Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Forrester" data-source="post: 328029" data-attributes="member: 1279">Well, &quot;nerfing&quot; Commune would in fact be allowing a PC to earn an ability (seemingly), and then completely eliminating the PC's ability to use it, especially if the DM didn't have the foresight to tell the players that he was changing Commune ahead of time. Perhaps I'm reading too much into the column -- but I think that much of Monte's message is meant to be taken as not just tips for individual adventure design, but how DMs should deal with high-level campaigns in general. I'm also (perhaps unfairly) attributing to him some comment one of the Gaming Elite made SOMEWHERE about how DMs should be satisfied with changing the challenge they want to give to the party (i.e., a mystery) instead of feeling tempted to change the rules. Maybe that's in the Mystery Passage . . . we must find it! Regardless of what is floating through Monte's head, the fact remains that it seems there are a significant number of players out there who are ready to whine at full volume if the DM decides to employ Rule 0. I'm not saying that you can't have a good campaign WITH the rules as written (though it'll be silly sometimes). But again, there should be zero stigma -- and one would hope, zero resistance from players -- towards changing some of the rules that make &quot;realistic&quot; campaigns difficult.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Forrester, post: 328029, member: 1279"] Well, "nerfing" [I]Commune[/I] would in fact [b]be[/b] allowing a PC to earn an ability (seemingly), and then completely eliminating the PC's ability to use it, especially if the DM didn't have the foresight to tell the players that he was changing [I]Commune[/I] ahead of time. Perhaps I'm reading too much into the column -- but I think that much of Monte's message is meant to be taken as not just tips for individual adventure design, but how DMs should deal with high-level campaigns in general. I'm also (perhaps unfairly) attributing to him some comment one of the Gaming Elite made SOMEWHERE about how DMs should be satisfied with changing the challenge they want to give to the party (i.e., a mystery) instead of feeling tempted to change the rules. Maybe that's in the Mystery Passage . . . we must find it! Regardless of what is floating through Monte's head, the fact remains that it seems there are a significant number of players out there who are ready to whine at full volume if the DM decides to employ Rule 0. I'm not saying that you can't have a good campaign WITH the rules as written (though it'll be silly sometimes). But again, there should be zero stigma -- and one would hope, zero resistance from players -- towards changing some of the rules that make "realistic" campaigns difficult. [/QUOTE]

Verification