Too powerful? What am I missing... (please help)

[Slaved]

As a DM, I do not tailor encounters around PC abilities.

I said that every character forces the dungeon master to change how the game is run but I said nothing about tailoring encounters around the characters abilities.

How many monsters have Spell Turning?

Why does it matter? I said that it would be funny! There was nothing about it being common, that is game dependent.


Various ways of getting energy resistance at this level are getting pretty common though. Energy resistance the spell gives a resistance of 30 at caster level 11 and lasts for 110 minutes. The second level slot that each takes is a drop in the bucket when you are able to cast 6th level spells. Even third level slots are for fluff at that point so an extended version of important safety spells is completely reasonable.

 

[hong]

I said that every character forces the dungeon master to change how the game is run but I said nothing about tailoring encounters around the characters abilities.

Every character induces change in the game, but some changes are bigger than others.

 

[Slaved]

Every character induces change in the game, but some changes are bigger than others.

Such as point buy or being able to roll your statistics and change them from the order that they were rolled in?

 

[pawsplay]

Wilders can put together a nice blast. However, with the risk of enervation taken into account, I just would be awful cautious about using that ability. The only time I've ever rolled one up, I focused on melee and scouting, a sort of brute force variant on the psychic warrior. The idea of being dazed in the second round of combat just gives me the willies.

Dying from dazing yourself is just about one of the worst ways to go.

 

[KarinsDad]

I said that every character forces the dungeon master to change how the game is run but I said nothing about tailoring encounters around the characters abilities.

I wasn't aware that the two was mutually exclusive. Didn't you write:

Each has their own set of abilities attatched which will shift how everything works.

Doesn't "everything" include encounters?

"abilities will shift how everything works"

It sure as heck sounds like you were talking about the DM tailoring the game to abilities considering that abilities was the focus of that sentence.

If you didn't mean abilities, maybe you shouldn't have written it in the sentence.

You went on to say:

I believe that all characters force change in how the dungeon master runs his game

So in the same post, you tied in how the DM runs his game. The entire implication of that post is that the DM adapts to the characters abilities. So, that is what I responded to.

 

[Slaved]

I wasn't aware that the two was mutually exclusive.

Well, they are different concepts.

Didn't you write:

Doesn't "everything" include encounters?

Yep! A fighter with one set of feats will be very different than a ranger with a different set of feats. Everything they do will impact the world differently because they have a different set of abilities.

When does that move to the dungeon master adjusting encounters for the party?

So in the same post, you tied in how the DM runs his game. The entire implication of that post is that the DM adapts to the characters abilities. So, that is what I responded to.

I have no idea what you are talking about. As far as I can tell you are making things up and applying them to me. We are talking about very different things and yet somehow you keep on making one the same as the other in your head. I would suggest not doing that as they are not the same.

 

[KarinsDad]

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Uh huh.

 

[Felon]

Every character build does. Each has their own set of abilities attatched which will shift how everything works.

This stands out as an evasive bit of equivocation. Many DM's kick off adventures heedless of party composition. If my ranger becomes a scout at the last minute, it's unlikely to be disruptive.

Clearly, having the option to dramatically ramp up damage output--robbing Peter to pay Paul so to speak--is very advantageous. I don't know that I'd calll wilders too powerful (because as long as you're just dealing hit-point damage you're at least sticking to direct offense) but clearly a DM has to factor in whether a BBEGG will wind up as nova-meat.

 

[hong]

I must now create a Bo9S maneuver called "evasive stance of equivocation".

 

[Slaved]

This stands out as an evasive bit of equivocation. Many DM's kick off adventures heedless of party composition. If my ranger becomes a scout at the last minute, it's unlikely to be disruptive.

It is an important distinction for the point that was being made.

If your party has a bunch of heavy armor tanks with no scouting skills at all then that will be a very different adventure than a party of all rogues who are all maxed out in stealth.

The adventure planned by the dm in general is the same but how the party goes about solving any problems that come up will be very different. One will have the dungeon master reacting to a full frontal assault while the other a whole lot of people trying to not be noticed.

Clearly, having the option to dramatically ramp up damage output--robbing Peter to pay Paul so to speak--is very advantageous. I don't know that I'd calll wilders too powerful (because as long as you're just dealing hit-point damage you're at least sticking to direct offense) but clearly a DM has to factor in whether a BBEGG will wind up as nova-meat.

The dungeon master has to factor this in? Are you suggesting that the BBEGG (?) will need to have his statistics changed because of the party? Why?

Some adventures will be easier because of party composition, others harder, but if the dungeon master does not want to change the enemies based on the party he does not have to.

Although I would imagine that over time he would spend more time on the parts of the adventure that this particular group is likely to go through.