Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Paradisio 08-22-05, 10:56 PM	It seems I am still in the same party from the previous thread... for now at least. The DM finally got the problem player off my back. Anyways, I was wondering, do you guys have any experience with DMs who just hate a specific book you want to use. First it was psionics, but I finally got him not to say they weren't broken/impossible to use in a regular campaign... but he still refuses to use it. Now its Libris Mortis, my favorite book, and I am a bit confuddled why he doesn't like it, considering he said he loved playing evil clerics. The party is mostly evil, so it would fit in the theme of things, so that isn't the problem. He says the book is badly written because some monsters don't have a description the DM can read to the players and the feat that lets you heal with negative energy is apparently horribly broken because a party could use mass inflict. Not to mention the feat doesn't tell why you channel negative energy or have any prerequisites aside from evil. Flipping through the monster entries, almost every monster has a good picture and a very well placed description of the monster and a section of flavor text. Nixing the monster section rant. Now onto the feat, tomb-tainted soul... Ok it doesn't give justification, but neither do a lot of feats the vastly change you. Obscure lore apparently drives about 1000 books worth or misc crud into your brain when you take it, I don't see what the deal is. There are plenty of other feats that have much more tactical abuses, which don't require the entire party taking the same feat (which would never happen from my experience.) Anyone else have any ideas for my argument?
Jaime_Wolf 08-22-05, 11:52 PM	Have you pointed out to him that a party could just use mass HEAL <degree of> wounds? They're exactly the same thing. The ONLY advantage you would get is that you could theoretically use it to harm enemies and heal yourself at the same time. Congratulations, inflict deals/heals 3d8 points of damage+1 per caster level (max +15). Wow, you've ALL had to waste a feat to use a spell that will deal 28.5 (on average) points of damage as a 15th level caster, using up a 7th level spell slot, that's the BEST you can possibly get from it. Sure you can hurt a lot of people and heal yourself a small amount of the same time, but seriously, that's a pitiful amount of damage to be complaining about when everyone in the party had to give up a feat and the spellcaster had to give up a 7th level slot to do. I'm almost sure that most people in the party could find a much better feat choice. Edit: Ah, as for the feat changing you, I think you've got that one. I don't think I've ever seen a feat that explains why you can do something supernatural. It could be assumed that you are embracing evil (negative energy is inherently evil, remember, not morally, inherently)and have built up more than an immunity, but an affinity for it (like an assassin building resistance to poisons, but taken one step further).
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 08-23-05, 12:11 AM	[QUOTE]Anyways, I was wondering, do you guys have any experience with DMs who just hate a specific book you want to use. Lend it to him. Let him read it at his leisure. Then, test the PC you want to use. It can be a solo quest, adding a one-shot PC to the session, whatever. He'll be able to see how it really work and judge balance for himself. Even better, add it in a campain where he's a player. Seeing it from a player's perspective will often do wonder for your arguments... First it was psionics, but I finally got him not to say they weren't broken/impossible to use in a regular campaign... but he still refuses to use it. I consider psi to be a special case... Not all worlds can accomodate them. It would stretch my game world's theme too far for me to even consider adding them (except as very rare mysterious NPCs). Now its Libris Mortis, my favorite book, and I am a bit confuddled why he doesn't like it, considering he said he loved playing evil clerics. The party is mostly evil, so it would fit in the theme of things, so that isn't the problem. He says the book is badly written because some monsters don't have a description the DM can read to the players and the feat that lets you heal with negative energy is apparently horribly broken because a party could use mass inflict. Not to mention the feat doesn't tell why you channel negative energy or have any prerequisites aside from evil. Now onto the feat, tomb-tainted soul... Ok it doesn't give justification, but neither do a lot of feats the vastly change you. Obscure lore apparently drives about 1000 books worth or misc crud into your brain when you take it, I don't see what the deal is. There are plenty of other feats that have much more tactical abuses, which don't require the entire party taking the same feat (which would never happen from my experience.) Anyone else have any ideas for my argument? Best one I can think off: Go to him and tell him You'd like to use this book, but you understand that he's not very familiar with it and has legitimate doubts. Ask him if he'd let you use it with everything he think overpowered removed. Your DM is probably gonna be much more willing to introduce it if he can remove what he don't like. Even tell him it's a 2-3 session test. At the end of this test, you and him are gonna get togheter and evaluate what should go and what should stay. If he truly feel something's not OK, it's gone. That way, you compromise, showing you are willing to see his way. You do it gradually. After a few games using the educolored version, plead your case again, asking for a review. Eventualy, you'll be able to use the whole book. The thing is, being a DM's a lot of work. You have a lot of things to oversee, to prepare and to execute simultaneously. If a player want to use an unknown book, you'll want to check it first to see if it mesh with your world and your play style. If you think something is going to be problematic, why include it in your game? Why add another problem to worry about? Now, if a player ask for an unknown (and therefore, bad) thing while explicitly stating you can ban what you want and he won't complain, you're going to be more enclined to say yes. The player is addressing your fears in his demand. He doesn't want his way or the highway, he offer a compromise from the get go. Beside, he's the supreme authority on what is and is not accepted. Even if the whole group agree with you, if he won't budge, your only option are accepting or quitting the game. In my area, there are a lot more players than DMs. DMs seeking players don't wait long.
skywyze 08-23-05, 12:17 AM	I think your DM is weak-minded and insecure. I mean, consider that every single thing that you wish to do has to be cleared with him while those who just take his acceptance for granted (such as the problem player from the last thread) get away with it every time. I think he's just afraid that you'll boss him around. I.e. if he gives you the pinky finger, you might grab the whole proverbial arm. That sort of thing. But the sheer fact that there have been a handful of threads and hundreds upon hundreds of posts arguing back and forth about whether psionics are broken or not means that your DM is fully justified in his own opinion about it. Any DM should be free to disallow it if they think it's broken. And quite frankly, he's not alone. However, the Libris Mortis thing was just overly dumb, unless you left something out. I didn't see a single good reason in there anywhere. If he IS afraid of being a pushover, all you have to do is show him that you're a cool guy, and that he has nothing to fear from you. That you're on his side and that you want to make his campaign better. As he gradually begins to trust you, and you demonstrate that his trust is well earned, eventually you should be afforded at least SOME creative freedom in his campaign. And you will both be able to enjoy the game more as a result. As a nice perk, you might make a new friend. I personally would just run for the hills and never come back, considering your previous thread about this group.
Bringslite 08-23-05, 12:21 AM	I can't tell you how to get your DM to go with your PC concept but I can tell you some reasons why he may be disallowing/fighting it. Note: By the term "New Books" I mean skills, spells, PRCs, classes, races, rule variants, etc.... New books mean more combos to the already endless PC and NPC possibilities already there. In order to be challenging a DM has to try to keep up with all that the PCs do and make his NPCs able to cope with and surprise the PCs occasionally. That is alot of work, especialy for a DM that has his NPCs already planned out or even (gasp) prepared. New books come out, what, every month? Good campaigns last for years. Ever try, yourself, to keep up with that pace in a campaign? If you did you would likely find that your carefully constructed universe has become a carnival of new thrills every month. Books with new options are coming out faster than a good campaign can integrate and stay believable. New books often have many new great things to add to your campaign. They also bring out alot of controversy over what is "broken" from these new rules. Nothing, besides too much wealth, destroys a campaign faster than "broken" rules from new books. I'm not saying that your ideas are broken but your DM could be afraid they are. New books should be eased into a DM's pot slowly, a book or two a campaign. I know this seems slow but give the guy a break. :)
Paradisio 08-23-05, 12:35 AM	He wings the entire campaign, there is nothing to ease in. He makes up everything, on the spot with the exception of continental maps which just have cities on them. I know this as such. I don't even care about feats or classes or even equipment... The fact is, he won't let me use any of them. Example: There is a cool weapon in the arms and equipment guide, but he doesn't like the book.... I can't get anything the book has in it, not a single item. He is that unwavering. What is wrong with being a Flexible DM? I am beginning to thing he is being paranoid. I keep up with the pace fine in my campaign, I roll with the punches and learn from them as the players use them. I also know what my PCs can do ahead of time. It's not like I can min/max against him, since his railroading is pretty severe most of the time.
Brashnir 08-23-05, 01:13 AM	Allowing you to use your book has nothing to do with being open or close minded. It's his game, he decides the rules, not you, the player. Just because you do it in your campaign doesn't mean he should do it in his. After seeing two complaining posts about your group in as many weeks here, I've come to the conclusion that the problem with your group is you. You don't like it and yet you won't leave. Grow a pair and deal with your problems yourself.
Paradisio 08-23-05, 01:26 AM	I made this post before I brought it up to him again to see if I am in the wrong on this one, and I felt I might be. That is no reason to flame me. I just felt his inflexibility and falsities about some books needed to be brought up, I didn't even want to use the book. Basically if I quit, I lose players in my campaign, I lose the only campaign I can play in, and I lose friends. How did I make another player PK me 10 times on brand new characters? How did I force the DM to curse the players when they were killing each other and I wasn't? I don't see how I am the instigator in these or many of the other problems I have posted about and tried to resolve. Also I could have sworn the name of the forum was "What's a player to do?"
Kalanth 08-23-05, 02:36 AM	You could show it to him until he is blue in the face, but there is only one way to actually prove to him that it is not as broke as he claims. Take the time to create an example, show him through use, the more scenarios you have the better. Personally, I am standing next to your DM on this one, because I too hate the Libris Mortis (and yes, I own it). My reasons are far from what your DM is claiming, I hate it because I was just so dissapointed on what they delivered (beind in the 90% that love undead, I had rather high expectations). I am sorry he wont allow psionics into the game either, the XPH is one of the best, most balanced books out there, and is now part of the SRD. Really though, a large number of the problems you mention seem to stem from massive playing style conflicts and being in an evil party (evil always falls in on itself eventually). There may not be much you can do here to save things. I did not read the entire thread, but are you running a game as well, because you could always volunteer to run and open the floor to all supliments (with your approval on the items used), show them all how things could truly work. One last note, evil or not, I would never allow the feat that lets you heal with negative energy unless you were playing a demon or devil (or half-fiend). That is one of the feats that really made me dislike that book.
Paradisio 08-23-05, 02:43 AM	I do run a game with all supplements, just that at one point I would like to use a couple of my books as a player, I just feel I've wasted money by buying books now (I have almost every 3.5 book now). Yes, I realize the DM decides what he does and doesn't allow, but I don't like that some DMs have huge misconceptions about some books.
Xaktsaroth 08-23-05, 03:50 AM	First off, Libris Mortis is my favourite book ever printed, so if I go off on a fan boyish rant, I shall ask for forgivenness now. :P The single EASIEST way to prove to this guy that the book isn't a threat is to let him borrow it and make a few NPC's with it for you guys to face. Hordes of Undead? Toss Cure spells Hordes of People? Toss inflict spells Hordes of People who aren't harm by inflict spells? Toss cure spells. :P(A lot of people forget that Tomb Tainted-Soul makes it so you take damage from cure spells. :P) If THAT doesn't convince him, just get him to chop the stuff he doesn't like out of the book, nobody says you have to use all of it. :P Hope that helps.
Kalanth 08-23-05, 05:49 AM	If THAT doesn't convince him, just get him to chop the stuff he doesn't like out of the book, nobody says you have to use all of it. :P This is where most stubborn DM's get caught, because they don't seem to grasp the concept that it does not need to be used just because its in the book. This particular DM sounds like the kind that wont even bend towards the whims of the player, which can suck the fun out of the game. My next piece of advice is this, talk to him about how you feel about his restricitions. Sure, he might not bend towards this book, or at least during this campaign, but if he is any good as a DM then he alread knows that the number one priority is that ALL players (including the DM) are having fun. If you feel that you have waisted your money because of this restriction, then he should understand that and should adjust acordingly. Key note, I am not saying that you should give him an ultimatum (do this or I walk), but instead try to convince him to change to make the game more entertaining for you, which hopefully brings the balance of fun back to all members.
Phrennzy 08-23-05, 09:47 AM	I hate your DM. My hatred burns with the fury of a thousand suns. I have no advice here. Just thought I'd point out my thousand-sun-fury-hatred.
Akharu 08-23-05, 10:23 AM	I'm a soon to be DM dealing with the issue from the other perspective. I'm wanting to limit books to core, the Complete books and possibly a few others. There are several reasons I have for limiting the books in my campaign. Reason number one is simply that I'm not familiar with every book out there and don't have time to familiarize myself with every obscure detail. Reason two is part of reason one...rules lawyering is already out of control with this group and I don't want to add fuel to the fire. One person bringing in a book that most others are not familiar with is like adding gasoline to the problem. Three, maybe the dm wants to set his world up a certain way...without psionic, templated, or level adjusted characters. Reason four is because six of the seven players I'll be playing with are all for it. I'm sorry, but when all but one player doesn't want to see those things in the campain...I'm going to do it that way. That one person is just going to have to deal with it.
green_yawgmoth 08-23-05, 10:38 AM	(negative energy is inherently evil, remember, not morally, inherently) BAD MONKEY. NO BANANA FOR YOU. Negative energy is 'inherently' nothing. It's as evil as using a fireball. Do you see any alignment subtype on inflict ____ wounds, or Harm? Enervation? Well looky there, you don't! And all of these spells use negative energy. That's because negative energy is not evil. It may suck the life out of you, but that isn't evil. It's just the nature of the stuff. Just like fire burns, acid disolves, and water erodes. Just because the designers decided to stupid things up by making mindless undead evil does not make what runs them evil too. It'd be like saying a steak is evil because the BBEG likes red meat. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
Twisted Puppy 08-23-05, 11:48 AM	It'd be like saying a steak is evil because the BBEG likes red meat. :rofl: Of course, maybe the BBEG is responsible for all those mad cows... I think the issue is the comfort level of the DM with certain books. As others have said, DMing is tough enough. DMing for an evil party is tougher. I say offer to let him look the book over, and see what he thinks. Whatever he does, I don't think you should push it past that.
Gemstone 08-23-05, 12:43 PM	As a pretty harsh DM myself, I can understand why he has a certain "broken" feeling about some books... but I suggest that you sit down togheter and discuss pro's and con's with the feats/stuff you want to use. It can ease up things pretty much.
Paradisio 08-23-05, 01:14 PM	If he told me he wasn't allowing it because it didn't fit the campaign, I would drop the subject immediatly. But he is dropping it because one feat doesn't have flavor text from what he tells me.
Gemstone 08-23-05, 01:49 PM	If he told me he wasn't allowing it because it didn't fit the campaign, I would drop the subject immediatly. But he is dropping it because one feat doesn't have flavor text from what he tells me. Then discuss it with him. Ask him if you can simply drop THAT one feat and take the rest
Laranis Callirr 08-23-05, 03:08 PM	As a DM myself, I can tell you that the more you bother him about allowing the book, the more indisposed he will become towards your plight. It simply gets irritating after a while.
green_yawgmoth 08-23-05, 04:22 PM	As a DM myself, I can tell you that the more you bother him about allowing the book, the more indisposed he will become towards your plight. It simply gets irritating after a while. Because heaven forbid he try to figure out an adaquate compromise. :rolleyes: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
LCD2YOU 08-23-05, 04:31 PM	As a long time DM I have had to nix certain books as a whole from being used in my campaigns. Like more than one other DM has said here, campaigns take time to generate. Now you say that your DM "wings it", well, to a big extent I do too. However, I have the background of the lands documented so I do know who the PCs can run into where ever they end up. If I don't I will give them a "challenge" to slow them down so I can get what and who is where they are going. The problem with many of the new books that come out is "power creep". I have created NPCs just to see how munchkinned I could make them. Many of the new books take things to an extreme that the characters even at 1st level aren't really 1st level. I can create 1st level NPCs that wipe the floor with the core classes. Yet, I'm still amazed on how much more a few people I know can really turn the screw. I have okayed books and supplements with a player telling me this or that only to see it blow up into something truly hideous because the player "didn't see that before" but figured as I allowed the book, it was ok. Yeah, I dealt with it in ways that I'm sure more than a few powergamers and rules lawyers would object to if I did it to them. That's tough. I figure if a player wants a book, class, skill, feat, etc. with no role-playing reason, it is because they want to powwergame or munchkin out somehow. As for my world: I use all the books with restrictions. Only the CORE books can be used at will and have no restrictions. Psionics are for evil, warped, twisted and demented creatures. Mind Flayers are the best you can hope for in "good" in a psionic. They're strange BBEGs. Maybe it's just because I remember psionics from 1978 and how warped they were so I am prejudiced against it, big time. Old memories of psionic ubermen are still fresh in my mind. I use the other books a lot, though there are some restrictions mostly because they don't fit in with my game. One last thing here guy, if a player would come up and ask if I could take a look at a book, I will. If they come up and say, "I want this character", I say, "No". The more they push the less likely I will even consider it. I do this for two reasons: 1: Like I said, if someone wants something so bad with no other reason, I think it's nothing but a way to powergame. 2: I want the player to put stuff in writing first before I let them use their new feat they found, PrC to add or skill to try. It gives me a paper trail to remind the player this, and only this, is what we agreed to try. As for #2, it also makes the player give an IC reason to try something different along with how they can get this power/effect/PrC. Then as it becomes role-playing, it is far easier to grant.
Paradisio 08-23-05, 04:53 PM	I am not arguing with what you say, I don't even want to make a character using it so It isn't about being a munchkin (and the classes in there are pretty weak IMO anyways), I'm just wondering how one feat makes a book unusable?
LCD2YOU 08-23-05, 04:56 PM	Let them have the book for a week. If he is being stubborn ask why.
Paradisio 08-23-05, 05:01 PM	The problem is the DM who taught him how to play hated it too for the same reason, and now he hates it because he hated it.... That is all I can gather. He hates psionics because his DM played with 3.0 psionics.
Traevanon 08-23-05, 09:41 PM	"Power creep" is real. Every new book has to top the last one or else it doesnt sell. Its a DMs job to keep this under control or else the campaign flops. Now, I'm not sure exactly whether this stuff came out of Libris Mortis or out of another off-brand Necrmancy / Vampire / Gothic handbook, but I had to wind up just plain nixing necromancers in general. Level 1 had them running around with a skeleton, Level 3 had them with a Zombie and a Skeleton... both enhanced. By level 7 the person was running around with somewhere around 35hd of undead with powerful semipermanent buffs on. He was in control of the two most powerful members of the party and they werent even him (undead NPCs). So... the result was 11 players sitting around doing nothing and one player rolling for things that werent even his own character. Understandably (I hope) I outlawed the non-WotC books when he agreed to make a new character and got rid of Animate Dead. I wish I didnt have to, but yeesh... 4 times your HD in NPC cohorts? Play your own character!!! So 5 or 6 game sessions were ruined. Thus, the experienced DM does not allow an "anything printed goes" policy, and sometimes this results in some very fair and balanced material being disallowed. I hope you understand.
Laranis Callirr 08-23-05, 10:11 PM	Because heaven forbid he try to figure out an adaquate compromise. :rolleyes: It all depends on the DM, of course. But some people just don't like adding more material than what is presented in the Core books, and the more they are bugged about it, the more frustrated they become.
TheErsatzFacsimileOfMe 08-23-05, 10:33 PM	Really, a puny wizard with 35hd of undead isn't too much to handle...I mean honestly...when that's the BBEG, someone commissions a force to deal with them...duke, king, mayor, whatever. So, I'd say the Church of Pelor would be following that guy around with Rangers, Clerics, Rogues, Justicars, Palladins, Exalted Monks, Exalted Anything else you can think of.... I mean, that's what happens in the good campaigns, right? ;) I agree, I hate your DM. I'm sure there is a way you can work out your problems with him...even if it results with him buried in your basement. :smirk: :rolleyes: .o0( S0o0o0o0o kidding.)
20goingon1232 08-23-05, 10:57 PM	Closed-minded DMs aren't that bad. One that is well versed in hypocracy and railroading, on the other hand: "Mystic Theurge is BROKEN!!!!" "Psionics are BROKEN!!!!" "You can't wield a Greatsword and then use Armour Spikes!" (And then admit 2 sessions later that he has a character that does that in another campaign) "I rolled your Will save vs the Dominate. Twice! I swear it. You just weren't looking! I don't care what your Will save is! I have epic bad guys in my campaign!" (then why the :censored: did you have us roll up level 12 characters??) "No, you can't do this!" "No, you can't do that!" "Your character won't do that!" "I won't accept this character, make a new one" x ad nauseum followed by "No, you cannot bring a level 12 Half-Orc Commoner to the game. I won't make one for you either. Make up a character you'd like to play." (I want that two weeks of my life back...) All of this from the same :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: DM. You know how many people hate Ed Greenwood because of Elminster and a lot of people want to kill Elminster because of the way he is just to darned uber? Well, this DM has got, in EVERY campaign, beautiful young virginal girls that make Elminster look like Karen Carpenter just before she died (for those that don't know, she died of anorexia). I have since refused to play with this guy as the DM and never will again.
Paradisio 08-23-05, 11:32 PM	Ironically, half the things you just said my DM has.
20goingon1232 08-23-05, 11:43 PM	Ironically, half the things you just said my DM has. Run. Like. The. Wind. Now. Seriously. Is it that hard to find another game where you are at? I mean I managed to find 2 games (one of which I am DM-ing) within 2 months and that is in NZ, the pimple on the rear of the world...!
Brashnir 08-23-05, 11:49 PM	How did I make another player PK me 10 times on brand new characters? How did I force the DM to curse the players when they were killing each other and I wasn't? I don't see how I am the instigator in these or many of the other problems I have posted about and tried to resolve. not being the instigator doesn't mean you're not at fault. A battered wife isn't an instigator, but she's still at fault for allowing it to happen if she refuses to leave. And really, that's what you are. You're the battered wife of your gaming group, and yet you still won't leave. The people you're playing with are a-holes, and you're enabling their behavior by returning time after time and putting up with their crap. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. The fact that you even made the third character after being PKed twice shows that your co-dependant nature is the real problem. The fact that you made 8 more... yikes.
Paradisio 08-23-05, 11:51 PM	I am still having fun, regadless of me and having these problems. Trust me, first group I find, I join.
20goingon1232 08-23-05, 11:54 PM	I am still having fun, regadless of me and having these problems. Trust me, first group I find, I join. Start looking. Hard :)
Paradisio 08-24-05, 12:12 AM	not being the instigator doesn't mean you're not at fault. A battered wife isn't an instigator, but she's still at fault for allowing it to happen if she refuses to leave. And really, that's what you are. You're the battered wife of your gaming group, and yet you still won't leave. The people you're playing with are a-holes, and you're enabling their behavior by returning time after time and putting up with their crap. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. The fact that you even made the third character after being PKed twice shows that your co-dependant nature is the real problem. The fact that you made 8 more... yikes. So, if a person gets shot while walking down the street, he is at fault and not the shooter? And, co-dependant? I am not dependant on anyone, the only reason I didn't leave is because I never got to develop any of the characters that were killed, and I followed peoples advice on these same forums telling me to just let him kill me until he got tired of it. Which he did. Now I just have new problems I have to overcome.
20goingon1232 08-24-05, 12:16 AM	So, if a person gets shot while walking down the street, he is at fault and not the shooter? No. If he gets shot, and then walks down it again, knowing he'll get shot and DO get shot, then he is partially at fault.
Paradisio 08-24-05, 12:35 AM	Yes, thats all well and good, but if you don't know your going to get shot then how are you at fault? Or should you just huddle in a corner for the rest of your life? Point being, the group is getting better. No one has been PKed in several months.
20goingon1232 08-24-05, 12:43 AM	Yes, thats all well and good, but if you don't know your going to get shot then how are you at fault? Or should you just huddle in a corner for the rest of your life? Point being, the group is getting better. No one has been PKed in several months. Getting shot walking down the street is an extremely bad analogy for a serious problem. Battered Wives Syndrome is a very, very real psychological problem. It IS akin to people that keep going back to a setting where they KNOW they will be abused. Much like your setting, by the sounds of it. They just can't help themselves. Read a book on it. It is very illuminating, the hidden masochist in our psyche.
Paradisio 08-24-05, 12:50 AM	Ok, maybe I should just stop posting. As it seems people are trying to diagnose me with mental conditions for playing a game. Get some perspective, one day a week I go and have fun, and sometimes stuff goes wrong, it doesn't make me have a mental disorder because I continue to play. If it wasn't enjoyable to some extent, I wouldn't play. But I do have to be a little lenient, since these are the people in my group as well, and I am trying to lead by example to some degree. And If I walk out on them, they walk out on me. And then, it is basically my $800 in D&D books is wasted. Since I obviously can't find another group. I have joined every local gaming group, been to all major stores, and still have found no D&D group to play with, in fact I can hardly find any at all. And none of the people looking want to start a group... and honestly, I don't think I can DM two groups.
20goingon1232 08-24-05, 01:03 AM	Ok, maybe I should just stop posting. As it seems people are trying to diagnose me with mental conditions for playing a game. Get some perspective, one day a week I go and have fun, and sometimes stuff goes wrong, it doesn't make me have a mental disorder because I continue to play. If it wasn't enjoyable to some extent, I wouldn't play. But I do have to be a little lenient, since these are the people in my group as well, and I am trying to lead by example to some degree. And If I walk out on them, they walk out on me. And then, it is basically my $800 in D&D books is wasted. Since I obviously can't find another group. I have joined every local gaming group, been to all major stores, and still have found no D&D group to play with, in fact I can hardly find any at all. And none of the people looking want to start a group... and honestly, I don't think I can DM two groups. There is no walk out unless you go out with a bang. I will play badminton with my horror DM. I play cards and other things. Just not DnD when he is DM-ing. Or anything where he has a role that is similar to the DM. You can read it anyway you like, but if you go on a self-pitying trip as your above post indicates, then we are not likely to help you even if we try because you are not looking for help. You are looking for a shoulder to cry on. That can't be done over the Internet. Sorry.
Paradisio 08-24-05, 01:14 AM	Well perhaps you should try to help me instead of trying to diagnose me. I just wanted some advice for an argument, not psychotherapy. And please point out where I had a self-pity post, so I can delete it.
JStegmaier 08-24-05, 03:34 AM	A think the analogy that actually fits this situation is like so: 1) Husband and wife have trouble 2) They get marriage counseling; problem solved. 3) They have trouble of a different sort 4) This thread is the second session of marriage counseling The OMG, YOU'VE HAD PROBLEMS TWICE AND ASKED FOR HELP, YOU MUST BE AN IDIOT posts are ridiculous. The vast majority of people, when combined, are always going to have trouble of one sort or another. It's the smart, reasonable person that looks for help in order to resolve those troubles. An idiot just throws up his hands and says "Screw it, I'm out of here," when things aren't perfect. As for the OP, I'd try to tell you're DM what the other posters have said above--i.e., we can leave out the feat you don't like, you don't have to use the monsters, etc. However, I am of the opinion that this is unlikely to work--that would be using logical to combat what appears to be an illogical problem. Your DM doesn't really dislike the book or want to ban it because of the problems he stated--he's simply trying to rationalize his irrational dislike of the book. It's unlikely you'll be able to change his mind--this is simply one battle you'll probably have to surrender. And, of course, a DM is always be allowed to ban anything he likes. It would just be nice if the DM would give some reason--"This book doesn't really fit my world," for instance, or "I want to keep my campaign Core to keep it simply." "There aren't any descriptions and one feat is stupid," is not a good enough reason for me.
Paradisio 08-24-05, 03:39 AM	Thanks, I realize I'm probably am not going to change his mind... but I can at least try. I petitioned to have the thread removed so save your flames for my inbox and my next thread.
Corinthians 08-24-05, 05:55 AM	Allowing you to use your book has nothing to do with being open or close minded. It's his game, he decides the rules, not you, the player. Just because you do it in your campaign doesn't mean he should do it in his. After seeing two complaining posts about your group in as many weeks here, I've come to the conclusion that the problem with your group is you. You don't like it and yet you won't leave. Grow a pair and deal with your problems yourself. Lurk more.
Akharu 08-24-05, 09:51 AM	Wow...this thread hasn't been on topic for awhile.
babysamurai 08-24-05, 10:25 AM	Yeah, I think a lot of the DM's on these boards are bitter old granny's who just love to say: No!
LCD2YOU 08-24-05, 10:57 AM	Yeah, I think a lot of the DM's on these boards are bitter old granny's who just love to say: No!Watch your tone there youngman(? I don't know) or there'll be no cookies and milk for you tonight.
babysamurai 08-24-05, 11:05 AM	Watch your tone there youngman(? I don't know) or there'll be no cookies and milk for you tonight. Really? Well how about a kiss and a cuddle.
LCD2YOU 08-24-05, 12:07 PM	Really? Well how about a kiss and a cuddle.You should be so lucky. While it is not out of the realm of possiblities, I do have some stringent requirements: 1: Must be female. 2: Must be of age. 3: Must be breathing. If you meet those requirements, contact me. ======================================== ================== But back to the issue at hand. DMs have the right to do as they see fit in their game. Now, if they are arbitrary, mean spirit and or foolish, they won't be a DM long. With that said, a player must understand that the DM has a lot of things to do in their game. A few things here though Paridisio I'd like to say. Now others have said that if your DM allows another PC to kill yours so you have to roll up a new one 10 times, I would have to put the blame on you. If your DM spews things like 20goingon1232 stated, and you did say your DM said things like that, I have a difficult time understanding why you play. You said you are having a "good time" playing. Great! If that is so, then why are you complaining about what your DM does as obviously you're having a good time?
ShadowDragon8685 08-24-05, 12:23 PM	Paradioso, maybe it's because you post, like, every freaking week with something new this group of outcasts from normalcy has done to mess up your gaming. It's just that simple. Find another group and tell these jerkwads where to shove it. Or sit down, shut up, and enjoy being yanked around like the whipped pup you are. Please. I've been coming here for awhile. I stopped posting to the D&D boards for like six months during which I was all about lightsabers and Jedi. Now that I think about it, I'd like to get into another SWd20 game... And in that whole time, I can't recall you posting about you having any freaking FUN in a D&D game. Dude, get a clue. You're hangin' around with bullies who keep you around because they can beat you up easily. The beatings occur in a game, but they're still yankin' you around for the fun of it. Get. Out. While you still can, jeeze. Just hang around gaming stores and look for a game. Start your own and advertise for players. Get OpenRPG (www.openrpg.com) and get an online game if you have to. I'll ask my DM if he can possibly open a space for another one in OUR game if you can't find or start one of your own. (11th level, anything by WotC goes pending DM review of the character, Fridays starting at 7 till late, Eastern time.) Just ditch these losers. That said, I can understand where DMs are coming from in catagorically banning whole books. Your DM in particilar just needs to grow a pair and fess up and say "Sorry, you're wastin' yer cash if you want these for my game, don't buy it on my account." I ban whole books. For instance, the FRCS stuff. Firstly because I don't tend to DM the FR, secondly because of the Fey'ri, which are possibly the most stunning example of broken I've ever seen. Shapeshifting at will, DR 10/magic, resistance 10 to fire and a couple of others, I think they get Outsider type... All for a +2 LA. I mean, the reason you buy books is that you want pregenerated stuff that's been playtested. But when you see something like that, your faith in the playtesters goes out the window. How can you trust ANYTHING in a book that dares say that Fey'ri are an LA +2? I can't, your mileage may vary. So I just catagorically ban the whole book, rather than risk any potentially hurting "Look, your character is just too powerful. The other players can't shine because of your ubermensch, and they're angry because they don't have the cash to plop down for it. I'm sorry, but your character and the book he came from has to go." situations. It's a lot easier to take your book being pre-emptively banned than being told it has to be banned half-way into the campaign, after you've invested time, emotion, and roleplay in it. Think of Dungeons and Dragons as a giant MMORPG, running on the "own your own server" engine so widely popular in first person shooters like Halo and Half-Life. And imagine that every month, WotC releases a couple of expansion packs for everyone to play with. Only, in a lot of cases, this requires anyone who wants to use the custom content to buy it. At the minimum, it requires the DM and the player to buy it, though they can in theory share it, it takes up time and is hard. This means that one player is now playing with custom content that the otehrs cannot access. An analogy for this would be like when you give your friend the admin console code in a game of Counterstrike, and post on the MotD that nobody should bother complaining about him using noclip to sneak up behind them and shoot them, because he's the admin's buddy and he's paid cash-money for the privledge of pwning your butt. Starting to see why some people don't like them? The power creep is very real - to make a character from Core who can compete with Complete'd crap, you have to be VERY good at munchkinry. If the Complete character is a munchkin, either you buy the book, or your game suffers. So, many DMs simply take pre-emptive action, and rather than risking letting completely badly broken pieces of code like the Fey'ri in, and rather than upsetting the people who don't have ~USD$100/month to plunk on gaming books, they simply restrict their server to the base game alone, or they selectively allow only certain modules that they know everyone has in.
Paradisio 08-24-05, 12:48 PM	If that is so, then why are you complaining about what your DM does as obviously you're having a good time? Wait, so every post here means "Im quitting, my game blows if I don't resolve this"? If someone would have told me that I would have saved myself time, I am trying to resolve the issue, not walk out in a puff. Like I said previously, I quit the campaign, and I lose my own campaign as well. What do I say? "Your campaign sucks, im leaving!" Then I lose him as a friend as well. Quitting because of things that happened last campaign or because he doesn't allow a book are equally bad reasons for quitting out of the blue in my opinion. Unless you guys have seen something particularly bad that I should point out to him as I leave.
Vyvyan Basterd 08-24-05, 01:19 PM	I don't even want to make a character using it This could be why your DM is shutting you down. You're arguing for a book that you don't even want to use. I tend to ignore people that pose fruitless arguments, your DM is probably doing the same.
Paradisio 08-24-05, 01:30 PM	The whole point was, you have to be pretty closed minded to dissalow a book for the sole reason of not liking the flavor text of one feat, In my opinion at least. I wouldn't say it is fruitless, I did try to use the book at one point, and I might want to use it in the future. But I'm not sure which way to approach But for now I am happy with my character. Anyways, I hope the mods delete the thread soon so I can get some of these people off my back.
LCD2YOU 08-24-05, 02:06 PM	The whole point was, you have to be pretty closed minded to dissalow a book for the sole reason of not liking the flavor text of one feat, In my opinion at least. I wouldn't say it is fruitless, I did try to use the book at one point, and I might want to use it in the future. But I'm not sure which way to approach But for now I am happy with my character.There are many reasons to disallow a book. You believe the DM will not let the book in to the game because of a single feat. Are you sure of this? Are you certain that the DM wasn't using that particular feat as one example? Anyways, I hope the mods delete the thread soon so I can get some of these people off my back.Nobody is flaming you. Yeah, some may not be exactly gentle, but that is not an issue. Look people are telling you things because you asked and most are willing to help. If you are the type who will not take help unless it agrees with how you want it to be, then I am sorry that we were not able to comply.
Paradisio 08-24-05, 02:10 PM	No I want it to be deleted because people were trying to diagnose me with psychological disorders, not because of the help I was given. He told me specifically, he isn't allowing the feat because it doesn't have any justifiable prerequisites or why negative energy heals you now.
Vyvyan Basterd 08-24-05, 02:21 PM	He told me specifically, he isn't allowing the feat because it doesn't have any justifiable prerequisites or why negative energy heals you now. I'll get off your back and offer some on-topic advice: Have you asked to use anything else from that book? I generally restrict any books that I don't want stuff freely flowing from. Usually because I don't own the book or it doesn't fit into my campaign. But I do allow a player to request individual feats, classes, spells on a case-by-case basis. I deny requests to use the whole book, but I allow individual items on their own merit. Sounds to me like he thinks Tomb-Tainted Soul doesn't have a high enough prerequisite and doesn't make sense flavor-wise. Have you tried asking him what he thinks a good prerequisite for the feat would be? Have you tried to explain how your character gained such an odd ability without being undead? This is the route I would expect a player to take to gain this feat if I thought it was too easy to obtain and didn't have a good backstory as to why the character can suddenly heal himself with negative energy. Just saying that you don't agree with him isn't an argument, it's just being contrary, IF you haven't tried to compromise by offering solutions to the problem your DM has.
Paradisio 08-24-05, 02:26 PM	I sent him an email with a bunch of other feats which changed your body/mind without a prerequisite that he liked and am still waiting for a reply. But I don't know if the argument will fly. Anyways, I'll wait to hear his response and post back.
Paradisio 08-24-05, 02:29 PM	Also, if any of you have legimiate reasons for me quitting I would like to hear them so I can voice the problems.
20goingon1232 08-24-05, 11:09 PM	Also, if any of you have legimiate reasons for me quitting I would like to hear them so I can voice the problems. If he even pulled HALF the crap my ex-DM pulled on me, why are you even asking for legitimate reasons??? Isn't any ONE of those enough??? :confused: