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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 1535422" data-attributes="member: 3424">Hmmm... I seems as if a fair number of posters have disagreed with my statement that DMs should not apply rules inconsistently.  Perhaps I should elaborate a little on my point of view.I have no problem with DMs coming up with house rules, variant classes, new feats, etc.  To me, that is not a case of inconsistent application of rules, simply the application of different rules.I have a bit more problem when the DM comes up with new rules that only apply to NPCs, and that the PCs cannot benefit from.  To me, this has the feel of player-DM competition.  In addition, it brings back memories of 2e NPCs who had abilities that the PCs could not hope to duplicate and were thus much cooler as a result.  Case in point: NPC drow had spell resistance while PC drow did not ("mysterious underdark radiation" indeed).  What bugs me the most, and it's a personal thing because I admit to being a stickler for rules, is when DMs create once-off "exceptions" to the established rules if they cannot get the rules to work out the way they want.  If it bugs you so much, change the rules. Don't make exceptions, and especially don't make exceptions only for NPCs.Heh <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />. I just realised I've spent most of my posts on this thread justifying my need to follow the rules. Does following the rules make me a bad DM <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />?</blockquote>

Verification