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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6183664" data-attributes="member: 4937">No.  Not at all.  If you're group is enjoying the game where 1st level spellcasters cast 9th level spells and the DM is doing all sorts of gonzo things to keep you challenged and engaged while you display your 'systems mastery', then I'm all for it.  That sounds really great.   I'm not sure I yet believe that game actually exists or that group actually exists, but if it does, then yes I can see how it would have a certain appeal.  Tell us all about it.  I love funny campaign stories.  Certainly I've played those sorts of things before, though mostly they have names like 'Diablo III' rather than D&D.However, whether I approve of your style of game or not, the fact remains that a game that is built around the assumption that spellcasters are going to be casting 9th level spells at 1st level isn't necessarily the same game anyone else is playing and as such advice to someone based on the assumption that a game looks like that doesn't necessarily have a lot of value to a player who plays something that looks a lot like E8 or E10 and where even if someone owns the books 'Elder Evils' and 'Ghostwalk' he isn't necessarily searching them for the most broken available combos like this is some sort of collectible card game and he's looking to create a competitive tournament deck in the current meta.Of all the things that you've said, that's the one I'm the least inclined to believe.  You haven't shown anything that remotely looks like curiousity.  You don't seem inclined to be interested in figuring out what is going on; you seem rather inclined to believe your system mastery extends to mastery of this situation and that you understand everything as thoroughly as your knowledge of combining esoteric splatbook rules.The truth is it's really obvious that you don't play the same game of D&D I or most anyone else does.   There is a whole subforum for discussing on going campaigns.   Many of them offer to me recognizable examples of play.   But I would suggest that my game has more in common with some of the games based on 4e (despite using no 4e rules) than it does with the sort of game you seem to be outlining as the results of your 'knowing the rules'.  For my part, I would tend to lump whether or not a particular book like Savage Species or Magic of Incarnum or Races of Stone was available to use under the general category of the tables 'house rules'.  The fact that you don't, tells me that you are playing a game very different from how D&D 3.X is usually played.Let's just put it this way.   The game I play is probably 80% the 3.5 SRD, and Tumble is considered an extremely powerful and useful ability to have despite the DC to dodge through a threatened square being 15+enemies BAB.   So, despite sharing a lot in common and being recognizably D&D, we are most certainly not playing the same game since in yours you firmly avow: "Tumble is meaningless. Pointless."  I have no reason to doubt that is true of the game you play, but it is just further proof we aren't playing the same game.In general, I would say that at most 3.X tables the assumption was that a given splat book had to be added to the rules set as an explicit exception, rather than removed from the rules of play as an explicit exception.   The sort of design done on the character optimization boards as to what was possible really was a game in and of itself, amusing and fun even if it was never used at a table, and for the most part probably never was.</blockquote>

Verification