Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kirie 05-17-06, 02:03 AM	Bit of a backstory: Last fall, my fiance set up and DMed a Psionics based campaign for me, 2 friends of mine, and my ex-boss. Of the five of us, the DM was the only one with a lot of table top role-playing experience, myself having only played a quickie session once, and my ex-boss having some minor AD&D experience. Now, as we were playing, the ex-boss decided that he wanted to take a swing at DMing, and started reading a lot of the books and everything. Current DM was fine with that and said he could take over when we reached the end of the current story arc. Other issues that aren't worth bothering to get into right now aside, the story arc ended, and New DM (hence forth refered to as NDM) was getting ready to begin. All of our current characters were 9th level at this point. NDM said we would all have the choice to keep our current characters or roll up new ones, and the old DM would have to make a new character anyway. NDM placed no restrictions on new characters, as long as they were 9th level and had gear at the appropriate gold level for a 9th level character. One of my friends and I decided to make new characters, while the other friend kept her old. This is where the fun begins, I suppose. Now, long stories about character creation aside, both my friend and my fiance decided to go down the "leadership" feat path, the friend actually taking the feat, and my fiance taking a Psionic prestige class, the Thrallherd, which follows the same basic idea as the leadership feat, except you gain a thrall (instead of a cohort) and believers (instead of followers). They fleshed out the characters well, and both had ideas for what to do with their Cohort/Thrall. NDM was fine with this. Now, as we got to the final planning pre-session, NDM is looking through my fiance's Thrallherd (friend's character wasn't quite finished, yet), and decides that my fiance is too powerful, and decides that the gear set up for the Thrallherd and the Thrall should only be split from the 9th level gold (instead of the Thrallherd getting 9th level gold to himself and the Thrall getting 8th level gold), effective splitting the gold in half for the 2 of them. After some minor arguing, a new gold value was settled on for the thrall, and that was that. For now. Because my one friend was still working on his character, the start of the one-on-one sessions (we always do one-on-ones with new characters before throwing them into the campaign) was pushed back a bit. After this, I never saw first end any of NDM's rulings, but I've heard about them from both my friend and my fiance. According to my friend, when he was working with NDM in finishing up the character (which was a rogue), NDM changed his ruling AGAIN and said that the rogue and the cohort should share gold values, and that he was going to make my fiance change again, too. My fiance argued with NDM again about this, and nothing really got anywhere. After that, things were quiet for a bit, as we were all busy on and off and hadn't had time to get together. Then, my friend contacted my fiance and I again, with yet another new ruling from NDM. This is the meat and bones of this thread, and I'm sorry that it took so long to get here. NDM, decided to change his rulings on cohorts/thralls once again. This time he decided that the whole thing was way too powerful, and that total character level for a PC was his main character's level plus 1/2 cohort levels, dropping my friend to level 7 with a 4th level cohort, and dropping my fiance to level 5 with a 4th level thrall and a 4th level believer. My fiance was understandably ****** with this situation. Dropping his character 4 levels made it impossible for him to even take the prestige class,no matter how "overpowered" he might have originally been. In any event, there's a bit of a problem here. I know the prospect of having 2 people with followers seems a bit unbalanced, but I don't think it's near bad enough for the amount of nerfing that NDM is throwing into the situation. To me, it seems like he sees my fiance and my friend as trying to break the game and wants to (in NDM's own words, no less) "squash the problem before it even starts." Why are cohorts/thralls a problem in the first place? Both my fiance and my friend gave up a decent amount of power to take this path in the first place, and it really doesn't seem like a game breaking thing to me at all. My fiance has tried talking to NDM about this, telling him about different things to do in-game to make the followers more of a liability than an asset, and he won't even listen. We haven't even started his part of the campaign yet, and NDM is aready fond of the ruling "I'm the DM, what I say goes." He says he doesn't want me and my other friend to feel underpowered, except that both of us have told him, multiple times, that we really don't care; neither of us are powergamers, and we like the character concept that both my friend and my fiance have chosen. What can we do or say to NDM about his ruling? Is there any way that we can talk to him about this and get him to chance his mind without him just falling back on the "I'm the DM rule?" How have other DMs used the Leadership feat in the past and keep the game balanced? Any advise would be much appreciated.
Witch 05-17-06, 03:37 AM	Leadership is widely regarded as extremely powerful. I suggest you use the table for NPC wealth for your cohorts - it's more standard, and less overpowered.
Galroth 05-17-06, 03:38 AM	Well if you really want to drive home the point that Thrallherds and folks with leadership really aren't overpowered, you should have them both make new characters for this campaign since it hasn't started yet, and before they do, send them over to the Character Optimization boards. When the NDM is weeping in the fetal position on the floor over thier new characters, the old ones won't seem so bad after all, even with thralls and followers. :P Man, that was one long run on sentance, sorry. :)
kelvinaw273 05-17-06, 03:57 AM	Well, he's never DMed before, so go easy on him ... I second the suggestion of taking simpler characters, as DMing cohorts and such cancomlicate things for a newbie.
Gauze Fireforge 05-17-06, 04:08 AM	Bit of a backstory: Last fall, my fiance set up and DMed a Psionics based campaign for me, 2 friends of mine, and my ex-boss. Of the five of us, the DM was the only one with a lot of table top role-playing experience, myself having only played a quickie session once, and my ex-boss having some minor AD&D experience. Now, as we were playing, the ex-boss decided that he wanted to take a swing at DMing, and started reading a lot of the books and everything. Current DM was fine with that and said he could take over when we reached the end of the current story arc. Other issues that aren't worth bothering to get into right now aside, the story arc ended, and New DM (hence forth refered to as NDM) was getting ready to begin. All of our current characters were 9th level at this point. NDM said we would all have the choice to keep our current characters or roll up new ones, and the old DM would have to make a new character anyway. NDM placed no restrictions on new characters, as long as they were 9th level and had gear at the appropriate gold level for a 9th level character. One of my friends and I decided to make new characters, while the other friend kept her old. This is where the fun begins, I suppose. Now, long stories about character creation aside, both my friend and my fiance decided to go down the "leadership" feat path, the friend actually taking the feat, and my fiance taking a Psionic prestige class, the Thrallherd, which follows the same basic idea as the leadership feat, except you gain a thrall (instead of a cohort) and believers (instead of followers). They fleshed out the characters well, and both had ideas for what to do with their Cohort/Thrall. NDM was fine with this. Now, as we got to the final planning pre-session, NDM is looking through my fiance's Thrallherd (friend's character wasn't quite finished, yet), and decides that my fiance is too powerful, and decides that the gear set up for the Thrallherd and the Thrall should only be split from the 9th level gold (instead of the Thrallherd getting 9th level gold to himself and the Thrall getting 8th level gold), effective splitting the gold in half for the 2 of them. After some minor arguing, a new gold value was settled on for the thrall, and that was that. For now. Because my one friend was still working on his character, the start of the one-on-one sessions (we always do one-on-ones with new characters before throwing them into the campaign) was pushed back a bit. After this, I never saw first end any of NDM's rulings, but I've heard about them from both my friend and my fiance. According to my friend, when he was working with NDM in finishing up the character (which was a rogue), NDM changed his ruling AGAIN and said that the rogue and the cohort should share gold values, and that he was going to make my fiance change again, too. My fiance argued with NDM again about this, and nothing really got anywhere. After that, things were quiet for a bit, as we were all busy on and off and hadn't had time to get together. Then, my friend contacted my fiance and I again, with yet another new ruling from NDM. This is the meat and bones of this thread, and I'm sorry that it took so long to get here. NDM, decided to change his rulings on cohorts/thralls once again. This time he decided that the whole thing was way too powerful, and that total character level for a PC was his main character's level plus 1/2 cohort levels, dropping my friend to level 7 with a 4th level cohort, and dropping my fiance to level 5 with a 4th level thrall and a 4th level believer. My fiance was understandably ****** with this situation. Dropping his character 4 levels made it impossible for him to even take the prestige class,no matter how "overpowered" he might have originally been. In any event, there's a bit of a problem here. I know the prospect of having 2 people with followers seems a bit unbalanced, but I don't think it's near bad enough for the amount of nerfing that NDM is throwing into the situation. To me, it seems like he sees my fiance and my friend as trying to break the game and wants to (in NDM's own words, no less) "squash the problem before it even starts." Why are cohorts/thralls a problem in the first place? Both my fiance and my friend gave up a decent amount of power to take this path in the first place, and it really doesn't seem like a game breaking thing to me at all. My fiance has tried talking to NDM about this, telling him about different things to do in-game to make the followers more of a liability than an asset, and he won't even listen. We haven't even started his part of the campaign yet, and NDM is aready fond of the ruling "I'm the DM, what I say goes." He says he doesn't want me and my other friend to feel underpowered, except that both of us have told him, multiple times, that we really don't care; neither of us are powergamers, and we like the character concept that both my friend and my fiance have chosen. What can we do or say to NDM about his ruling? Is there any way that we can talk to him about this and get him to chance his mind without him just falling back on the "I'm the DM rule?" How have other DMs used the Leadership feat in the past and keep the game balanced? Any advise would be much appreciated. Well, I presonally think the Dm is being a bit steep. I would suggest him to play the game as the rules are written before he starts making whole sale changes to the game, particularily as he doesn't have any experience DMing in the edition you are playing. Secondly, followers or believers are really a waste of adventuring space. You shouldn't adventure with them but leave them at some sort of town or base, otherwise they will be wiped out with the challenges you will face. They are great for doing things behind the scenes such as building a temple of running a business or the like but not adventuring with. Now the cohort or thrall are usually geared up to handle the encounters you will face, thats the whole point of them. They should have the money of a character equivalent for their level. He should run it as the rules, with the thrallherd having her thrall at the appropriate level and the rogue with the ledaership score as theres. Point out to NDM that the whole point of the prestige class or the feat about oppurtunity cost. You are sacrificing a feat or other abilities to attain the thrallherd PrC or Leadership feat. Hence they balance out somewhat. Nerfing the leadership feat is one thing, but the backbone of the thrallherd is..well...having thralls. Your fiance is sacrificing manifesting levels to gain a thrall, hence the oppurtunity cost of going something else. Lastly, and for the love of god please, please, PLEASE, the DM should draw up the thrall or cohort! I have heard too many horror stories of a character taking the leadership feat and then twinking out thier cohort to supremely compliement their character. For instance, Imagine a heriophant cohort and the main character having divine metamagic:persistant. The heriophant can give all his turning attempts per day to the PC who can then divine metamagic for roughly 6 persistant spells per day instead of 3. This is one of many scenario's which will get overpowering quickly. Also, the Dm should roleplay the thrall or cohort, but the player should run the cohort or thrall during combat, its not like you now have access to two players to now control if you go this route. Lastly, if the DM is still fearful, he should rule 0 on the leadership feat or the thrallherd prestige class. Personally, I dont have a problem with the feat or the PrC, it does involve more work from the DM but can be very entertaining and rewarding.
DracoPhoenix 05-17-06, 04:55 AM	While I appreciate the new DM syndrome, you may have to "squash" a problem of your own before it starts. The three main options I can come up with is 1) Raise your concerns, but don't try to force the issue, then once the game begins/continues he will find out that his leveling and gold sharing has seriously weakened the group. When ('cus I can't see it being if) the party wipes, roll the same chars / raise them and continue. 2) Go to him, you all have the same issue - and he's the one changing core+ RAW, not simply ad hoc'ing an minor issue. Refuse to play according to those changes, taking time to explain that dm's have dm0, players have player0. (harsh, but changing the RAW of core+ because he (with no prior dm experience) has ruled it overpowering is a bad sign in and of itself) 3) Drop the cohort / thrall classes & feats, with the understanding that once NDM is better acquainted with the rules or DM takes over, you can retro-fit the classes / feats.
Aldarionn 05-17-06, 05:30 AM	Two words....Pun Pun. Throw Pun Pun at him and he will bleed rec....er...from the ears;. There are a few other builds I could suggest throwing at him to show him just how un-broken the Leadership feat is, so if you want them let me know and I will be happy to provide some stats for you or at least a concept :D . I'm an evil bastard, so if you really want to make a Dm cry, just let me know. Aldarionn
Witch 05-17-06, 05:57 AM	Two words....Pun Pun. Throw Pun Pun at him and he will bleed rec....er...from the ears;. There are a few other builds I could suggest throwing at him to show him just how un-broken the Leadership feat is, so if you want them let me know and I will be happy to provide some stats for you or at least a concept :D . I'm an evil bastard, so if you really want to make a Dm cry, just let me know. Aldarionn Because Pun-Pun is even more broken does not make Leadership any less broken. I believe Leadership can be dealt with, but it's still quite strong for a feat. PS: Actually wanting to use Pun-Pun in a game means you're nuts. He's the worst of CO's experiments to ever show up in a game.
Radijs 05-17-06, 05:58 AM	Oh that will really help Aldarionn. You're in a party of 5, then you don't need leadership or thrallherds. I'd suggest dropping the feats & PRC. Part of this is of course IMHO but Leadership is extremely powerful and as a DM I only allow it to be taken when I'm DM-ing for a small party (3 players or less) So they can have someone extra to fill another party role, be it skillmonkey, artillery or band-aid box.
Witch 05-17-06, 06:01 AM	Well, for a special mount it's another good option.
Galroth 05-17-06, 08:15 AM	Personally I think Thrallherds/leadership characters are all about how you play them. I have a Blue Goblin thrallherd for one of our side campaigns, and all the Believers do is haul me around on a slave litter, so that my character seems more impressive than he is, and so that I don't have to walk anywhere. Sure you probably aren't going to convince regular followers to do that for you, but that is part of the fun of the Thrallherd class. Also, even though I was the first to suggest the CO boards, DO NOT under any circumstances try and pull Pun-Pun on your NDM, you will just start a brawl at the roleplaying table, and that is never good. ;) Seriously though, if playing a leadership character or a Thrallherd is that important to the fun of the people playing them, explain that to the NDM, or they should just make new characters that are acceptable and have fun with those, since that is what D&D is all about. Sitting around with your friends, having fun. :cool:
Nom 05-17-06, 08:30 AM	Caveat 1: DMG pg 106: Leadership: "You're free to disallow this feat if it would disrupt the campaign". Caveat 2: In general, a new DM should start with level 1 (or close to this) PCs. Many players fail to realise just how much more complex DM-ing is than playing. The reason your DM keeps changing his rulings is simple: Inexperience. High level campaigns are best kept for more experienced DMs. Anything involving cohorts or similar followers is best left for more experienced DMs. As it stands, your DM doesn't have the experience to make the needed judgement calls, and thus keeps changing his mind as new thoughts pop up. Suggest he starts with low level (1st, or perhaps 3rd) characters instead.
DracoPhoenix 05-17-06, 08:51 AM	Caveat 1: DMG pg 106: Leadership: "You're free to disallow this feat if it would disrupt the campaign". Caveat 2: In general, a new DM should start with level 1 (or close to this) PCs. Many players fail to realise just how much more complex DM-ing is than playing. Problem is, he's not ruling out side-kicks becasue it over complicates matters, he's altering the game mechanics because they "overpower" the party. While your points are valid, they arn't applicable to the situation. He chose to DM a game, and while certain tolerances should be made to help him, he made substantial mechanical changes to the game (for the wrong reasons), irregardless of the players wishes (and dm knowledge). This is a bad habit for the NDM to pick up at any stage of the game, never mind from the start. What happens when the party pulls out a trick the DM didn't think of & rules the underlying mechanisim is clearly overpowered & therefore nerfed? Unless of course NDM is being an evil genius and, not wanting to forbid the feat / class, but also not wanting the party to use them, frames them in such a way that they are at best useless and and worst damageing to party effectiveness so there would be little point in taking them.
Nom 05-17-06, 09:23 AM	Problem is, he's not ruling out side-kicks becasue it over complicates matters, he's altering the game mechanics because they "overpower" the party.Look deeper. The reason he cannot accurately judge what constitutes "balanced" is that he lacks the experience to discern the effects of complex rules. While your points are valid, they arn't applicable to the situation. He chose to DM a game, and while certain tolerances should be made to help him, he made substantial mechanical changes to the game (for the wrong reasons), irregardless of the players wishes (and dm knowledge). This is a bad habit for the NDM to pick up at any stage of the game, never mind from the start. What happens when the party pulls out a trick the DM didn't think of & rules the underlying mechanisim is clearly overpowered & therefore nerfed?Nonetheless, the correct fix is "experience". Every DM makes changes to the ruleset, not the least because the ruleset quite deliberately only covers a certain range of activities and expects (demands?) that the DM extrapolate from these rules to other activities. Similarly, it's hard to argue that "optional" rules should be immune to DM meddling, especially when vast swathes of the DMG are explicitly qualified with variants of "adapt this to your campaign" or "consider how this will impact your campaign". The DM has seemingly not run a game before, but is suddenly finding himself needing to extrapolate how quite complex rulesets will interact with his game world. No wonder he is thrashing about. From a player's perspective, the best solution is not "stop trying to get it right" but "perhaps we should start smaller".
Kirie 05-17-06, 10:30 AM	Thanks for all the great replies ^_^ I feel I have some material to throw at him now. Just a couple more small bits, replies to things said, or things I forgot to mention originally. While NDM has very little knowledge of rules and gameplay mechanics (outside of the books mind you), he thinks he knows a lot more. He can be very arrogant, and it did cause some issues back when he was still a PC. He's a new DM, but really doesn't want us to acknowledge the fact, really. He was very insistant about us all staying at a higher level because, of course, this means he can throw harder stuff at us (IE, when I had my one-on-one, I was facing a monster that could automatically hit me, unless it rolled a 1. Not particularly fun, mind you, but it was something that he wanted to happen). The Thrallherd's thrall was going to be a SoulKnife; I'm not sure what the Rogue's is/was. The Thrallherd also had (originally, mind you) a Lvl 5 Believer following us as well, a Cleric so that we had some party healing (since psionics isn't the best when it comes to healing). All the other followers and believers were around the isle to be used as spies/messangers, etc. If my fiance wanted to make overpowered characters, trust me, he could :D . I've seen some of the things he's done, although mostly with the Star Wars d20 system. It's not really the path we wanted to follow; however, we do have a contingency plan for the campaign if NDM really does lead us all to hell and back. And don't worry, it would take a lot of bribing to get me to play something like Pun Pun. I don't generally like very-powered characters in the first place, would much rather make a character that I enjoy playing who has glaring faults (as my characters often do). Making new characters is an option, I suppose. I just know that it wouldn't be prefered for either my fiance or my friend, as both of them put a lot of work and care into their characters and how they fit into the world. My fiance even had his one-on-one already (how that works with him automatically, supposedly dropping 4 levels is beyond my knowledge). If he had disallowed it from the beginning, that would be a different story. He put no restrictions on us, and even ok-ed the character concepts when first presented. So, of course, both players went on and worked out all of the stuff for their characters, only afterward for him to say anything, and then change his mind a few times. I've never heard of DM's designing Cohorts/Thralls, before, but it does make a certain amount of sense. One of the suggestions my fiance originally gave to NDM about the Cohort/Thrall was for him to controll them, and he didn't like that idea. Oh, and by the way, NDM loves combat. Strong melee combat. Even if everyone were to get full gear and character levels, we would be an easy hit on the battlefield. The Thrall and I are the only real melee combatants, and even both of ours are psionically fueled. With this level drop, we'll die quickly and messily, but at least it'll be fun. And this time, we'll make him lay down his ground rules from the start instead of making them up as he goes. For the record, as a person, I really do like NDM, despite him being my ex-boss and all. He's a good guy, and I suppose it's been hard for me to yell at him in the past, since he is very much a newcomer to our little group (both my friends and my fiance I've known for over 4 years, and I just started working for NDM last summer), and I don't want him to feel shunned or anything. And, gah, sorry, I made a long post again...
psionichamster 05-17-06, 01:41 PM	on leadership: it's good, it's great even, but with a few handles you can grab onto to slow it up. 1: the NPC cohort is of lesser level than the party, and makes for a pretty easy-to-hit and squishy target. once the PC loses a bit of leadership score for causing the death of numerous cohorts, its back under control 2: the DM really should design the cohort/thrall. really, this represents the fact that some fully-formed person was drawn to the PC, rather than giving them a new char to play. 3: there are some significant PC responsibility issues in play: who pays for the cohort's mount? who upgrades their gear? do they get a share of the loot? if so, how much? on thrallherds: i have one in my game right now (Elan Telepath 5/thrallherd 7 right now). he is like professor X, and takes the majority of the time in battle because he really gets like 5 combat turns each round (His, Thrall's, Believer1, Believer2, any constructs he makes, any dominated enemies). if that doesn't get streamlined, you have one player taking up almost half of every combat round with just his actions. this is the last time i will allow thrallherds in my game. (not from "broken-ness" or overall power level...a psion 12 would be capable of even more craziness, after all....but because of the time/creation time issues.) all that being said: thralls and followers (as well as 9th lvl starts) are really NOT for newbie DM's. there's too much give-and-take, too much design and dev. and too many things to keep your mind on as is, doubling the size of your party makes it all the more crazy. if your leader-people are DEAD set on playing their char's, as is, consider the following: 1: followers/believers are TOTAL non-combatants. that is, they can set up businesses, make shopping runs, dig ditches, or other non-combat tasks, but they are not adventurers, and should not be out w/ the rest of the group. (takes away about 1/2 of the worries) 2: cohorts and thralls are designed by the DM (best bet: create 3-4 of them, and let them "interview" which one they would like. this prevents the above-mentioned "super-synergizing" and making wonder-twin power sets. 3: single classed cohorts/thralls. simple enough, keeps the bookeeping simple. 4: all members of your "team" of characters act on the same initiative round (as determined from the leader's init). this keeps them from having multiple rounds to act, compared to the others in the party. 5: cohorts/thralls get no treasure. beyond their starting gold, and anything the PC gets them, they're not getting shares from the party haul. (may have a harder time convincing the cohorts than the thralls, but meh..) feel free to use some/all of the above suggestions, and remember: if he's a new DM, HE WILL MAKE TONS OF MISTAKES. simple as that. NDM should know better than to allow everything under the sun, and to start at so high a lvl, but that's what being a new DM means. he'll learn. namaste' the hamster
The man they call Boxhead 05-17-06, 05:47 PM	Just a quick point, I, as a DM, would have no qualms about making the cohorts/followers/thralls/etc. be equipped from your starting gold. Otherwise, it would too easy for soemone to use the feat as "free" money. Leadership is better than most feats (how many give an extra set of actiuons per turn), and should be earned in most cases. If your PCs are dead set on them, they should be willing to live with regular gold. Besides, if the cohort had been there from Day 1, they would have had to be equipped from the party treasure anyway. Only seems fair that the onus is on you if you make one at a higher level. As far as the level nerf goes, that sucks. I wouldn't take it or give it. It's just stupid. Say no if you mean no.
Nom 05-18-06, 09:27 AM	Kirie, Like so many issues that grace these boards, this is purely a social issue that happens to be playing out in the context of your D&D game. Is there some way you can humour your DM into not biting off more than he can chew? "We all started at level 1 when we started DM-ing, and it would allow us to avoid some of these conflicts we've been having about advanced characters and feats." However, there's another problem. Running a D&D game takes social finesse and a decent amount of trust between players and DM. There is no "level playing field"; regardless of your play style the DM is the one who sets the challenges and controls the metagame. If the DM does not have a clear idea what will make the game fun for the players then you have a train wreck coming. It's far better to think you can see inside their heads and know what will be fun but be mistaken than to simply see everything from your side of the table. The best DMs derive their enjoyment vicariously through their players' enjoyment. The worst treat the players as necessities that allow the DM to entertain himself. Think very carefully about whether this guy has (or can develop) the necessary social skills to administer a cooperative game. Then consider the best way forward.
Kirie 05-18-06, 02:04 PM	Just a quick point, I, as a DM, would have no qualms about making the cohorts/followers/thralls/etc. be equipped from your starting gold. Otherwise, it would too easy for soemone to use the feat as "free" money. Leadership is better than most feats (how many give an extra set of actiuons per turn), and should be earned in most cases. If your PCs are dead set on them, they should be willing to live with regular gold. Besides, if the cohort had been there from Day 1, they would have had to be equipped from the party treasure anyway. Only seems fair that the onus is on you if you make one at a higher level. As far as the level nerf goes, that sucks. I wouldn't take it or give it. It's just stupid. Say no if you mean no. The only problem I have with this sentiment is how the Thrallherd (I don't know enough about how the Rogue made his cohort, but I do live with the Thrallherd) was incredibly careful about how he did his gold for both Thrallherd and Thrall. Of all of us, he has the most game knowledge by far, and he's not the type to take advantage of things. He even gave some of his Thrallherd's gold to deck out the Thrall. It is easy to use the feat as free gold, but that wasn't how it was handled at all, and anyone taking a look at the character's sheets could see that. As for in game explainations of Thrall gold vs Thrallherd gold, I suppose that's depends on the Thrallherd's backstory, which I don't know too much of. Nor do I think NDM really cares, he just believes the characters to be too powerful and leaves it at that. I suppose that's where a large part of my dissent comes from: NDM's lack of explanation for just about anything. He'd rather turn to Rule 0 than discuss anything, and has yet to give any sort of explanation for his nerfing of the characters outside of his original "too powerful." Kirie, Like so many issues that grace these boards, this is purely a social issue that happens to be playing out in the context of your D&D game. Is there some way you can humour your DM into not biting off more than he can chew? "We all started at level 1 when we started DM-ing, and it would allow us to avoid some of these conflicts we've been having about advanced characters and feats." However, there's another problem. Running a D&D game takes social finesse and a decent amount of trust between players and DM. There is no "level playing field"; regardless of your play style the DM is the one who sets the challenges and controls the metagame. If the DM does not have a clear idea what will make the game fun for the players then you have a train wreck coming. It's far better to think you can see inside their heads and know what will be fun but be mistaken than to simply see everything from your side of the table. The best DMs derive their enjoyment vicariously through their players' enjoyment. The worst treat the players as necessities that allow the DM to entertain himself. Think very carefully about whether this guy has (or can develop) the necessary social skills to administer a cooperative game. Then consider the best way forward. Well, one of the next things that needs to happen in this campaign, I believe, is us all getting together and talking about these things face to face. Since the originally Gold value change, all of this discussion has taken place over the phone or in e-mail. The Rogue did meet up with NDM once, which was when the level nerfing came up, but that was just the 2 of them, and the only reason the Thrallherd and I even know about it is because the Rogue gave us an e-mail in warning. I, personally, haven't spoken with NDM since my one-on-one, and I don't think our other player (a Kineticist) has seen him since her one-on-one (a week before mine), and possibly his meeting with the Rogue (since her and the Rogue live together). When this meeting comes up, which I'm determined for it to, one of the possible suggestions I'm going to bring to the table is the starting at Level 1. The Thrallherd has come to terms with the fact that he may be changing his character, and is fine with that, and even has semi-plans for his new character already. But, getting rid of the Thrall/Cohort issue is just skirting the issue, I believe, and restarting at Level 1 may help us all to cope better with things. I don't know how it will work, but it's worth a shot. Before he took over, we did all sit down and discuss what we wanted the campaign to be like. In all honesty, I don't think he took much of that into account. We were a bit iffy about letting him DM in the first place, but figured that it couldn't hurt to give it a try and see how things went, but now that we're having so many problems before the game even starts, we may have made a bad decision. In all honesty, I think what he's enjoying the most about DMing is beating the characters up and making it seem like it's their fault. At least that's how my one-on-one went. He doesn't like people thinking for themselves, and would much rather us go where he leads us. As far as social skills go... probably not. I guess that's something I never thought to consider in the first place.
psionichamster 05-18-06, 04:00 PM	In all honesty, I think what he's enjoying the most about DMing is beating the characters up and making it seem like it's their fault. At least that's how my one-on-one went. He doesn't like people thinking for themselves, and would much rather us go where he leads us. pls reexamine this statement again. deep down, this DM is already showing all the promise of a "no you don't, you do x" kind of person. (as in, "I open the door." "no you don't...") do you really want to play an open-ended, ROLE-playing game with someone who can't even let you CREATE characters without huge amounts of interference? also: if his primary goal is to beat up on the characters, you will likely experience many IG deaths. if you are willing to go this route, i would recommend a relatively simple character build (ie...THF barbarian w/ rage-enhancing feats and Power Attack, or High-Ac heavy armor fighter). then, when you get killed off, you can bring in "Mr. Shield-Fighter VI" hell, have an entire family of em, switch ages, names, and genders as needed, and keep sending em on into the blender. you will SOON tire of the games. (not the Game, as in, the reason you get together in the 1st place, but the mind-games he's pulling on you) when that happens, ditch the NDM and replace w/ someone more flexible. namaste' the hamster
Kirie 05-18-06, 06:02 PM	pls reexamine this statement again. deep down, this DM is already showing all the promise of a "no you don't, you do x" kind of person. (as in, "I open the door." "no you don't...") Well, he's not quite THAT limiting, but, well, let me give you example... NDM and the Thrallherd were talking about the new campaign once a while ago, actually while the old campaign was still going on. I don't remember the lead up to the conversation, but somehow they got to talking about NDM's campaign. (All of this is approximate quotation, I can't remember the exact words, but it was very similar). "NDM: So, you're on a ship going to the mainland and you're attacked by pirates. That a pretty one-way scenario, right? TH: What if we don't want to fight? NDM: Then you're captured and taken into slavery... not that exciting, but possible I suppose. TH: Well, Klia's (my character at the time, Wilder with killer charisma) great at diplomacy, what if we talk to them? Maybe not make friends exactly, but work out some sort of compromise where they get the valuable stuff from our ship, and we get our lives. NDM: They're not going to listen to you, they're pirates! TH: What if someone gets Psionic Charm or Dominate anduses it on the Captain? NDM: Oh, come on, like THAT could happen. I mean, he's a pirate captain, he's gotta be a very high level or something, it won't work. TH: What if we decide to join the pirates? NDM: Why would the pirates let you join? You're a bunch of psions and can't fight, they don't want you. You're going to have to fight. do you really want to play an open-ended, ROLE-playing game with someone who can't even let you CREATE characters without huge amounts of interference? also: if his primary goal is to beat up on the characters, you will likely experience many IG deaths. if you are willing to go this route, i would recommend a relatively simple character build (ie...THF barbarian w/ rage-enhancing feats and Power Attack, or High-Ac heavy armor fighter). then, when you get killed off, you can bring in "Mr. Shield-Fighter VI" hell, have an entire family of em, switch ages, names, and genders as needed, and keep sending em on into the blender. you will SOON tire of the games. (not the Game, as in, the reason you get together in the 1st place, but the mind-games he's pulling on you) when that happens, ditch the NDM and replace w/ someone more flexible. namaste' the hamsterIn game deaths I can handle, like I mentioned in my second posts. At least then we can lay down more firm rules from the start. Though I don't understand what making a Barbarian character has anything to do with that. If anything, it would play into what he wants, since all he likes is strong melee, and that's not my kind of thing, or the kind of thing for the rest of us, really. I don't want to feel pressured into making characters I don't want to play just because of the type of game the DM likes, especially when none of the other players agree with him. Trust me, I'm already getting tired of the games. I want to give him the benefit of the doubt for a least a little while in the campaign and see how it goes, but if things stay this bad, to hell with making him feel left out, I'm going to want a new DM.
WolfHati 05-18-06, 06:11 PM	The trouble seems to be more on the mechanics end of things, I would think, rather than how to incorporate the fact that some players have followers into the campaign and story. Remember than cohorts are NPCs, not another PC. First off, the cohort usually gets a half share in the treasure. However, since the DM controls the party wealth, I see it as perfectly reasonable to make a character pay for their cohort's equipment out of pocket, at least unless the rest of the party ponies up the dough to give that cohort a half share. The best solution though would be to give them starting npc equipment, as outlined in the DMG. Secondly, as they really are NPCs, the DM should have control over them. The player obviously gets to design what the cohort or thrall should be like, but the specifics are in the end up to the DM. And third, unless the PC has absolute control over their cohort or thralls every movement, the DM should be moving them around in combat, following the player's orders, as each step and sword swing are is not determined by the PC, and so should not be determined by the character's player. At least these are the rules in the games I have played in the past, and they make the most sense to me. Some DMs may change this to make things easier, but if you have an inexperienced DM... I do, however, agree that the level changes are unfair and ridiculous. First off, a 7th level and a fourth level character would be slightly less than an 8th level character, if it works similarly to how CR works. And a 5th level character and 2 fourth level characters would be not even equivalent to a level 7. Just ask him to reconsider, and suggest that you play it by the book, NPC starting items for cohorts. Trying to make your cohorts into additional PCs is freakin him out (as it should).
psionichamster 05-18-06, 08:55 PM	perhaps i was not as clear as i intended the barbarian was a simple-concept character that could be reused many times, with slight variations on a central theme. opposed to that would be a psion (or wiz/sorc/cleric/bard) where you really need to plan out the progression from an early point, and gear it specifically towards one specialty (even if that is "jack of all trades") this was intended to provide advice for the inevitable train of PC deaths that will follow when you are unable to avoid violent conflict. (personally, i would LOVE to play a bard/telepath in this game, detecting thoughts and telling specific lies-with glibness- just to avoid or cheat through every potential combat situation ever. but thats just me) it really seems to me that the only thing left for you all is to let him run a game or 2, then, if its as bad as i predict, boot him from behind the screen. hurt feelings or not, its a hard job, and not everyone is cut out for it. NDM seems like the exact OPPOSITE of what makes a good dm. of course, he probably has many other redeeming features, else you would not even be considering such an option. and we do only know of NDM from your POV and with all the bias/connotations that brings with it (neutral statement, not intended to give offense) namaste' the hamster
DracoPhoenix 05-19-06, 04:33 AM	"NDM: So, you're on a ship going to the mainland and you're attacked by pirates. That a pretty one-way scenario, right? TH: What if we don't want to fight? NDM: Then you're captured and taken into slavery... not that exciting, but possible I suppose. TH: Well, Klia's (my character at the time, Wilder with killer charisma) great at diplomacy, what if we talk to them? Maybe not make friends exactly, but work out some sort of compromise where they get the valuable stuff from our ship, and we get our lives. NDM: They're not going to listen to you, they're pirates! TH: What if someone gets Psionic Charm or Dominate anduses it on the Captain? NDM: Oh, come on, like THAT could happen. I mean, he's a pirate captain, he's gotta be a very high level or something, it won't work. TH: What if we decide to join the pirates? NDM: Why would the pirates let you join? You're a bunch of psions and can't fight, they don't want you. You're going to have to fight. Um, yes, you need to have a brutally frank talk with NDM and explain the concept of rail-roading and how & why it is one of the least desireable DM types going. If he doesn't see a problem with his style, pull out of his campaign. That and it looks like he's into hack & slash. Might be worth explaining that someone with high diplomacy & CHA could dupe someone many levels above them (specifically the mechanics behind said move. And then watch as he re-drafts diplomacy as intimidate and a function of str :)). Edit Just noticed: You're a bunch of psions and can't fightand You're going to have to fight.(In the same breath too!) Um, didn't he just say you're all going to die / contradict himself?
Kirie 05-19-06, 12:05 PM	Edit Just noticed: and(In the same breath too!) Um, didn't he just say you're all going to die / contradict himself? That may be a minor misquote on my part, but I know that his reasoning for the piratyes not wanting us was because we were psions and not strong.