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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 8303834" data-attributes="member: 7025508">But the GM put the thing that ate your character in the game and the GM decides that it eats you. All of this is in GM's control.Sounds like a failure to communicate. The nature of the deity/pact/whatever should be established at character creation, so that both the GM and the player have roughly similar idea o what it entails. In my game warlocks are just infused with power, so this doesn't apply to them, their power is their own once given. Though in theory the character could take some actions which might result that power being removed, for example a character infused with cthulhoid essence could seek to have that purified and removed somehow, and as that is the source of their powers the powers would go with it. But again this is something the player would knowingly choose. What they cannot decide, that they purify themselves of said essence and still retain their powers, as that goes against the established and agreed upon fiction. And ultimately in D&D the GM controls NPCs and other such setting elements. So sorry, I simply don't believe that the player can just declare that a god whose central stated purpose is the opposition of demons is suddenly super cool with their clerics summoning and cavorting with demons.I believe in players making informed choices, that's agency. I really am not talking about old school horror story gotcha moments where the GM tries to trick the paladin out of their powers. But I believe respecting the fiction, and things having consequences. If you leave your magic items unguarded in the middle of a market place teeming with thieves and other shadowy individuals, then you don't get to be upset if they got stolen even though they're part of your 'character concept.'</blockquote>

Verification