Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="cptg1481" data-source="post: 698238" data-attributes="member: 5360">OK, here is something I have been wondering about for some time....Do you nerf stuff and why?  I don't, I follow the leadership rule I have always had in the service.  While I don't, I do, however, respect very much your right to do as you see fit at your table.  I never ever take anything away from my, players, (I see the DM position as one of trust and leadership) if they have the right to something in a set of regulations or situations I find it unnecessary to limit or restrict them further.  IMO, it just leads to resentment.  On the other hand, granting further liberty, privilege or access, within the scope of the rules is fine in my opinion.I guess I feel that I'd would resent seeing something in the rules and being told I can't do it.  I'm guessing that therefore my players would most likely resent a house rule to limit them more than the published rules require.  There is an awful lot of stuff on the boards about nerfing this and that, by my reckoning there is a lot more about limiting players than empowering them further.  I go with the philosophy that, as the virtual situation author,  I can come up with an appropriate challenge for the players without further limiting their access to what is allowed within the rules.  I don't want to degenerate into the harm/haste debate, because in the end we all make our own rules, its a game.  Perhaps I'm too lazy to think about the mechanics, I just accept that the WOTC play tesing, while imperfect, is stull way more accurate than my attempts to correct the games issues.  I'l admit that I'm lazy.  I'm just  fine with the stuff as written.  My thoughts are that if the same rule set is applied universally for the characters and their challengers then the playing field will remain level.  I don't and never will give my players less magic, gold, or anything for that mater,  than they are entitled to based upon the rewards indicated in the rules.  I guess I just wonder why those who do restrict players access to items, spells, skills, gold, whatever, more than the rules dictate do so.  Why do you do it? What is achieved? As a DM is the intent to make one's tasks easier, more manageable, or fun?  As a player, how do you feel about this issue, do the increased limitations make the game more pleasurable, harder, easier, or more realistic.  I'm not after WWIII here, (or a troll, whatever that is?) I am just curious what people nerf and why.  I've given my thoughts as best as I can present them and I want you all to feel free to weigh in.  I will not argue with you so don't even try, I just want to know what others think.  I'm not gona attack your ideasI am just intrested in alternate views.  What that means is just make statements about what you do and why, don't attack each others ideas.  It is a game and it's supposed to be fun, if your ideas work for you and your players/DM then fine.  I'm just wondering.</blockquote>

Verification