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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8306477" data-attributes="member: 22779">Sigh.  One more time with feeling.  It's not a problem for me.  It really, really isn't.It's a problem that I see coming from people who have played under other DM's who then bring that problem to my doorstep.  Note, the whole paranoia thing isn't something I could be giving to the players since I don't take control over their characters.  I realize that it's simply easier to pass the blame onto me, but, it's not like I don't have various points of evidence for what I'm saying.1.  Over the years, the amount of DM interference explicitly allowed by the rules has been drastically reduced. 2.  Years and years of DMing advice in Dragon and other places saying that DM's should generally not interfere with player's characters.3.  Years of players coming from other tables to my game, basically with a sort of gaming PTSD where they create character after character with nothing for the DM to hook into because they refuse to allow the DM any control over their characters, having been bitten by it in the past.I'm honestly, frankly, baffled why the advice is controversial.See, if the player initiates, then I'm all for it.  Heck, even if the DM suggests it, but, leaves it up to the player for final say, I'd be perfectly fine.  But, my problem is, upon reflection, that the DM is having PLAYER CREATED elements (note [USER=6701124]@Cadence[/USER] - your example doesn't apply since none of that was introduced by the player) react to actions taken by the player and removing class elements from the player's character.  The player basically has no real say here.  The DM is, essentially, saying, "Sorry, you aren't playing your character right.  You did something that I think is against the concept of your character and I'm going to punish you for it, regardless of whether or not you agree with the interpretation."  And you wonder why people have an issue with this?And, the funny thing is, the only justification you can find for doing it is in vaguely worded PHB quotes that are meant as examples, and are certainly not universal or explicit.  In other editions, it was explicit that the DM should do this sort of thing.  The AD&D alignment rules, xp rules, paladins, and I'm sure there are other examples.  Heck, 5e alignment doesn't even have any mechanical impact.  I can be a Chaotic Evil priest of Heironeous and that's perfectly fine.  Sure, other clerics and the authorities might take exception to my orphanage burning ways and they especially don't like me kicking three legged puppies, but, Heironeous?  Couldn't care less.  This isn't older editions where the DM gets to pull out the beat stick and punish players for not toeing the line by stripping away class goodies. It's funny how this only seems to apply to NPC's that have power over the player's characters though.  Do you similarly strip away class features if a fighter gains a level but didn't kill anything?  If I don't use a given skill for long enough, do I lose that proficiency?  Does my barbarian lose the ability to rage if I settle down in Waterdeep?  After all, the spirits that grant my rage and other powers certainly don't want me to get all civilized right?  Where does it stop?</blockquote>

Verification