Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6284049" data-attributes="member: 4937">Balance of spotlight is always an issue, and I do coach players away from very limited skill monkey concepts that will tend to only shine in narrow situations - particularly if they aren't the party 'Diplomancer'.  However, I don't think this problem applies to straight sorcerer or straight wizard characters even if they are deliberately being sub-optimal in spell selection particularly if they have a blaster focus where they can at least do something in combat.Well, that's a crude way to put it, but yes, I do know that Hussar has absolutely zero trust in DM impartiality.  His every position is dominated by the belief that the DM is just out to screw him.  How he's stayed in RPGs this long I've never quite understood, since he's pretty open about his overall disatisfaction with his play experience until quite recently.  But your characterization is an over simplification of both of our positions on mechanics.  Hussar is a staunch believer in RAW, but only as it enhances player agency.  On an issue like recruiting NPCs, Hussar pretty much believes that the correct approach to, "I want to recruit a squire.", is to not to turn that into an adventure or side quest or to site lack of rules support for a 1st level character acquiring a cohort, but for the DM to pretty much say, "Ok, quickly sketch out the character you want as a squire so that we can get on with what's important."   In other words, Hussars position is the rules are there to empower the players, but whenever the rules interfere with the player getting what they want, the DM has rule zero to override the rules so that player can get what he wants.  Hussar's position on the Leadership feat is inconsistant with his past positions on hirelings, retainers, etc.Oddly though, what I just attributed to Hussar is not that different than my own position.  Where we really disagree is over that idea of "what the player wants".  Hussar approaches that from the position of immediatecy - right now the player wants a squire, to find the ancient tomb, to get a +5 sword, therefore give it to him.  The reason Hussar is in this thread is because he very much is a 'here and now' type player.  I approach it from a more meta level, the player's desire is for an engaging story, to get a sense of accomplishment by overcoming challenges, to develop and explore the character he's chosen to play, etc.  I'm more of a 'enjoy the journey so that the story can develop momentum' advocate.  Pacing is a huge argument between us.  Hussar thinks I infinitely delay getting payoffs.  I think Hussar disatisfaction with play is directly related to his never actually waiting to recieve them. That's a whole other thread, and I think it only loosely related to both the thread at the roots of Hussar and my disagreements.We don't that much disagree.  Spellcasters are explicitly allowed to theme there spells in any way that makes sense to the story provided it doesn't alter the mechanics.  So a pyromancer that knew scare could theme his narration by saying he emolated and blew out a stream of smoke and sparks, provided that the mechical resolution of his narration was RAW (all the special effects don't matter).  A pyromancer that wants to color his magic missiles as flaming darts may do so, provided they don't mechanically change.   For mechanical changes, I'm pretty open to players creating new spells provided I get final say over the implementation and level, and I explicitly allow spell research and allow collecting books that speed magical research to the point that it can be fit into a campaign story without interrupting it.   Otherwise, you've several options for 0th and 1st level fire spells in my RAW - flame dart, fire slap, minute meteors, affect normal fires, endure elements and burning hands come to mind immediately.  Combined with the Elementalist feat, that will ensure your a relatively powerful blaster.  If you need more variaty and you are a Wizard, it's recommended you pick up Elemental Substitution, so that you can cast say Elementally Substituted Fire Shocking Grasp or latter on Elementally Substituted Fire Cone of Cold.None of that is particularly far from what you are capable of RAW.  I think some tables force players to pick up a feat if they want to style their spells, but I consider it fairly stupid to charge players feats for flavor only considering they only get a few feats.Well, I've anticipated that, and this is why a) there is no such thing as fire immunity in my game.  Even fire elementals can be burned, though admittedly, you have to be pretty epic to do it.   And, b) there is an Elemental Penetration feat that halves the fire resistance of all your targets.   So, hit the fire elemental with a maximized empowered fireball while you have Elemental Penetration (Fire), and teach it the real meaning of Hot.  "Your intimidation appears to be successful.  The Elder Fire Elemental tremples in fear, a mouth like a blast furnace opens and with a voice like the cracking of trees in a forest fire it says, "Mercy.  Dreadful Master, wielder of the heart flame, do not be angry with us, we are but a faltering torch.  Command us.  Teach us.  Show us how to burn as you do!!"  Blaster type mages as really easy to support and balance IMO, because there impact on play is fairly predictable.  And if you can't tell, I'm really big on PC's having influence.  NPC's aren't there just to sacrifice themselves futilely on the PC's XP point alter.  If they figure out they are outclassed, they don't necessarily fight to the death.  Then again, I give XP for talking your way through problems, something you seem to characterize as, "DM may I?"</blockquote>

Verification