Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Dahil 03-19-04, 04:50 PM	Last session, our DM told me that he had been considering making a change to our game. The change was that he wanted to restrict access to any spells other than the Players Handbook. We aren’t to look at them, know what they do (no meta-gaming), and can’t prepare or cast them. The reasons he gave are: -Gives DM a set of NPC only spells -DM can hand out new spells as part of treasure -No hassle, since the spells are pre-balanced for him -Easy way to eliminate any spell he feels is overpowered My DM said I could learn new spells by: -Researching them (incurring standard time and money costs) -If he gives them through storyline (such as an NPC teaching me a spell) -Finding scrolls First of all, I want to say that I agree with his reasons. They’re good, valid points. I also like the storyline possibilities of learning new spells. That’s all great. My problem is how the change is actually implemented. Let me run through the specific effects on each party member: -The Rogue: No effect whatsoever. He doesn’t cast spells, and any wands/magic items are going to be DM selected, so no issue there. -The Sorcereress: Quite frankly, the number of known spells is so small that she is only going to want (at most) 1 non-PH spell per spell level. And she is part of a guild that requires her to do a set amount of research each year. In the end, there isn’t going to be any effect on her at all. -The Paladin: A small loss. He does lose some spells, but he really only plans on using a few, and they’re from the PH. Besides, he is already planning on doing research on his own (this is why: Lv 0 Paladin Spells (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=195817)). Overall, he really doesn’t need his spells to be an effective part of the party. It’s going to hamper him a little, but not much. -The Cleric: It hurts, a lot. The main focus of the cleric class is spells; they’re a primary spellcaster. And the cleric spells aren’t as good as the arcane, but they make up for it by knowing their entire spells list. Now even this is being taken away. With the books we play with (Ask if you want a list) I’m losing approximately half my spell list. That hurts, bad. In short, my main problem is that this change essentially ignores everyone else while nerfing my cleric. Now, bear in mind that this is happening to pre-existing characters (at 8th lv). It isn’t really a matter of rule 0, since that is supposed to be before you begin making characters and playing with them. If I had known before I made my character, I could have played something different, or played a cleric anyway (but it still would have been due to my informed choice). Now, however, I’m kind of stuck. Another thing to bear in mind is that the entire party has played (for a long time) with these spells. The sorceress has at least one non-PH spell known, and both the paladin and I have prepared and cast non-PH spells before. So, now to the point of the thread: What’s a player to do? What should i say to my DM (aside what i have already told you)? Just buckle down and suffer? Protest? What? I feel as though there should be a balacing factor. If we take something away from the divine casters, then there should be something given in return. But i have no ideas. Suggestions? __________________ My group uses 3.0, with only a few 3.5 changes (DR namely). I have access to most books, but will take time to look stuff up. Please include page #'s if possible. Our campaign takes place in Faerun. Our Party (In case you need to know) Human Rogue 1/Ranger 1/Paladin 4 (Military Leader and bringer of Longsword death) Elven Sorcereress 6 (Specializing in Boom spells) Elven Rogue 6 (Awesome bowwoman, loves to set off traps) Water Genasi Rogue 1/Cleric 5 (Tries to keep party alive; My character)
SilenceHC 03-19-04, 06:25 PM	Your DM should restrict everything to what's in the players handbook/DMG then. I've considered that myself. No Feats, Prestigue classes, weapons or anything else from anything but the PHB. Should be fine then.
PhaedrusXY 03-19-04, 06:45 PM	Is he only restricting access to spells from outside books? Or is he restricting access to feats, Prestige Classes, and the rest also? Personally, I don't think it's a huge deal. Clerics are already arguably the most powerful class in the game, so they can afford the loss. And it's not like you can use all those spells every day. You're just losing a bit of versatility, really. The thing that will be kind of... odd is exactly how is he going to introduce new spells for the divine casters? The wizard and sorcerer have a way to gain spells from outside sources via spell research. But can clerics and other divine casters do the same? I always thought it was kind of a strange idea for divine casters to be researching new spells, since supposedly they know all the spells from their entire list.
da chicken 03-19-04, 06:45 PM	More than that, clerics aren't supposed to automatically know every spell ever printed in any book at any time. If your DM is limiting you to core + what you research, that's fine. I tend to think that's rather what the game assumes. I tend to limit clerics IMC to 1 non-core spell per spell level unless they research it themselves. Alternately, if they can give he a good enough reason for them to know a given spell, they can have it. Clerics and druids have enough benefits without giving them unrestricted access to every conceivable spell. It'd be fine if your assumption that divine magic were worse than arcane were actually true, but that simply isn't the case. The only school of magaic wizards are better at is evocation, which is undoubtedly the most nerfed school in the game. In turn for this "penalty", clerics get access to Conjuration (healing), and get to ignore ASF.
DrWorm 03-19-04, 07:11 PM	I think your DM has a good idea, but is shoosing a rotten time to impliment it. MY players would rebel ourageously if I subbenly yanked spells from them that they had used before. I would be upset if I were in your shoes as well.
Heron_Marked_Blade 03-19-04, 07:53 PM	More info would be appreciated here. What non-Core books are you using? At 8th-level, you only have access to 4th-level spells, and I can't recall too many non-Core cleric spells that are game-breaking (unless you're using 3rd-party sources). I suggest your DM limit the spells from this point forward, letting you keep the non-PHB spells that you have already acquired (unless there are some spells that you haven't used at all so far; yanking those won't affect you). This will mean that you don't have to "rewrite" the storyline so far where you used spells that you no longer have access to. The up-to-4th-level non-Core spells you currently have shouldn't break the game as you go forward. Regarding divine magic, there is very little room for arguing that it's less powerful than arcane magic. Perhaps the direct-damage spells are not as powerful or versatile, but the rest of a cleric's spell list makes up for that, as does the lack of spell failure, as does the ability to wear heavy armor, as does spontaneous casting of cure spells. If anything, this will bring you a little more in line with everyone else; you should be the most powerful and versatile character in your group as it is. I don't think this is such a big deal, personally. The Core cleric spells alone are enough to fit any occasion. And it's not as if you're not going to gain access to those non-Core spells; the DM will include them as treasure, and your deity or your deity's servant might visit you in a dream and "teach" you a new spell. This isn't the big nerf that you think it will be. If you're playing that when you gain a new spell level you IMMEDIATELY know all (Core and non-Core) cleric spells of that level, then you NEED to be nerfed. Do you understand how overpowered that is? Wizards gain two new spells each level, and then have to pay money to purchase/research new spells/scribe them in their spellbooks/etc. Gaining all non-Core spells for free; that's crazy. Your DM is doing the right thing by this, but I don't think he should take away what you already have (unless, as I stated before, they're spells you've never prepared up to this point).
PhaedrusXY 03-19-04, 08:37 PM	da chicken and Heron_Marked_Blade, I understand what you're saying from the standpoint of it being too powerful, but the rules do not agree with you. A cleric may prepare and cast any spell on the cleric spell list, provided that he can cast spells of that level, but he must choose which spells to prepare during his daily meditation.
Heron_Marked_Blade 03-19-04, 09:19 PM	Phaedrus, I understand the rules. Really. But that rule refers to Core material (since it's found in a Core book). While technically any non-core book that is allowed ALSO allows all non-core cleric spells in that book to be added to the cleric's spell list (and therefore be subject to that rule), I'd argue that doing so benefits the cleric MUCH more than any other class, as his spell list basically increases for free, and increases that cleric's power as a result. I'd argue that that may be one of the reasons the DM has decided to keep non-Core spells out of the players' hands. It's really difficult to make a challenging encounter when one of the characters has all the spells he needs to turn that encounter into a cakewalk. There are ways around this, of course, but I agree (as does the player, from his first post) that the DM has good reasons to deny his players unlimited access to all non-Core spells. Remember that this just means the DM has control over which spells they gain, NOT that they will never have access to those spells. Dahil, you might want to take a look at your character in relation to the other characters from a DM's perspective (not as a player who wants to be as powerful/effective as possible). Do you have a spell-solution to everything you face? Are there a couple non-Core spells that make you more powerful than a cleric of equivalent level using only Core spells? Are there some 5th-9th level non-Core spells that might break the game wide open? If so, you might want to make your DM's job a little easier by cooperating with him. And I want to state very clearly that "nerfing" a cleric back to Core-only spells is NOT much of a nerf. Holy cow. If half of your accessible spells are all the cleric spells in the PHB, you're still in very good shape. You're still going to be the most powerful character in the party (compared to a Paladin, Sorceress, and Rogue). You're still incredibly more versatile than the Sorceress, with the appropriate buffs you'll deal as much damage as the Paladin, and can hide and sneak nearly as well as the Rogue can (Invisibility + Fly = insta-scout). With Persistent Spell (I see you play 3.0), you can be all three of those things at once. My advice: go with it. Allow yourself to be challenged.
Castor Troy 03-19-04, 10:01 PM	I have a 24th level cleric that I've played from 1st that has yet to use any spell that isn't in the PHB. While I think you should get ot keep what you've already had and used, this restriction really isn't going to be that much for you. Speaking from direct experience Cause I'm Castor Troy.
Nom 03-19-04, 11:53 PM	Heck, as DM I reserve the right to inform any spellcaster that "sorry, that spell is unavailable (insert reason)". In rare situations, I might even take away a previously available spell from a Cleric if he peeved his diety enough. Retrospective removal is a little trickier. "Uh, your deity forgot that spell" isn't totally believable.
Dahil 03-20-04, 01:14 AM	Silence HC, To answer your question, no, our DM is not restricting access to anything else. We can still take feats and prestige classes from other books. Just not spells. As to which books we are using here's a list: -Player's Handbook (2 3.0 editions, 1 3.5 version) -DM's Guide (DM-Only, 1 of each edition) -Numerous Monster Manuals (DM-only) -Sword and Fist -Tome and Blood -Song and Silence -Masters of the Wild -Defenders of the Faith -Savage Species -Draconomicon -Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting -Magic of Faerun -Complete Warrior Several people commented on the power level of the clerics. In our group, my character ranks in at 3rd strongest (second weakest). And thanks only because the rogue (the weakest) is still learning how to play. The simple fact is that in our games, my cleric is far down on the power scale. Our DM tends to throw very powerful enemies our way in combat. In fact, most of the time i am struggling to keep everyone alive. (Last game, i barely kept the NPC sorcerer alive, and only then by rolling an 8-7-8 on my three highest cure spells! Stupid npc wouldn't move out of the hill giant's reach!) Most games, I don't have time to be doing anything in combat except saving the people that are at -7 hp and dying. I don't think i rolled for damage in the past two games. (I understand that clerics can be powerful, and i'm not arguing that they aren't. Simply that they aren't in our campaign.) Perhaps the best way to say it is this: Take away the spells from a cleric (since they are all for the party good anyway, and 90% go for cures) and what do you have left? Medium base attack, armor, simple weapons, and turn undead (which we almost never run into, except in desecrated-impossible-to-turn areas). (And to forestall comments, yes, i know how to play an effective cleric. I know to buff, cast bless, ect. I don't try to "waste" all my spells on cures, but with what we get thrown into, and how i'm effectively the only healer, it just ends up that way.) PhaedrusXY, Yes, it's the loss of versility is exactly what i meant. Thank you for stating it clearly. By the way, clerics have always had the ability to research new spells. Look under "New Divine Spells" in the 3.0 Player's Handbook, page 156. Da Chicken, I agree that my opinion of arcane being better is an assumption (i learned it from experience, however). However, let's not get into a debate/flame war about that. If you want, i'll try to make a list of why i think that, but maybe it would be better to email that, so as to avoid flaming or sidetracking the thread. Dr Worm, You hit it dead on: Good idea, rotten time to implement it. Heron Marked Blade, You are right, it's not a huge nerf. I understand that, and i tried to communicate that earlier, but i may not have succeeded. My problem is not that it's a big nerf, but that it's a very targeted nerf. If my DM said "Dahil, you're too powerful, i think we need to take you down a notch." Then that's different, i could live with that. But my character isn't very powerful, and this was presented as a change not to nerf me, but to give the DM more options. Yet it really only harms one player. That's more what bothers me. Does that make sense? Originally posted by Heron_Marked_Blade If you're playing that when you gain a new spell level you IMMEDIATELY know all (Core and non-Core) cleric spells of that level, then you NEED to be nerfed. Do you understand how overpowered that is? Wizards gain two new spells each level, and then have to pay money to purchase/research new spells/scribe them in their spellbooks/etc. Gaining all non-Core spells for free; that's crazy. I really don't think it's that crazy. The player's handbook is quite clear. Divine casters may prepare and cast any spell on their spell list (PH 31). Now, to be fair, i may not be on the exact same page as you. You specifically say "all non-Core spells for free" and i'm not 100% sure what that means. Are you refering to books like the ones i listed above, or to stuff like 3rd party books? The way our group used to play was that we got access to the spells in those books listed above, and only those books. So far, it has seemed to be far from overpowering. PhaedrusXY, Thanks. It's a critical point, and i really hate posting quotes. Heron Marked Blade's Second Post, Yes, you have a good point. Adding new spells from new books that way does benefit clerics and druids more than any other (as well as paladins, and rangers of course). Alright, i have taken a look at my character from a DM perspective. No, i don't have a spell-solution to every problem. (We generally have to solve a problem that day, not rest and switch spells.) Even so, clerics usually don't have that 'it's-the-perfect-spell-for-the-occasion'. As to the question: "Are there a couple non-Core spells that make you more powerful than a cleric of equivalent level using only Core spells?" I'd have to say no. I really haven't cast more than a small handful of non-PH spells (maybe 2-4?). As to buffing to be more powerful than the other players, it's not gonna happen. We play as a team, cooperatively. If i spent the magic to buff myself like you are saying (yes i know how to) then the loss of magic would be the death of someone. Honestly, most of the time i am stretched to my magical breaking point just trying to keep everyone alive. As to the Persistent Spell, i highly doubt it. Belive me, I would love to get my hands on one of those metamagic rods. (No feats to spare) But i highly, highly doubt that my DM will allow them in the game. They're probably "too powerful." And yes, i do let myself be challenged. I enjoy it, it's part of the fun. (You probably remember the Lv 7 vs. Greatwyrm post. Trust me, we're challenged). Castor Troy, Yep. I know it's possible. Congrats by the way. Still, it doesn't change the fact that one, it's a rotten time to decide this, and two, i've already gotten use to having a bit of variety. Nom, Nope, haven't annoyed my deity yet (either one ;). Yes, i have a lot of backstory to explain why i have two.) To all/In general, I want to say thank you for replying, it is deeply appreciated. I'm still not sure what to say when i talk with my DM. (I told him i'd think the change over and get back to him). At the very least, it's been nice to vent some frustration. Though i don't think this thread is done yet. So, please post, and i'll try to get back to you. P.s. One of the reasons i'm frustrated is that this is merely the latest in a list of nerfs and changes (most of which hurt the paladin and myself. DM has a soft spot for rogues, he used to play one; and the sorceress, well, let's not go there).
PhaedrusXY 03-20-04, 02:02 AM	(Last game, i barely kept the NPC sorcerer alive, and only then by rolling an 8-7-8 on my three highest cure spells! Stupid npc wouldn't move out of the hill giant's reach!) Then let the moron die. He sounds like a detriment to the party, anyway, if he's too stupid to get out of harm's way. It sounds like to me that you're frustrated with being the healing battery. Take the Brew Potion feat and give them potions, or tell them to buy some. Tell them you are tired of doing nothing but healing damage that they could have avoided anyway, if they'd been fighting smarter. Tell them to get a cohort cleric or druid to help take some of your burden, or get one yourself.
da chicken 03-20-04, 09:49 AM	Originally posted by PhaedrusXY da chicken and Heron_Marked_Blade, I understand what you're saying from the standpoint of it being too powerful, but the rules do not agree with you. The rules say you can prepare whatever is on your list, but they say nothing about what is and isn't on the list (beyond the spells listed in the PH). It's more than reasonable for a DM to deny spells from non-Core sources, or to require research (or some equiavlent) to gain access to thrid party spells.
Heron_Marked_Blade 03-20-04, 10:33 AM	Thanks for the clarification, Dahil. It seems things are more complicated than I assumed. I've been in your situation before (healing monkey) and hated it. Perhaps you'd have more fun and feel less targetted by this change if your party played as though they didn't have a cleric. It seems they need to get a better understanding of tactics (i.e. NPC sorcerer staying within reach of a hill giant??? He deserves to die) and/or purchase healing potions, which would then free you up to actually do something for a change. I suggest you let them know that your deity has warned you to stop wasting the power he gives you on fools. Characters taking risks for an important cause is good, but taking risks because you "know" you have a cleric running around healing you if your risk results in damage devalues the cleric and the gaming experience. Incidentally, by "non-Core" I meant anything not in the PHB, DMG, or MM. Splatbooks, while published by Wizards, are still considered non-Core. Anyway, I suggest talking to your DM about it. If it isn't making you overpowered (point out how you're kept so busy healing you can't cast most of the spells anyway), there's no reason he shouldn't allow you to have the cleric spells from those other books. Particularly as you don't/can't research new spells. Hope things work out for you.
Dahil 03-20-04, 02:49 PM	PhaedrusXY, *laughs, slightly ironically* Yeah, i'd considered letting the NPC sorcerer die, i really did. Unfortunately it's not that simple. Our party is on the run from a very big and powerful white dragon (See Lv 7 vs. Great Wyrm posts). If we can't get back to the town soon, it'll be healed up enough to hunt us down. And there's no way we'll be able to do anything about it (TPK). That NPC sorcerer is our contact with the military outpost to get horses, and the ship back to town. We need him. Plus, he's much higher in level than the party. And the critters around our area are very strong. If he dies, there is a very real possibility that we'll hit a random encounter that kills us. (We've already lost 2 druid scouts, and our NPC very high level wizard). We need his firepower. In short, i can't let him die; not if i can possibly help it. Oh, the DM likes him too. As to the potion thing, well *sad chuckle* that doesn't work out well either. (I like my DM, i really do. And i'm not trying to pick on him, which is why i didn't bring this up earlier.) You see, my DM screwed up on magic items. We're handling almost all of them wrong (from what i can gather off the board and website). Yet i can't call him on it, because of the house rule that the DMG is DM only. The way he says potions work is like this: Cure Lt Wounds: 1d8 Cure Mod Wounds: 2d8 etc. Notice that it isn't 1d8 +1. All a potion cures is the d8s. A Cure Crit potion cures 4d8 +0! Which means that potions don't really do a lot compared to the spells i can cast. Also, with the amount of healing i do, i would rapidly drop behind in level with the XP costs if i was making that many potions. Da Chicken, Yes, it is reasonable. No arguements there. Heron Marked Blade, Wow. My opinion of you went up a notch. Most people wouldn't say that they assumed wrong. *Tilts head in respect*. Perhaps you'd have more fun and feel less targetted by this change if your party played as though they didn't have a cleric. It seems they need to get a better understanding of tactics (i.e. NPC sorcerer staying within reach of a hill giant??? He deserves to die) and/or purchase healing potions, which would then free you up to actually do something for a change. I suggest you let them know that your deity has warned you to stop wasting the power he gives you on fools. You have a very intriging idea. I need to think it over, but yeah, that's a very good idea. Thank you. A large part of it is that i'm supposed to be curing people because it's "for the party's good," much as the same way that we don't pay the sorceress to fireball things because it also is for the party good. Hmmm. You have a point though, it does devalue the cleric. *Thinks* I need to know how to say that to the group, but i think you have some very good points. Thanks for the core/non-core clarification as well.
Teron Gorefiend 03-20-04, 03:43 PM	Honestly, clerics and druids are overpowered even when nothing but core material is considered. Giving them additional spells for free is just crazy (even wizards have to pay for their spells, which imposes a soft limit, and sorcerers have a hard limit on spells known). To put it simply, you've been spoiled because your DM allowed it in the first place.
Nick Soapdish 03-20-04, 10:35 PM	It sounds like a lot of the problem is the play-style. First, buy the potions. It's not cost-effective, but everyone in the party will pay equally. (Actually, the experience shouldn't be that great of a loss anyway. You just have the party members use the potions during combat and heal up with your left over spells afterwards.) And yeah, getting the caster levels re-introduced to the potions would be great. And somebody get that sorcerer a headband of intellect or amulet of wisdom or both. Sorcerers should not be in melee (except for certain specialized builds) and particularly not with hill giants. (And hey, if the DM likes him, maybe he won't kill him off the next time that he has him act like an idiot.)
Starcrossed 03-22-04, 10:32 PM	If I was going to take those things away from a campaign that I DM'd in I would allow a cleric/caster to use whatever spells that they have already used as if it was already researched or gained as treasure. However if they didn't use any of the levels that they could cast, and I change it, well thats just tough for them. I do allow any WoTC books with the player only simply needing to ask me before "taking it". Any other source I have to approve the source first , then the spell. Some companies non-WOTC I allow. Some I don't like most things by.
danielinthewolvesden 03-23-04, 05:42 PM	Originally posted by Dahil Silence HC, To answer your question, no, our DM is not restricting access to anything else. We can still take feats and prestige classes from other books. Just not spells. As to which books we are using here's a list: -Player's Handbook (2 3.0 editions, 1 3.5 version) -DM's Guide (DM-Only, 1 of each edition) -Numerous Monster Manuals (DM-only) -Sword and Fist -Tome and Blood -Song and Silence -Masters of the Wild -Defenders of the Faith -Savage Species -Draconomicon -Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting -Magic of Faerun -Complete Warrior I see the problem, and I'd say your DM is right. The "Splatbooks" and SS are 3.0 and the spells from those books don't mesh well (and in many case are broken & munchkin) with 3.5. A cleric is already one of the most powerful characters in the game. The fact he automatically gains access (according to some) to every single new spell in every single new source makes him crazy powerful. Like you said- new spells don't change a Sorc much- but they boost a Cleric a LOT. And, yes, you can talk to the DM OOC about what the potions do- why not? Even if the DMG is "off limits' (and that's a stupid rule) you have a brain, you can use it, you read this [], you have played in other games, etc. But yes, you can let the Sorc die. Yes, that could mean a TPK. So? Next group of characters will have a player that now has learned how to run a Sorc better. :b:
Nick Soapdish 03-23-04, 11:14 PM	Originally posted by danielinthewolvesden But yes, you can let the Sorc die. Yes, that could mean a TPK. So? Next group of characters will have a player that now has learned how to run a Sorc better. :b: It's an NPC. So the DM is the moron in question. Depending on how paranoid I was feeling at the time, I'd suspect the DM of using the sorcerer to cripple the party.
Steelwill 03-24-04, 04:42 AM	I have read most of the posts in the thread and did not see any advice on what to say to your DM concerning this matter. This is what I would like to address. Considering that he is instituting this change mid stride with level 7/8 characters, I think it would be fair to go into detail about your concerns with this change and how they affect your character. Then if some mutually acceptable compromise is achoeved, great, if not, I would seriously request the option of creating a new character with a different, less affected, class, and ask that you bump the new character up to the average party level. I beleive this would be the only fair solution since you had a significant game rule change thrust upon your character, and from your perspective, the change harms your character more so than any other player's. However, on a different note, you have mentioned in more than one post on this thread that your magical means are almost entirely expended healing and buffing your party in this campaign, so the question that seems logical to ask is does this new change hinder your ability to continue healing and bufing the party to keep them alive? If the answer is no, then why bemoan a thoeretical loss of spell variety? I say theoretical because by your own admission you burn all your magic on healing and buffing anyway. Just pointing out that this seems paradoxical, since heals and buffs are for the most part core, and covered by a relatively small variety of spells(the cure line, heal, buffs). Anyway, that's my 2 cents, hope it helps.
Gnarl 03-24-04, 05:31 AM	The rules do say a cleric knows every spell on the cleric spell list but they don't say from what material, so you can't get your DM on that point. Furthermore, I remember reading something about divine spell casters learning all those spells during their study and that they could conduct spell research. So technically, if you want some spells outside the player's handbook, you might as well research it yourself. Furthermore, if an NPC cleric casts a spell you don't know, then it's that somewhere, in one of his deity's temple, a book contains those obscure secret spells. Retrieving them would make a fun quest. Another option would be to argue, even though I'm not sure it's gona get you anywhere.
Joe Khol 03-24-04, 06:12 AM	I would suggest a good compromise would be to suggest the DM lets you keep any non-core spells you've already used and limit them from there. It still gives him the control over the spell lists he apparently wants but reduces the impact on your cleric (logically and mechanically). I don't think you're being hit all that hard though. It's more that an open-ended spell list from whatever splat books you're using being such a big benefit that is the real issue.
Beamup 03-24-04, 10:27 AM	It would have been better had the DM stated this ahead of time so you could consider it during character creation. However, I don't think it's terribly unreasonable. Especially given your description of how your Cleric spends his time - if those prepared spells are all going to end up spontaneous cures anyway, it doesn't make as much difference as if you were tossing a cure every so often, and mostly other spells.
danielinthewolvesden 03-24-04, 02:20 PM	Originally posted by Nick Soapdish It's an NPC. So the DM is the moron in question. Depending on how paranoid I was feeling at the time, I'd suspect the DM of using the sorcerer to cripple the party. Oh Gods above& below!!! Not a DMPC?!?:b: :eek: :nonono: :headexplo No wonder you're here. First, look for another game. Next, ask the DM to stop running a DMPC. I take it back- your DM is utterly & completely wrong, WRONG, WRONG!!! :rant:
Darth K'Trava 03-24-04, 07:23 PM	As to which books we are using here's a list: -Player's Handbook (2 3.0 editions, 1 3.5 version) -DM's Guide (DM-Only, 1 of each edition) -Numerous Monster Manuals (DM-only) -Sword and Fist -Tome and Blood -Song and Silence -Masters of the Wild -Defenders of the Faith -Savage Species -Draconomicon -Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting -Magic of Faerun -Complete Warrior If you're STILL using these now, it's one helluva list!! :OMG! We use all those books in our games plus Exalted Deeds which has cleric spells in there (in addition to sanctified spells) We don't use any other books for spell lists nor do we use spells submitted on these boards for review/use... If the DM has it, we can use it (one DM owns EVERY SINGLE BOOK out there D&D-wise)
Darth K'Trava 03-24-04, 07:34 PM	Originally posted by danielinthewolvesden Oh Gods above& below!!! Not a DMPC?!?:b: :eek: :nonono: :headexplo No wonder you're here. First, look for another game. Next, ask the DM to stop running a DMPC. I take it back- your DM is utterly & completely wrong, WRONG, WRONG!!! :rant: DM PCs are annoying, especially if they're the ones to pull your collective asses out of the fire. Hate to tell him but he needs to remove the sorcerer he's put into the party. Making him higher level than the party itself is just plain wrong. If he won't, maybe you guys should start your own game without him.
Raging Halfling 03-25-04, 03:00 AM	I don't mean to trash on your DM, since you seem to be content with playing in his game. But, you seriously need to talk to him. Not only about the mid-game character nerf he instituted, which sounds like it is actually a small issue, but about things like reasonable challenges and not giving you a DMPC who acts more like an anchor than an intelligent piece of help. Honestly, if he's having you be chased down by a Great Wyrm white dragon, either the players messed up in a truly amazing way, or he's a sadist on a power trip. I DM myself sometimes, and I don't hesitate to challenge my players, but if nearly every combat risks a TPK, he's going a bit too far. Ask him to treat his NPCs as intelligent help, not as annoying problems to put up with. That's not just railroading, it's finding creative ways to irritate your players. I would strongly consider changing DMs, from what you've said. Of course, this is just my opinion. I don't play your game, so I could be wrong. But your DM sounds like a bad one to me.