Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DanteHayes" data-source="post: 899517" data-attributes="member: 8880">If you would like to avoid the "derision and disrespect" that Necrogorgon spoke of, perhaps you you should consider revising this "talking down to" tone you've affected.I don't need anything re-explained to me. I understand what you are saying. I just think you are wrong.First off, attaining Epic levels isn't altruism, the unselfish concern for the welfare of others. In fact, his insistance on self preservation is quite literally the oppisite.Next, he has made decisions about his character, disguised as good role-playing, which render him useless in combat situations.Then, the DM, who is presumable familiar with the guides and outlines in the DMG, designs a combat situation, which should use about 1/4 of the party's resources. The Druid elects not to participate thus creating additional burden on the other three players. One of whose character dies because of it.Had the Defender fumbled, and the DM had house rule regulating fumbles, and the PsyWar had died, you are right, the party would have forgivin him. Because, at least, he tried.The DM brings this situation here and the board members encourage him to have that player change characters or, alter his precious persona.Now, as to your feelings about fun; I have some opinions about fun myself. I think it's fun when I know I can count on the other characters to back me up and, knowing that I'll back them up. I have more fun when we emerge from a conflict victorious as opposed to running away. If the three players in the DM's campaign agree with my veiws on fun, and, I think they do or they wouldn't have this problem in the first place, then the question we really need answered is; why should one players decisions about his character ruin the fun for them?</blockquote>

Verification