Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6662880" data-attributes="member: 5834">Yes. We all know players that have different attitudes.Players are under no obligation to build characters with the fun of others in mind. They are under no obligation to build characters with balance in mind. Many players often don't want to run the game because they have fun playing and little fun dealing with a DM deals with. Even this thread with all the insulting talk about arbitrary DM's is indicative of this attitude. They don't like the DM having control of the game. They prefer a set of rules that allows them to do what they want within the rules without having to worry about arbitrary DM rulings. They argue over rules they think work a certain way, usually as advantageous to them as possible. I'm sure myself and other DMs could create a nice long list of things we have to deal with from players, just like players could make a nice long list of things they don't like from DMs.I hold not resentment. You are reading that in. I hold more resentment towards lazy game design that misses these problems. I feel like we pay game designers to understand and provide rules free of most of the imbalance problems. Yet they always seem to release a book with some of these problems. I have yet to play an edition of D&D that did not have these problems. Even 4E had some cases where abilities were out of control if run by the RAW. As a DM you have to find them and rewrite them, the player has no obligation to do this. Some players put up resistance to changes to favorite power abilities, even if it is fairly obvious they are making the game nearly impossible to run. Do I resent the player for acting within their nature? No. Players want to build the best character they can.Do I resent game designers for creating problem abilities, getting play reports on these problem abilities, and not fixing them quickly? Yes, I do. Game designers are paid to build an extremely balanced game and make corrections when problems are found. That should include the high level game, otherwise they shouldn't even have made the game go to high levels. It's lazy for game designers to make a game that plays to level 20 or 30 and allow it to be so problematic to run. Could you imagine if they did this in MMORPGs? If they created the game, sold it to you, and it became ridiculously easy for you to defeat their designed world encounters of an appropriate level including elites and world bosses. Would you be happy with your purchase if that were the case?Some of us like to play to high level because we enjoy the characters. Finding that monsters can't withstand player groups at high level is disappointing. It shows the game designers failed to account mathematically for the high level game. They should have taken the time to create high level optimized characters and run them against encounters from the Monster Manual to ensure they are challenging using optimal tactics. So yes, there is some resentment. Not towards players who are doing what human nature impels them to do, but definitely towards game designers for not testing the high level game more thoroughly to provide me with a rule set that works from 1 to 20.</blockquote>

Verification