it,as i've stated earlier: its the psywarriors fault, plain and simple, the guy decides to whine for a medic when he's down to what i assume to be single digit, or low end at least hitpoints. I'm sorry, but its tough, if he's facing a superior opponent then he knows damn well that hes gonna need healing earlier than when he's on deaths doorstep.
2) the druid contrary to pretty much all the posts i've seen, DOES pull his weight outside and while in combat, he doesn't do melee, well neither does the wizard, or seemingly, the rogue, he uses his spells to provide ranged support, while the devoted defender and psywarrior kick ass in melee. thats the party balance, and if the character has stated that his role in combat is as support, then strategy should be planned around this, i've actually started playing a 3rd level druid in an online game just to see what their capabilities are, and i find them to be more effective at a distance than in melee.
3) people haven't paid attention, the rogue and wizard have been stated to have been providing long ranged support in this instance, its not an assumption, its been posted. in my tt party, we prioritise, if a man goes down, he becomes number one priority for EVERYONE, not just our cleric, or myself, the paladin. it is NOT one members job to dodge slings and bullets to get into combat and heal the guy, it is everyones, those that can distract, and beat back attacks, do so, while the healer goes to work, and i've seen very few parties that don't work like this. the priority in this situation should have switched to the fallen ally, for everyone, it didn't, and theres no way any of my characters would risk their lives knowing that theres not going to be any backup, unless they were alone. in fact, the majority of characters i've played would leave the party rather than continue to adventure with people they couldn't trust to go all out to save his ass, rather than killing stuff. there were plenty of options, looks like no one used any thing other than the "hey lets kill stuff" one.
4) we havent seen anything other than this example, so lets have some more.
5) if its a hack and slash game, my advice is to ditch the roleplaying druid, save him for a different campaign, and make some munchkin super character say, a cleric with persistent divine power, then you can fight as well as the front line fighters, and melee characters, and hey, you can heal as well...and provide long range support. if they outshine your character, turn the tables and twink away.
6) advice for both spellcasters, pack defensive, disruption spells, any of the wall spells work great, if the psywarrior, assuming hes been raised decides to yell "medic" when hes down to 2 HP then whack up a wall of stone and cut the two sides off from each other for a few minutes, while you heal up, plan your strategy in advance.
7) theres a great deal of antagonism in this thread, so lets just curb it, and show we can all act civilly toward one another, shall we? i hope that the other threads aren't as hostile.
Kahuna Burger
First Post
Re: stuff
*snicker*
...the beam in your own eye, my new friend....
Kahuna Burger
likuidice said:
*snicker*
...the beam in your own eye, my new friend....
Kahuna Burger
Re: stuff
"The Psychic Warrior can't help but notice that the Druid only doles out healing after a battle (saving them for himself during battle just in case). The Psychic Warrior can't help but notice that the Druid almost never uses dipel magic, but is quick to take credit for doing it when the Wizard cast dipel magic. The Druid holds off and granting aid (like freedom of movement) if he is not a beneficiary (unless he stays behind while others endanger themselves). As far as writing healing scrolls (which could easily be used by the Rogue or Wizard/Bard), the Druid does not wish to lose XP. The DM has made every effort to ensure Item Creation feats are not useless. Most of all the Psychic Warrior can't help but notice that on occasion the Druid does nothing at all. The Psychic Warrior has even seen the Druid crawl on the floor yelling for help simply to avoid an attack of opportunity from a skeleton."
Yeah, no reason at all to say he doesn't contribute...
You're right, it's the idiot tank's fault for expecting to be healed. He should know that (since the Druid can play his character any way he wants to) he has to change the way he plays his character to make sure he doesn't do stupid things like take damage in combat. For that matter, everyone else needs to change the way they play their characters because we can't possibly expect the Druid's player to change the way he plays, that wouldn't be right.
likuidice said:
"The Psychic Warrior can't help but notice that the Druid only doles out healing after a battle (saving them for himself during battle just in case). The Psychic Warrior can't help but notice that the Druid almost never uses dipel magic, but is quick to take credit for doing it when the Wizard cast dipel magic. The Druid holds off and granting aid (like freedom of movement) if he is not a beneficiary (unless he stays behind while others endanger themselves). As far as writing healing scrolls (which could easily be used by the Rogue or Wizard/Bard), the Druid does not wish to lose XP. The DM has made every effort to ensure Item Creation feats are not useless. Most of all the Psychic Warrior can't help but notice that on occasion the Druid does nothing at all. The Psychic Warrior has even seen the Druid crawl on the floor yelling for help simply to avoid an attack of opportunity from a skeleton."
Yeah, no reason at all to say he doesn't contribute...
You're right, it's the idiot tank's fault for expecting to be healed. He should know that (since the Druid can play his character any way he wants to) he has to change the way he plays his character to make sure he doesn't do stupid things like take damage in combat. For that matter, everyone else needs to change the way they play their characters because we can't possibly expect the Druid's player to change the way he plays, that wouldn't be right.
Similar Threads
