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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 6155860" data-attributes="member: 95493">6421 that time <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> lol. I dread how long mine is.Covered by Kobold Stew and Dausuul.Where  is it a small percentage? What number do you define as small? A  minority is probably the best thing you can say about it. A popular  minority is probably what I would say about it. Either way, there is  very little space needed to be "wasted" by allowing monster PCs. You  don't need a monster as PC section for every monster, you just need  simple comprehensive rules to allow monster PCs. Pathfinder has  something that works very well already and the section of the book that  has the rules for it is a page. One. PCs as PCs takes a whole book.Then we agree.Just  because you don't like it doesn't mean anything in my calculation of  how worthwhile it is. You don't like wizards with spellbooks  (bookkeeping) and yet that seems a pretty popular choice.Then  don't allow that particular monster-PC in your game. I'm not going to  try and fight the "5 times a session" bit, except that I think it is a  crock.I don't know where you are getting these figures.The  stat in the article was something lower than this number (iirc), and  that related to how many builds were made on character builder about  monster PCs. It seems to me then if 5% want to play dragons that might  actually be pretty high. How many people wanted to play Shadar Kai? I  want a link to whatever you are using that says 5% of people want  dragons. I then want a link to the survey that shows exactly how many  people want EVERY humanoid race. Every single one. If there are 20  humanoid races then I'm betting some are lower than 5%.4e good on balance, ergo 3e bad. Got it. You could have started with this in your first post and saved us some time.For  my money, toolbox = good. Always. 3e's got it. PF has it. Any RPG I  play right now has it. Unless WotC wants 0% of people who like  toolboxes, they had better put some effort into it.Again, could have said that last time too.Replace wish, in my last post, with .. disintegrate? That still too good of a spell? Fireball then. I hope that works.Then replace dragon, with minotaur.My  argument was about power levels and when people should be able to play  things. They should eventually have that power and option just as  wizards should have powers and options in spells. Just as fighters have  feats or combat ability. Just as rogues have tricks and clerics have  divine powers. It is a power level thing, not the specific spell. Dragon  is just an example, I'm using it as a placeholder for similarly  powerful monsters; ie. Not-humanoids.They  CAN be balanced. They can be allowed. You never would and that is fine.  I again have no interest in making a game solely for your consumption  or based on your goals, just as they should have no interest in making  one that only adheres to mine.If you are the DM  then that is your choice, to disallow them. If you are the player then  talk to the DM and make sure that you don't feel this way; hopefully  getting that DM to ban the monster choice. As Dausuul says this should  be exclusively the option of the DM. Just because they want to take it  doesn't mean it should always be available. But if they want to play it  and the DM is okay with it then why should we care if you think they are  balanced or not? I want to have dragons as an option in my campaign  going forward. If 5e can allow me to do that with no fuss then it will  gain my favour. If not, then as I repeatedly say, it breaks my game and  makes it not fun for me. If you don't want it you don't have to use it.  If you don't want to use feats or skills or magic there is nothing  saying you have to use it - and those are (not sure about magic) 5e's  design goals. Modules of options.Dragons  as monsters are pretty common. It would no more be wasting space as a  monster to fight than if a monster to play as a PC. Like I said, the  best rules I've seen so far require a single page to use.Then I'm glad it came out then. A nice innovation that they should not simply ignore because it doesn't fit in your sensibility.Wow. Okay. Where to start.. more or less in order I guess.'The  ability to snap your fingers and change the universe' is not a power  than any monster has (that the PCs don't). Wish has limits and PCs can  do wish too. What you describe above doesn't exist and shouldn't exist  for either party.If I reverse the DM and PC tags (and slightly  modify) in that back and forth it doesn't make it make any more sense.  See (my changes in bold):PC: "So, the good Wizard appears in the sky and says 'HAHAH...I now control your land and your slaves are free...you will bow be-"DM: "Yawn, I snap my fingers, the good Wizard and all his henchmen stop  existing.  Wait...no, they continue to exist, but now they are all  fanatically devoted to the evil wizard."PC: *throws out character sheet and notes on the adventure he had played* "Well, that's done."It  is silly for the PC (playing the good wizard) to have that power just  as it is for the DM playing the evil wizard. In that case the problem is  with the power itself. Flying is a problem on both sides of the screen.  Having sight in a world of blind people is the problem.However,  having sight isn't a problem when sight exists in the world. It is a  problem when only one person (especially a PC) has it. If dragons are  broken for PCs then dragons are broken for DMs to play. That is my point  of contention here. Yours is sided only on the PCs have power side.But the gods having that power is something that I  would fully allow the PCs to have if they became gods. That is exactly  the thing. You wouldn't probably allow your PCs to get there, but I  have. The problem is balance and expectations. PCs wanted to be gods,  but the whole game had to be geared for that. They went on a god killing  game and I made sure the rules and campaign expectations worked with  them god killing. There were other gods and they only did things that  were on par with the power they weilded. The PCs however never went to  Greyhawk and never tried to be normal once they got divine rank. That is  the step you are missing.Agreed. But my point is that if such  a monster is a party member and he has the ability to turn people into  stone, or whatever that monster can do, then that is ALL they do. The  wizard can fly, fireball, cloudkill, and so on. The dragon can only fly  and <s>fireball</s> err.. breath fire. Those should be balanced. But it  is still the ONLY thing the dragon is doing. Also, during his off time  he isn't just another member of the team; he is a dragon that everyone  can see and who will provoke townspeople by existing (and certainly by  coming to town).That  is what I would be asking too. NOT ALL monsters are the problem. Some  monsters are going to be, especially if they can't work with the other  party members but not all monsters are going to be that way. If a PC  chooses to play a monster that will be an issue, either with the world  or with the party, then they are making the active choice. The other PCs  are perfectly justified in asking "Why didn't you choose something that  can work with us?"We found it to be amusing  every time. Glad we had this talk. I'll keep playing monster PCs then.  Your bad experiences after those first few times do not colour mine at  all.SPOILERS YOU HAVE BEEN  WARNED: And yet, in game of thrones there ARE dragons. The world accepts  and understand that they exist. If those "characters" were PCs then the  world has the understanding that they exist and can make preparations  against them. They are tiny now, but can easily kill a full grown man by  themselves, faster than any other fighter in the show. They will  eventually grow so large that they can conquer kingdoms - we have been  told that has happened before.The guy with Q level powers is the wizard with spellcasting. Those are still allowed by you however.Sigh, the game doesn't have  to become logistics. It can, especially the first time, bog some things  down but it really doesn't have to. If you have bad experiences then I  recommend not using the ruleset. That doesn't mean anything about how  fair or balanced the ruleset is nor whether I should be allowed to use  it. Your experiences here are moot.Still  3.0 and irrelevent to the conversation, except to note that Savage  Species was broken. Not all monster suppliments are, and monster PCs  don't have to be. But savage species was broken and I'll admit it.Lol, not at all.No,  if anything, the people who play the "powerful" races before are the  same ones who do it now. The ones who play the fluff play the fluff  either way. I'm saying the motivations are the same. But, given PF's new  model, those who play power and those who play fluff BOTH play the same  as they did before. People are no more likely, in my experience, to  play a dragon or a minotaur or anything; including Tiefling, more now  than they were before.That kind of  thing happens/ed a lot in my group, except that it wasn't a sin. It was  considered sub-par and so people rarely did it. They would do it for  fluff purposes, or to get different bonuses or build different kinds of  characters but it was never a sin and certainly never expected for every  character.I guess it was a combination of things.No  group of my extended group of players and friends would ever accept a  DM specifically specifying their race/class combo. We usually rebel  when limited to too fine a selection of books.The closest we've  ever had are usually something along the lines of "Core only" games; of  which I've been in two. In the first I played a Catfolk (because it was  PHB only with some extra races) monk in a party with a wizard (I forget  race) and a rogue.. or was he a fighter. That game didn't last very  long, but it certainly wasn't stock 4 classes nor stock PHB only races.The  second time, more recently, I played a grey elf wizard. We were limited  to core 3 books (MM ftw), but it eventually opened up to more as the  game progressed. In that game, for a time, we lacked a rogue and for  another bit we lacked a pure arcane caster.In a third game, the  DM tried to pen them in and specified that the party MUST have the "core  four" role filled. He even went as far as specifying what each of the  four (starting) players must play. He allowed all books, but you had to  fulfill your role. The "rogue" was a spellthief. The healer (who  absolutely hated being stuck in his role) was an amazing healing-bard  (who maxed out his healing abilities and was better than your standard  cleric at healing).I'm just saying that I have NEVER seen a  standard party actually ever play, even by DM mandate. If a DM had given  us the example characters we would have simply not played, no question.  So to answer your question.. never broke the rules, never had to. Just  bended it.Again, the  lowest dragon I can play in PF is a CR 6 so.. by that point the wizard  isn't getting taken down. He just flies away and cackles.At  same level as the at wizard? The dragon is CR 6 and has 66 HP, no DR  and a weakness to fire. So, yeah not so much with the "without really  worrying." Really, he seems equally able to be brought down as that  equal level wizard.A Fire Giant is CR 10 and is  size type Large. He is able to step on buildings as much as I am. His  punches don't do fire damage. It is the difference between a guy in a  jeep vs a guy with a flamethrower. Oh except that guy with a  flamethrower is level 11, has access to 6th level spells.Option of attacking, not  necessarily killing. And that is if you are "forced" to deal with  people. The only people I would force the giant to deal with are party  members and if he can't deal with them then he can't really be a PC.Actually no. When you consider than dragons are colour coded and that by  the time you hit CR 14 you aren't targeting AC anymore; the natural  armor does basically nothing. The first wizard you come across is going  to have a chance to kill you. Any well prepared party you come across  will have a certainty of killing you.The other abilities they  get are mostly useless against a level 15 party. Some might have  strategic value but that's about it. Then again, they need those  abilities to try and keep them on par with parties; which they still  really aren't.I can understand that you don't know pathfinder and so part of what you said here isn't correct. I'll explain how.CR  is balancing mechanic for monsters; but it is also used as the primary  way to introduce monsters as PCs. It is also used to define power levels  of PC classes. Any PC class is CR equal to their level-1. So, 15th  level cleric (which has 8th level spells not 7th) is CR 14. They are  then comparable to a CR 14 dragon. At least as far as "you can come in  with either CR 14s at level 15".Right, it is edition specific. But as Pathfinder  is the only edition I'm using for my example. The conclusion of allowing  a monster AS IS with 8 levels lower in abilities seems pretty even to  me.The only time I've had a dragon in my  party was when the dragon was a companion (leadership feat) I had for an  epic level favoured soul. As I keep saying; the assumption of "dragons  are always more gooder than PCs" is a wrong one. If the dragon is  appropriately leveled there is no issue and a low level dragon (CR 6) is  size medium. By the time they are large enough to be .. large.. the  party has other ways of riding around and so no one needs to ride him -  making it a non-factor.Well it isn't up in the air. It is campaign  dependent. If a campaign is set where humans ARE the only people, then  elves are going to be a problem. If elves are normal then aasimars are  exotic. Aasimars are common place angels can be rare. If the world  exists such that a dragon can be in the party in the first place, then  it exists such that the world can accept the dragon in the party. If not  then there should must be a reason why this dragon is there.Either  way, any race (all races) should be cleared with the DM to make sure  they work. I had a game where no one had heard or seen catfolk or  snakefolk. They were from another continent and so when a PC came to me  wanting to play one I had a choice. I could disallow it because it  didn't fit in my game or I could allow and make it so it did. I didn't  have another continent for her to be from UNTIL she came to me wanting  to play it.No, I don't play player driven games.But  in this case, the case of a dragon PC, then it requires a bit more  thought by both the PC and the DM to work out minor things like; how did  they find you, etc. I'm saying it is a really minor thing, it requires  as much effort to say how the dragon got through the doors as it does  for a medium size PC to exist in a small size .. kobold/goblin .. cave.  That also assumes the dragon is significantly larger than the other PCs  and that it can't shapeshift in someways; neither of which would be  overly true in PF's example.Either way the issue of "how do I get inside" seems REALLY minor and not the huge issue you are making it out to be.If you know what  the PCs are running then this becomes a non-issue. You can just allow or  factor in how a (we're assuming huge? size) dragon will fit in.If  you don't know what the PCs are then that might be more of an issue. In  such a case, like if you are just expected to show up without any  communication between the player and DM then I would assume a dragon is  probably not the right fit anyway.Except it is the same scenario  where (in 3e) the party is fighting a golem which is immune to crits  (rendering the rogue inoperable) and magic (rendering the wizard  inoperable). "Live with it" is a correct response in those cases. If  this happens constantly, because the DM isn't willing to make the  adjustments so that every time the dragon can gets screwed DOES get  screwed then that still falls under the "deal with it" response as the  player should have known what he was getting himself in for. If he is a  pure combat tank and posses ZERO interaction ability then he knows this  and "deal with it" should apply. If the DM just decides to arbitrarily  screw him then that is different, and is an issue of the DM .. not the  monster PC. The DM can screw any class/race combo for any reason he  likes - doesn't mean he should.Good  for you. I have no such rule. I advise the PCs against splitting the  party but they still can and will do it for any number of reasons. It  isn't my job to babysit their choices, advice against it perhaps but not  dictate. Sure. Agreed. But  mechanically being able to fly at will might be comparable to teleport.  So, then restrict that ability until the caster would have the teleport  option. (I mean I don't think they're equal but that might be a solution  for you.) Keep in mind, however, that the caster is going to have MANY  other options in addition to teleport/fly that the dragon simply will  not. The dragon is a one trick pony and those are generally poorer  choices than people who have versatility. One dominates Tier 1, the  other is maximum Tier 3. Tier 3 doesn't seem like a problem to me.How  would we know what you are going to allow and what you are going to  disallow? Are we using your standards? Mine? Anyone else's? How about we  just print everything and let individual DMs and games to figure out  what their limit is. Instead of one person on the internet who doesn't  want us to upset his sensibilities and style.Those aren't the same things. I'm not creeping toward it, they are different things entirely.One is saying that if you don't LIKE something you don't have to use it.Another is saying if something is BROKEN then it should not be playable.Don't  confuse them. You might dislike something because it is broken. You  might like something because is broken. Others will contest if something  is broken in the first place. Again, I don't see why you are so special  here as to dictate what should be allowed, made, released/sold, or  otherwise available in my game. That takes one hell of an ego.Cool. Except that rule is (I'm certain) a  houserule. I don't care why it was put into place - though I could  guess. What it means is that you are treating PCs special in the  category of what a character is. If something offends and actively  provokes characters, I don't specify if those characters are PCs or  NPCs. You do and that's cool, but it is not the rules as written.If Jim was constantly and viscerally  offending you. Insulting you with your senses and with his words, then  I'd be surprised if you could stand being in the same room as him, let  alone playing with him.There's those assumptions again.Apparently  you do. The NPCs did it to your friend when he had that character. The  PCs don't do that, and that's cool, but the GAME clearly does. Not  adhering to those rules is NOT using them properly. You might like it  more that way but I don't really care if you do that is not how the game  is written. The game might still be broken (and that brokenness we can  talk about) but it has nothing to do with the overall effectiveness of  the option.No. Stop. Go back and  read those last two posts. Do it now. I'm serious. Go back and read the  part you specifically quoted here (and the last time). I NEVER SAID  NON-NEBULOUS ROLEPLAYING DISADVANTAGES. I said I  thought you could make them (for me) but never said that the  non-nebulous disadvantages are, were, or should be roleplaying ones.I  specifically said twice.. now three times, NOT TO make them nebulous.  If that means non-roleplaying disadvantages then so be it. Three times  to make them non-nebulous. Never, not once, to make them non-nebulous  ROLEPLAYING disadvantages. I quoted myself with your post last time in  my reply just to make sure you could read it and I'm quoting my post  this time too.See directly above.Now I'll move on.You were  being a jerk. If you purposely go looking and take the game breaking  options then you are being a jerk. Your friend was right. You say you  had that discussion with him, did you ever convince him? Rhetorical  question, I don't care if you did as it does not convince me.Options  are good. Toolboxes good. Not everything in them are good. Not everything in them should be allowed. And I'm certain you can break the  game using certain (unforeseen) mixtures of options. That does NOT ever  invalidate the options themselves.By in large the options available  aren't the ones that will electrocute and cut you right off the bat.  They can be made to do that but they don't do that on their own. You  really took the analogy in directions that didn't make sense.Weak monsters are unsatisfying IFF they are different  from the base creature. If there is a weak form of that creature that IS  that creature then I see no problem taking the weaker vs the stronger  version. I think weak forms are unsatisfying when you have to come up  with a special case to make it work. Ie. The weakest dragons are CR 6  when playable; finding one you can play at first level would be  unsatisfying.Otherwise, the CR 6 dragons EXIST IN THE BOOK  ALREADY. They exist as monsters to fight and they take up NO more space  than they would if they were unplayable as PCs.You really shouldn't  have. You should go read the rest as it kind of makes your point better  than what you actually use here. But let me continue.Which is what I said when I said.. Right, except that  that is the point. It works when everyone has the option. If only one  person were to be gestalt then it is broken. If the dragon is a full  grown, adult, size dragon of huge size and everyone else is level 1 then  the game breaks.However, if everyone is allowed the option.  (Ie. If the dragon is CR 14 and all other characters are CR 14.) Then  the problem is elminiated.So, I find your problem to be in the assumption.This is a problem  because no one else had those things. He was a god in a world of men.  If everyone had access to those powers, or if those powers were as good  as anything they did choose then those powers are fine. If he had d12s  for HP, THAC0 of a fighter, spells and all the rest.. of a character 8  levels lower than everyone else I doubt it would have been so much an  issue.Agreed. DnD has never been particularly good at that because of HP inflation but I do agree in principle.However,  the step you are missing is that your world - when the one PC defeated  the village full of guards - didn't make sense. It was both the player's  fault and yours. He made something too powerful and you decided to try  and defeat him by making NO adjustments and then crying fowl. Yes he was  over powerful but he wouldn't have been nearly as over powerful if  others had the same kinds of powers OR if they had the expectation that  such people exist.If the players are the only wizards in the  world - it doesn't matter what kind or what level - then that changes  the game. The world ether needs to make adjustments to make them normal  or needs to be the same where they are VERY extraordinary. You ran with  the second and then complained that he was the only one and should have  been normal.No, you don't have to. You should because they're  going to run into troubles, but you don't have to. Just as you don't  have to make adjustments for the dragon-PC, you should because it will  be less problems when the party enters town, but you don't have to. If  you don't then "live with" the ramifications.Boo hoo. Don't allow the dragon if he is too much work.I  know I'll make the adjustments I need to. I'm already making them as I  have never encountered a "standard" group. Making the adjustments  needed for a centaur taught me how to do it for dragons.I don't remember  exactly. And it was some time ago in the podcast. If you want to go  listening (which I recommend - it is a fun game to listen to) then they  are the strand gamers and doing kingmaker (rpgmp3.com).I do know  that the DM just said that they found the secret doors, he didn't have  them roll. It worked fine. It was probably stupid design to have soo  many secret doors in the first place but that isn't the real point. The  point is that there were soo many and they were necessary to pass, that  the party without the rogue simple did find and pass them. If they  didn't have the rogue then NO adjustment was necessary as the game could  have worked fine - but in that case they would have had a harder time  progressing.If anything, the adjustment made the game work more easily than if the DM hadn't made the VERY minor change.The character had no choice. Correct. I wouldn't  penalize the character for being in my game. Then again I can't really  penalize the character, but I wouldn't want to if I could. No I can  penalize the PLAYER who makes an active choice to make and play that  character.They knew, accepted, and even specifically picked out  the roleplaying penalties and so they should be made to live with those  penalties when they come up in play.Well,  no that's not what I said. I said they were incapable of challenging  the PCs. If they are supposed to and first level warriors isn't going to  do it then for the sake of internal consistency there had better be  stronger or maybe some casters to take them down. Not doing this is a  lacking of DM consistency - no matter what his motive.Then again, I suggest making it so that PCs  never advance to the point that threatens this. I recommend E6 if  playing PF or 3e. In those systems the guards easily be 1-5 and dragons  will NEVER be playable - as established CR 6 - lvl 7 - is the lowest a  dragon can be.However, the PCs WILL (by default) have the  ability to excel FAR behind those limits. Dragons also have that similar  capability. So long as things are balanced I don't see the problem if  they are a dragon or a PC. Again, if flying is a problem for monsters  then it is a problem for PCs and vice-versa.More or less agreed.How  balanced or over powered it is would certainly need testing. At first  glance it looks fine, and I said as much. It is a LA in that you have to  be 11th level before doing anything else. That is how LAs work, it is  LA by a different name. Just as CRs in PF are LAs with a different name.I don't have any specific idea either. I'm sure some form of polymorph or maybe a lesser known magic item could  do it. My point was more along the lines that by the time the dragon is  huge and could carry the whole party around, the whole party has flight  by other means and doesn't need it.And that because you don't like them  that I shouldn't be allow to play them either; as they shouldn't spend  any time on something you disapprove of.Where is that from exactly? Also, 20% of people who do seems large enough to work on it.</blockquote>

Verification