No Magic Allowed Rule?

[Gwazi Magnum]

Note, this has been mentioned before in my following threads...

Mental ability score based character (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=280053&page=1) and Should a high spot/listen skill be penalized. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=280386)

However, enough people have either been missing/not reading the explanations in those threads, or been asking about them that I feel the make a thread about it rather than repeat many times.

Plus this is a topic that probably deserves it's own topic/seperate thread anyways.

Essentially, this started with a group of us as players finding that when someone was a spell caster their spells caused them to become too powerful, over shadow the rest of the group and solve many what should be challenging challenges with ease.

So for our next campaign, we agree no spell casting classes, if we were to pick one then the spell tree was to be removed and either replaced with a house rule bonus or a variant for the class that may replace spell trees. If nothing could be found you may be allowed to just play the class without the spell tree.

Also we wouldn't use cheap ways around like being wand slingers. One or two spells on items may still be allowed though like True seeing and flying to deal with certain enemies, and magic items could still be used.

The DM eventually got wind of this though and supported it, but that support quickly turned from support to enforce. It has been taken to the point where he is not allowing anything that seems 'too magical' in even a lore sense, doesn't need to be mechanical.

As for some examples...

1. Gnome & Drow not allowed for the minimal spells per day they give
2. Changeling not allowed for it's shape shift ability
3. Druid without a spell tree isn't allowed for it's wild shape ability
4. Maneuvers and Stances are not allowed

Note: He tried to get rid of Paladin's 'lay on hands' ability too, but we argued enough that

1. It was more divine than arcane nature
2. That without it we had no way to heal people outside of skill checks, where even with a homebrewed surgery skill would give minimal results.

Note: He is ruling all this for a campaign where the realm is not only very high magic but very technological where all technologies power source is magic.

So what would you guys think of such a ruling?

Do you agree with what it was originally when set up by the players?
Do you agree with where the DM had taken it too?
Do you think you may ever use said variants in any campaign of yours?
Do you think it's justified to use in the campaign setting listed above?

[Krobar]

No magic in a high magic realm?

You're all going to die. You don't have the tools to survive without serious DM fiat, and based on the prior threads, that doesn't seem very likely.

Good luck.

I don't like the ruling, and would never use it in my games. As players you can decide to play whatever you want, I would let you do this. I would probably even try to warn you against it. But since you're doing it, keep in mind the risks. Magic is an integral part of D&D, and without it you're going to have real problems.

[JusticeZero]

The guy sucks. Man up, grab the DMG and tell people they meet in a bar already.

[Treme]

As i was reading i was thinking, 'ok, no magic sounds cool enough if you're seeing it as being unbalanced and the goto option for most problems. you get to slog it out and think for clever ways round certain situations and encounters...'

but heavy magic on the other side? sounds like your DM just wants to beat you up! :P
unless the basis of his story is you wrestling control of the ultimate power source for yourselves in someway?

[Gwazi Magnum]

No magic in a high magic realm?

You're all going to die. You don't have the tools to survive without serious DM fiat, and based on the prior threads, that doesn't seem very likely.

Good luck.

I don't like the ruling, and would never use it in my games. As players you can decide to play whatever you want, I would let you do this. I would probably even try to warn you against it. But since you're doing it, keep in mind the risks. Magic is an integral part of D&D, and without it you're going to have real problems.

This was why we allowed magic items to stay, didn't rule out any races that gave out minor spells and still allowed some spells such as fly and true seeing for the purpose of dealing with certain monster types.

[Gwazi Magnum]

As i was reading i was thinking, 'ok, no magic sounds cool enough if you're seeing it as being unbalanced and the goto option for most problems. you get to slog it out and think for clever ways round certain situations and encounters...'

but heavy magic on the other side? sounds like your DM just wants to beat you up! :P
unless the basis of his story is you wrestling control of the ultimate power source for yourselves in someway?

Seeing how this is the same DM who made a (Non-stated) plot control wizard in his earlier campaign to 'fix' anything the players messed up or screwed over essentially preventing the players from causing massive changes that he didn't like, I doubt his plan is to have us take over his world.

Especially when he's bragging about how big and well guarded his world is.

Note: I once said, "What if I had a level 40/50 wizard character, how would I face against your plot device wizard then?" and his response was "Still too weak, he sees you as nothing and flings you away.

This did make he ask, why doesn't he just save the world then have us level 7's waste our time at it? His response was 'The wizard is neutral and cares only for preserving the balance'.

[Krobar]

This was why we allowed magic items to stay, didn't rule out any races that gave out minor spells and still allowed some spells such as fly and true seeing for the purpose of dealing with certain monster types.

Well ... good luck.

You'd not survive in any game I've ever been in, or run myself, with that approach.

I hate to say it, and I don't usually denigrate the games of others ... but this is one of those rare times that I'll say, based on everything I've read so far ... "I'm glad I'm not playing in that game."

[Gwazi Magnum]

Well ... good luck.

You'd not survive in any game I've ever been in, or run myself, with that approach.

I hate to say it, and I don't usually denigrate the games of others ... but this is one of those rare times that I'll say, based on everything I've read so far ... "I'm glad I'm not playing in that game."

Can you give some examples where stuff like full spell trues proved vital between winning and not surviving the campaign?

I'm curious just so I have a better idea about what it is in magic in d&d people cling onto so much they think we can't do d&d without it. From where I see it currently, it's powerful sure but outside of one or two spells it shouldn't be vital.

[The Trickster]

D&D is a magic based game. You can play a non-magic game, but it will require a LOT of work from the DM to find encounters that won't kill your party. It's not really worth it, imo.

Also, in this scenario, would divine magic stay? That seems a little unbalanced, especially if someone plays a cleric.

[Gwazi Magnum]

D&D is a magic based game. You can play a non-magic game, but it will require a LOT of work from the DM to find encounters that won't kill your party. It's not really worth it, imo.

Also, in this scenario, would divine magic stay? That seems a little unbalanced, especially if someone plays a cleric.

Divine spell casting is gone too.

The divine argument was just a weak argument we as players used to try to keep our only means of healing possible.

[Krobar]

Can you give some examples where stuff like full spell trues proved vital between winning and not surviving the campaign?

I'm curious just so I have a better idea about what it is in magic in d&d people cling onto so much they think we can't do d&d without it. From where I see it currently, it's powerful sure but outside of one or two spells it shouldn't be vital.

Yeah. The stuff you can't hit with swords without serious buffs because their AC is too high, like dragons. You don't have wraithstrike or anything else that will make them hittable for anything less than an epic character. You don't have protections from their breath weapons or any other buffs (those are nerfed).

That pit fiend (or other devil or demon)? You can't stop him from teleporting in, destroying one character and teleporting away, and repeating that until you're all dead.

You can't stop possessions. You can't even heal yourselves. You can't stop just about anything, really. What are you going to do when you're forced to flee, and more bad guys show up in a couple of hours, having followed you to your campsite? You're going to die.

You guys might be better off playing Conan d20 or something.

[Studoku]

It suggests your DM is extremely ignorant of the basic principles of the game he is running. The fact that he chose such a heavy-handed and extreme solution also suggests that he's not willing to compromise and is very sure of his own abilities.

Banning full-casters, i.e. anyone who gets 9th level spells, isn't necessarily a bad idea. As a quick, easy fix, it stops most of the biggest power level issues that can occur. It requires a DM to know what he's doing when giving out loot and choosing encounters though- the lack of magic means some enemy abilities can make a normally easy encounter extremely challenging or impossible.

This is not the case though. Banning all magic tends to be done for one of two reasons- realism or power. If it's the former and the DM wants to play a mundane, realistic campaign, that's fine. I would strongly recommend a different system however. If it's the latter, which you're suggesting it is, we're back to my original point- your DM's "fix" is causing more damage than it solves.

I'd recommend showing your DM the tier system and trying to agree on a fix based on that such as banning t1 & 2. It's not the be all and end all of game balance but it'll work better than the nonsense your DM is trying right now.

[dps]

If you want weaker casters or no casters, then you should probably be playing in a low-magic setting at least, or else using a different system than DnD.

[Yael]

Wait... Did I just read that Changelings do not have their Minor Shapechange ability? DUDE that's like the 90% of the coolness of being a Changeling! Looking like whoever you want just by waiting 6 seconds!
What's else? Warforged do not exist? Half-elves is too much magical for existing? Oh, what about half-orcs? What do cleric a cleric do?!

You know what?

You can solve this easily. Take a Githzerai (EPH) and have fun :D

[Asteron]

Is this the same game with the stupid spot/listen rules? If so, just leave. That game is so borked its not worth it to play.

Honestly, I kinda want the DM to come and give his side of things. Not so that everyone can tell him how bad he is, but to see exactly what he is thinking.

[The Boz]

...but to see exactly what he is thinking.

That would require him to think...

[Gwazi Magnum]

Yeah. The stuff you can't hit with swords without serious buffs because their AC is too high, like dragons. You don't have wraithstrike or anything else that will make them hittable for anything less than an epic character. You don't have protections from their breath weapons or any other buffs (those are nerfed).

That pit fiend (or other devil or demon)? You can't stop him from teleporting in, destroying one character and teleporting away, and repeating that until you're all dead.

You can't stop possessions. You can't even heal yourselves. You can't stop just about anything, really. What are you going to do when you're forced to flee, and more bad guys show up in a couple of hours, having followed you to your campsite? You're going to die.

You guys might be better off playing Conan d20 or something.

For high AC, wouldn't stuff like full BAB take care of that?

For the other spells, in my experience there's 2 main types of spell casters.

Spontaneous who know a limited amout but can cast whatever they know whenever. And those who prepare, they know many more spells but need to pre-arrange which is available.

With the examples you gave above I can see the former not having learned the spells you state are needed and the latter simply not given enough insight to know to prepare said spells.

Outside of commonly needed spells like heals though of course.


It suggests your DM is extremely ignorant of the basic principles of the game he is running. The fact that he chose such a heavy-handed and extreme solution also suggests that he's not willing to compromise and is very sure of his own abilities.

Banning full-casters, i.e. anyone who gets 9th level spells, isn't necessarily a bad idea. As a quick, easy fix, it stops most of the biggest power level issues that can occur. It requires a DM to know what he's doing when giving out loot and choosing encounters though- the lack of magic means some enemy abilities can make a normally easy encounter extremely challenging or impossible.

This is not the case though. Banning all magic tends to be done for one of two reasons- realism or power. If it's the former and the DM wants to play a mundane, realistic campaign, that's fine. I would strongly recommend a different system however. If it's the latter, which you're suggesting it is, we're back to my original point- your DM's "fix" is causing more damage than it solves.

I'd recommend showing your DM the tier system and trying to agree on a fix based on that such as banning t1 & 2. It's not the be all and end all of game balance but it'll work better than the nonsense your DM is trying right now.

Sadly I don't really know the tier system myself.

I never really concerned myself with it, I just always focused on making a character.


If you want weaker casters or no casters, then you should probably be playing in a low-magic setting at least, or else using a different system than DnD.

The DM had a high magic world setting before we as players decided to go non-spell casters.

But there was a difference between high magic lore, and high magic encounters.
We figured the world was high magic but the encounters may not be so 'you need wizards to live' stuff, turns out the DM does mean 'you need spells or something else really good', but has already taken the stance of restricting characters to non-magical things.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Is this the same game with the stupid spot/listen rules? If so, just leave. That game is so borked its not worth it to play.

Honestly, I kinda want the DM to come and give his side of things. Not so that everyone can tell him how bad he is, but to see exactly what he is thinking.

I doubt he will, and if he does he'll take it all as me being overly stubborn and not just accepting what the DM says.


Wait... Did I just read that Changelings do not have their Minor Shapechange ability? DUDE that's like the 90% of the coolness of being a Changeling! Looking like whoever you want just by waiting 6 seconds!
What's else? Warforged do not exist? Half-elves is too much magical for existing? Oh, what about half-orcs? What do cleric a cleric do?!

You know what?

You can solve this easily. Take a Githzerai (EPH) and have fun :D

Changelings can't be used period, it's not that they've just lost their power.

Orcs, Half-Elves and Warforged are allowed though.

Githzerai is non-core though and will therefore need to be sent through DM for approval, and he won't because it's the same idea as Changeling.

[Krobar]

For high AC, wouldn't stuff like full BAB take care of that?



When you're looking at a dragon with an AC in the 40s or 50s, or even higher with a few choice magic items (and spells if dragons can cast spells in this world)? Good luck with your full BAB. You won't be able to hit it enough times to do enough damage to kill it before it just slaughters you all.

[Gwazi Magnum]

When you're looking at a dragon with an AC in the 40s or 50s, or even higher with a few choice magic items (and spells if dragons can cast spells in this world)? Good luck with your full BAB. You won't be able to hit it enough times to do enough damage to kill it before it just slaughters you all.

This is true, what about the other spell situations though?

[Treme]

I'm pretty new to D&D and to this board so I won't give too much input but it personally sounds like a game I wouldnt want to be a part of at all!
The spot/listen thing in the other thread just sounds stupid to me and your DMs attitude seems bad in all the points you've raised.

I'd kinda like this to happen ..



Honestly, I kinda want the DM to come and give his side of things. Not so that everyone can tell him how bad he is, but to see exactly what he is thinking.

as it seems so bad we've got to be missing something!

[Gwazi Magnum]

I'm pretty new to D&D and to this board so I won't give too much input but it personally sounds like a game I wouldnt want to be a part of at all!
The spot/listen thing in the other thread just sounds stupid to me and your DMs attitude seems bad in all the points you've raised.

I'd kinda like this to happen ..



as it seems so bad we've got to be missing something!

I'll try to do a general re-cap, see if I missed anything.
Though please note I am still one side of this.

There may be something else I am missing or simply not aware of because the DM has not expressed said reasons.

For non-magic he only started it after we as players selected the non-spell casting rule. Reasoning seems to be mostly what seems to be in his mind reinforcement of players choice, but he'll argue it against players requests now which doesn't make much sense.

Otherwise, he seems to be doing it for power balance reasons. I mean, it's hard to see why Drow would be banned for it's minor spell list in this situation for any reason other than 'Players can't have spells period'.

Note: He also tried to argue me on players gaining some form of access to stuff like flying and true seeing, but stopped when I highlighted that without it we have nothing to fight a lot of enemies which means he just broke his own campaign or has to cut out 95% of the monster manual.

For listen & spot, he describes it as something like...

His ears for example are bad at hearing things, while someone else may be better at hearing things. If both of them were to go noisy and distracting areas, he could fare better because there is not as much input as for the other person who may get over whelmed and start to hurt.

So in practice he is taking higher spot and listen skills and making the characters hurt at times for it for having more sensitive senses.

[Prime32]

Githzerai is non-coreThe Monster Manual is non-core now? :smallconfused:

Anyway, easiest way to explain the problems with removing magic from the game: Fighting a monster of CR equal to your level is supposed to be 50/50 odds. If a monster has a CR 8 below your level, you are considered as strong as sixteen of them put together. If the monster is any weaker than that then you don't even get XP for defeating it, since the game assumes you'll win automatically.

Now take a level 100 fighter with no magic, and put it up against this CR 3 monster (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/shadow.htm). This isn't just a hard fight for the fighter, it is literally impossible to defeat an incorporeal enemy without magic; he will die 100% of the time.

[Gwazi Magnum]

The Monster Manual is non-core now? :smallconfused:

Anyway, easiest way to explain the problems with removing magic from the game: Fighting a monster of CR equal to your level is supposed to be 50/50 odds. If a monster has a CR 8 below your level, you are considered as strong as sixteen of them put together. If the monster is any weaker than that then you don't even get XP for defeating it, since the game assumes you'll win automatically.

Now take a level 100 fighter with no magic, and put it up against this CR 3 monster (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/shadow.htm). This isn't just a hard fight for the fighter, it is literally impossible to defeat an incorporeal enemy without magic; he will die 100% of the time.


Oops, my bad. I forgot that was a Monster Manual race.

Though if it brags the same features as Changelings it will still not be allowed core or not. Gnomes are already not allowed for have spells per day.

Couldn't that fighter use something like a magic weapon though to beat the creature?

[ahenobarbi]

Couldn't that fighter use something like a magic weapon though to beat the creature?

magic weapon

[Krobar]

This is true, what about the other spell situations though?

What about them? Sorcerers usually take spells they can spam in any/all situations, specifically because they're limited in how many they can learn. Wizards prepare enough variety to be able to be useful in many situations. Clerics too. Buffs? You don't have them. Battlefield control? You don't have it.

From what I read, unless I misunderstood, YOU'RE limited. The game isn't so much. That means all those monsters that have spell-like abilities? Like Dragons? Baatezu? Tanar'ri? Undead? THEY still have them.

Most DMs I've ever played with, and myself when I'm DM, won't dummy down an encounter (so to speak) just to accommodate a party that willingly limited its own abilities. That's the risk you take when you decide "hey... let's try this with no spellcasters..."

[Arbane]

Seeing how this is the same DM who made a (Non-stated) plot control wizard in his earlier campaign to 'fix' anything the players messed up or screwed over essentially preventing the players from causing massive changes that he didn't like, I doubt his plan is to have us take over his world.

Especially when he's bragging about how big and well guarded his world is.

Note: I once said, "What if I had a level 40/50 wizard character, how would I face against your plot device wizard then?" and his response was "Still too weak, he sees you as nothing and flings you away.

This did make he ask, why doesn't he just save the world then have us level 7's waste our time at it? His response was 'The wizard is neutral and cares only for preserving the balance'.

Let's see: Uberpowerful NPC who explicitly breaks the rules the PCs are stuck with, who doesn't do anything but hit the PCs with the Plothammer when they get out of line? Yeah, I'm thinking that leaving this campaign is probably a good idea.

....Uberwizard doesn't own a katana (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=275152), does he? :smallbiggrin:


If you want weaker casters or no casters, then you should probably be playing in a low-magic setting at least, or else using a different system than DnD.

Yep. There's plenty of perfectly good low-magic fantasy games, but D&D is NOT one of them.


So in practice he is taking higher spot and listen skills and making the characters hurt at times for it for having more sensitive senses.

*facepalm*
Does he also make people with high linguistics skills more likely to get confused when talking, since they know so many languages?

[Gwazi Magnum]

magic weapon

Magic items/gear are still allowed. Just not those that act as a loophole for spells.

So stuff like Unholy Greatsword is allowed.
Stuff like wand of _____ is not.


What about the other spellcasters? Sorcerers usually take spells they can spam in any/all situations, specifically because they're limited in how many they can learn. Wizards prepare enough variety to be able to be useful in many situations. Clerics too. Buffs? You don't have them. Battlefield control? You don't have it.

From what I read, unless I misunderstood, YOU'RE limited. The game isn't. That means all those monsters that have spells and spell-like abilities? Like Dragons? Baatezu? Tanar'ri? Undead? THEY still have them.

Most DMs I've ever played with, and myself when I'm DM, won't dummy down an encounter (so to speak) just to accommodate a party that willingly limited its own abilities. That's the risk you take when you decide "hey... let's try this with no spellcasters..."

It is a case of just us being limited.
But it's turned into a player set restriction to a DM enforced one.

Though I was also kind of derailing here asking how spell casters would typically be ready for any encounter. I was curious so in the future I may know how to spell cast better.

[Krobar]

Magic items/gear are still allowed. Just not those that act as a loophole for spells.

So stuff like Unholy Greatsword is allowed.
Stuff like wand of _____ is not.



It is a case of just us being limited.
But it's turned into a player set restriction to a DM enforced one.

Though I was also kind of derailing here asking how spell casters would typically be ready for any encounter. I was curious so in the future I may know how to spell cast better.

If it's really just YOU that's limited, please forgive my choice of terminology, but in any game I've either run or played in over the last 30 years, you're gettin' raped, and raped hard.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Let's see: Uberpowerful NPC who explicitly breaks the rules the PCs are stuck with, who doesn't do anything but hit the PCs with the Plothammer when they get out of line? Yeah, I'm thinking that leaving this campaign is probably a good idea.

....Uberwizard doesn't own a katana (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=275152), does he? :smallbiggrin:



Yep. There's plenty of perfectly good low-magic fantasy games, but D&D is NOT one of them.



*facepalm*
Does he also make people with high linguistics skills more likely to get confused when talking, since they know so many languages?

No he doesn't have a katana :p
Note: The campaign with this no magic and the spot and listen rule hasn't started yet.

This Wizard is from an earlier/previous campaign he did that also failed because he started to do stuff like 'clothes set on fire, you can't take them off, you're dying now' I spoke up about it and he got fed up enough he quit as DM.

Spot & Listen are the only skills taking penalties at the moment.

[Karnith]

Otherwise, he seems to be doing it for power balance reasons. I mean, it's hard to see why Drow would be banned for it's minor spell list in this situation for any reason other than 'Players can't have spells period'.
So, in addition to him taking a player-imposed restriction and making it a harshly-enforced rule, I think that a big problem is that your DM is trying to balance things without actually understanding what is imbalanced about 3.5 (and making it worse, in fact). He seems to have taken "casters are broken" to mean "non-casters are fine" (I take this from him not wanting to allow any magic at all), which just isn't true. If you don't have access to some magical effects (see invisibility, flight) then you just aren't going to be able to deal with enemies. I know that you've still got access to those specific effects, so I'm going to move past them (though I would recommend that you at the very least argue with him about getting access to freedom of movement, as enemies starting at roughly level 10 or so will be grappling you to death as a matter of course without it).

The problem is that in a high-magic world, enemies are still going to have access to everything that makes spellcasting powerful, while you will not. This also means that you will have very few ways to counter their tactics. How are you going to deal with being level-drained, for example, or ability-damaged? How do you even get close to creatures that can teleport? Do you have a plan against enemies who have Save-or-Dies besides "hope I make my saving throw every time" (and the Lord save you if you come up against someone with no-save spells)? These are things that really need to be considered, and in-depth, by a DM running a campaign like this, and judging by what you're saying I would not be confident that he's going to put the effort into it.

A lot of this depends on op-level, of course. If your DM is putting out wizards who hang out unbuffed and throw fireballs at you, and dragons who stand still alternating between full attacking and using their breath weapons, then you probably won't have much trouble doing things in the world. However, even a minimal amount of optimization/system mastery will mean that magical enemies will basically walk all over you.

Also, your group really needs to talk with your DM about how this was a voluntary choice on your part, and that you don't want to be straightjacketed for it. If you guys made the choice, then he doesn't get to decide what that choice means when it interferes with what you want.

[Gwazi Magnum]

If it's really just YOU that's limited, please forgive my choice of terminology, but in any game I've either run or played in over the last 30 years, you're gettin' raped, and raped hard.

It's me and the group under this restriction, not me specifically.

[Barsoom]

It's ridiculous. It's like "Hey guys. let's play chess, okay? Chess is a fun and interesting game! But, let's get rid of those queens, cause they're overpowered, with their combined rook and bishop move. And while we're at it, let's get rid of rooks and bishops as well. And the knight ... don't even get me started on the leaping ability - totally unbalanced! So we're getting rid of the knights too. There, now we can play an interesting and balanced game of chess."

[Krobar]

It's me and the group under this restriction, not me specifically.

I understood that. When I said "you" I was referring to you, as a party.

[Gwazi Magnum]

So, in addition to him taking a player-imposed restriction and making it a harshly-enforced rule, I think that a big problem is that your DM is trying to balance things without actually understanding what is imbalanced about 3.5 (and making it worse, in fact). He seems to have taken "casters are broken" to mean "non-casters are fine," which just isn't true. If you don't have access to some magical effects (see invisibility, flight) then you just aren't going to be able to deal with enemies. I know that you've still got access to those specific effects, so I'm going to move past them (though I would recommend that you argue with him about getting access to freedom of movement, as enemies starting at roughly level 10 or so will be grappling you to death as a matter of course without it).

The problem is that in a high-magic world, enemies are still going to have access to everything that makes spellcasting powerful, while you will not. This also means that you will have very few ways to counter their tactics. How are you going to deal with being level-drained, for example, or ability-damaged? How do you even get close to creatures that can teleport? Do you have a plan against enemies who have Save-or-Dies besides "hope I make my saving throw every time" (and the Lord save you if you come up against someone with no-save spells)? These are things that really need to be considered, and in-depth, by a DM running a campaign like this, and judging by what you're saying I would not be confident that he's going to put the effort into it.

A lot of this depends on op-level, of course. If your DM is putting out wizards who hang out unbuffed and throw fireballs at you, and dragons who stand still alternating between full attacking and using their breath weapons, then you probably won't have much trouble doing things in the world. However, even a minimal amount of optimization/system mastery will mean that magical enemies will basically walk all over you.

Also, your group really needs to talk with your DM about how this was a voluntary choice on your part, and that you don't want to be straightjacketed for it. If you guys made the choice, then he doesn't get to decide what that choice means when it goes up against what you want.

I can state for sure that my knowledge of d&d 3.5 mechanics far out weighs his.

At least from what he has shown in his ability as a player.
However he claims he can find ways to make himself almost invincible and he is also is a very smart guy so I wouldn't be surprised to learn he had been holding back how much he really knows about d&d 3.5

Having yet to play his campaign I don't know if my challenge he means, send over leveled, over numbered enemies at us or if he is being clever with the mechanics/system mastery.

I know his first time as DM he sure didn't, but he was also learning how d&d 3.5 worked then. He's had a year to learn the game since then.

I do plan to ask the other players at some point though how they feel about this rule enforcement.

As for ways to deal with things...

1. Ability/Energy damage = Either find a racial template immune to it or nothing
2. Teleporting = He's banned any way of us teleporting, so best I can see is someone going Monk and chasing them down
3. Saving Throws = Sadly, we are kind of left with roll of the dice

[Gwazi Magnum]

I understood that. When I said "you" I was referring to you, as a party.

I should note, we are playing Gestalt.

But are restricted to core classes, and with the spell classes banned we pretty much have gestalt with...

Rogue, Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, Bard, Monk & Ranger

+Prestige from the DMG that do not expand spell levels and/or have spells as a pre-requesite (which is like 70-80% of them).

[Amphetryon]

Enjoy, if you can, both sessions of the campaign before you TPK. A 3.5 edition D&D campaign lasting more than that many sessions under these rules seems all but impossible unless confrontation with enemies is wholly avoided.

[Renen]

You said you don't know the tier system. Its fine, but you should atleast give it a look. Currently, in your high magic world you having no magic, will get you killed veeeeery fast.

No magic pretty much means no tier 1-2 characters. Maybe no tier 3 either, seeing as he outlawed stances and the such (wtf, they aren't magic). As such your WHOLE party can be killed by ONE wizard who will probably not even be trying too hard.

Edit:if I see its core only. You are doubly screwed, seeing as a mage can still kill you in a heartbeat, while you have even less of a chance to counter him.

[Studoku]

Sadly I don't really know the tier system myself.

I never really concerned myself with it, I just always focused on making a character.
I meant to post a link but I forgot. This explains it better than I could: http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/063/6/5/Doris_2_by_B1nd1.gif

[ahenobarbi]

Hmm how about playing Necropolitan (immunities) Avariel (natural flight) aiming for Shadowdancer (a bit of teleportation) or Horizonwalker (a lot of teleportation)?

[Kazyan]

You can take the Deadly Hunter Druid variant to lose Wildshape. It gives you Favored enemies and Monk AC + speed. Might wanna do Druidic Avenger, too. Gestalt that with Barbarian using Ferocity in place of rage, and you should have no problems catching up to enemies, nor whacking them for a lot of damage.

About the only nonmagical prestige class that's worth anything in core is Horizon Walker, but your DM will probably ban the Planar Terrain Masteries. DH Druidic Avenger//Ferocity Barbarian doesn't get you good reflex save, but I hope it's a good gestalt in your circumstances. An alternative to Barbarian would be Ranger, if you want good Reflex saves and more skill points, but it sounds like skill points are a bother in your campaign.

[Renen]

Hmm how about playing Necropolitan (immunities) Avariel (natural flight) aiming for Shadowdancer (a bit of teleportation) or Horizonwalker (a lot of teleportation)?


Well, they can't use anything that even smells of magic. So none of those would work. Oh, and its core only. If that was my DM, I would steal his whole group, and DM myself, while laughing at him as he cries alone

[tyckspoon]

At least from what he has shown in his ability as a player.
However he claims he can find ways to make himself almost invincible and he is also is a very smart guy so I wouldn't be surprised to learn he had been holding back how much he really knows about d&d 3.5


Or he found out how to use Google and looked up a bunch of TO/PO records. You don't have to have deep system mastery to find out, for example, that Persistent Beastland Ferocity + Delay Death means you just don't GAF about HP damage.. until it gets dispelled off you. But hey, your party isn't allowed to have magic. :smallsigh:

[Karnith]

Or he found out how to use Google and looked up a bunch of TO/PO records. You don't have to have deep system mastery to find out, for example, that Persistent Beastland Ferocity + Delay Death means you just don't GAF about HP damage.. until it gets dispelled off you. But hey, your party isn't allowed to have magic. :smallsigh:
It's much fairer when only the DM gets to make his characters invincible.

[Arbane]

Enjoy, if you can, both sessions of the campaign before you TPK. A 3.5 edition D&D campaign lasting more than that many sessions under these rules seems all but impossible unless confrontation with enemies is wholly avoided.

Pretty much what this guy said.

Also, your DM sounds like a jerk, try to find another one. Or to be another one.

[SaintRidley]

It's ridiculous. It's like "Hey guys. let's play chess, okay? Chess is a fun and interesting game! But, let's get rid of those queens, cause they're overpowered, with their combined rook and bishop move. And while we're at it, let's get rid of rooks and bishops as well. And the knight ... don't even get me started on the leaping ability - totally unbalanced! So we're getting rid of the knights too. There, now we can play an interesting and balanced game of chess."

Little more like "Hey, let's play chess. It's a fun and interesting game. But we should really get rid of your queen, because she's overpowered, and the rooks and bishops too. That's too much movement at once, way overpowered. Don't get me started on the knights, those are out too. What? You want me to get rid of my queen and knights and rooks and bishops? No, no, no, no. I still get to use them. I promise I won't do anything broken with them, though. This is going to be a fun and balanced game of chess, after all."


Your DM needs to stop DMing. Permanently.

[Barsoom]

Little more like "Hey, let's play chess. It's a fun and interesting game. But we should really get rid of your queen, because she's overpowered, and the rooks and bishops too. That's too much movement at once, way overpowered. Don't get me started on the knights, those are out too. What? You want me to get rid of my queen and knights and rooks and bishops? No, no, no, no. I still get to use them. I promise I won't do anything broken with them, though. This is going to be a fun and balanced game of chess, after all."I may have missed the part where the DM still gets to use all the goodies. In that case, it's not only stupid, but downright evil.

[Krobar]

I may have missed the part where the DM still gets to use all the goodies. In that case, it's not only stupid, but downright evil.

In response to a post of mine earlier:




It is a case of just us being limited.
But it's turned into a player set restriction to a DM enforced one.

[Karnith]

I may have missed the part where the DM still gets to use all the goodies. In that case, it's not only stupid, but downright evil.
Well, it hasn't been established that the DM is going to use all of them, but the campaign is high-magic, and the characters are not only banned from playing casters but also from using anything that resembles magic (including magic items, spell-like abilities, martial maneuvers, and the like). While it's possible that the DM can run the game sensibly, it's far more likely, given Gwazi's account of what's been going on, that he doesn't understand the impact of what he's done (as evidenced by the DM trying to forbid the players from having flight and see invisibility/true seeing).

[Gwazi Magnum]

You said you don't know the tier system. Its fine, but you should atleast give it a look. Currently, in your high magic world you having no magic, will get you killed veeeeery fast.

No magic pretty much means no tier 1-2 characters. Maybe no tier 3 either, seeing as he outlawed stances and the such (wtf, they aren't magic). As such your WHOLE party can be killed by ONE wizard who will probably not even be trying too hard.

Edit:if I see its core only. You are doubly screwed, seeing as a mage can still kill you in a heartbeat, while you have even less of a chance to counter him.

Classes are core only, we can still take stuff like feats and variants from out of core, but it all needs to be DM approved.


You can take the Deadly Hunter Druid variant to lose Wildshape. It gives you Favored enemies and Monk AC + speed. Might wanna do Druidic Avenger, too. Gestalt that with Barbarian using Ferocity in place of rage, and you should have no problems catching up to enemies, nor whacking them for a lot of damage.

About the only nonmagical prestige class that's worth anything in core is Horizon Walker, but your DM will probably ban the Planar Terrain Masteries. DH Druidic Avenger//Ferocity Barbarian doesn't get you good reflex save, but I hope it's a good gestalt in your circumstances. An alternative to Barbarian would be Ranger, if you want good Reflex saves and more skill points, but it sounds like skill points are a bother in your campaign.

Horizon walker was already approved during an earlier build concept I had in mind.
He's banned the Druid class flat out, and honestly If I'm going Druid, no spell tree but with Monk AC and speed, why don't I just go monk?

As for favored enemy, my currently build is using Knowledge Devotion and the DM expressed he doesn't want that mixed with favored enemy.


Or he found out how to use Google and looked up a bunch of TO/PO records. You don't have to have deep system mastery to find out, for example, that Persistent Beastland Ferocity + Delay Death means you just don't GAF about HP damage.. until it gets dispelled off you. But hey, your party isn't allowed to have magic. :smallsigh:

This is true... I'm hoping it's not the case though.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Well, it hasn't been established that the DM is going to use all of them, but the campaign is high-magic and the characters are not only banned from playing casters, but also from using anything that resembles magic (including magic items, spell-like abilities, martial maneuvers, and the like). While it's possible that the DM can run the game sensibly, it's far more likely, given Gwazi's account of what's been going on, that he doesn't understand the impact of what he's done (as evidenced by the DM trying to forbid the players from having flight and see invisibility/true seeing).

Magic items are still allowed.

Just not those that cast/simulate spells.

So stuff like Longsword +2 is allowed
Only spells we can simulate are those like Flying or True Seeing because otherwise most of the MM is immune to us.

[Karnith]

Magic items are still allowed.

Just not those that cast/simulate spells.
Sorry, that's what I meant. The thing is that those are generally the magic items worth spending money on, whereas the ones that just give you small numerical bonuses are much less valuable (despite what the DMG would tell you).

You can still get special weapon and armor enhancements on you gear, right? So you could get a +1 Chain Shirt of Light Fortification or a +1 Frost Greatsword or something, instead of just being restricted to +2 stuff.

EDIT: Also, if the game goes on for very long, you should really talk to him about getting Freedom of Movement somehow, if you can't convince him to let the restriction on magic items go.

[Barsoom]

Magic items are still allowed.

Just not those that cast/simulate spells.

So stuff like Longsword +2 is allowedYou may be displeased to know that Longsword +2 simulates Magic Weapon at caster level 8.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Sorry, that's what I meant. The thing is that those are generally the magic items worth spending money on, whereas the ones that just give you small numerical bonuses are much less valuable (despite what the DMG would tell you).

You can still get special weapon and armor enhancements on you gear, right? So you could get a +1 Chain Shirt of Light Fortification or a +1 Frost Greatsword or something, instead of just being restricted to +2 stuff.

EDIT: Also, if the game goes on for very long, you should really talk to him about getting Freedom of Movement somehow, if you can't convince him to let the restriction on magic items go.

He has warned against enchanting armor, he has a tendancy to take gear away from players constantly and never be seen from again.

His balancing is throwing more loot and gold at us per encounter, but still.
His love of taking gear away of players (Permanently) makes me heavily consider taking Vow of Poverty at times.


You may be displeased to know that Longsword +2 simulates Magic Weapon at caster level 8.

1. Very minor spell, not a game breaking one
2. I'm hoping he doesn't catch on to this and remove yet another benefit we may need

[Kazyan]

I was thinking Druidic Avenger for Rage and even faster movement, or not taking the variant and then keeping the animal companion. You also can't gestalt Monk//Barbarian because of the alignment conflict.

In that case...Wolf Totem Barbarian//Bard, maybe. The chassis is nearly as good as it can get, you still have a little speed, and you can trip with your whip and rage-strength.

[icefractal]

I have to ask - what redeeming features does this campaign have? Because it sounds terrible.

Not necessarily the "low magic" part - that's a valid thing, although 3.x is not the system I would use for it. But "low magic for you, epic-level NPC wizards and magi-tech for me" sounds like a huge pile of BS. And then you mix in weird house-rules like the Spot/Listen thing ... this game would have to be extremely awesome in other ways to be worth staying in.

[ZeroSpace9000]

I feel the need to chip in at this point. OP, it seems like when your DM is stating 'no magic', he really means no magic for you. I've heard of several games that were like this, and they were all just power-trips for the DM in question. And with what you've stated about the DM in your 'listen/spot' thread, it's sounds like that's the case here too.

Here's the thing; D&D assumes that you have access to magic and magic items. Monsters, challenge ratings, and the like, are calibrated against you having these things. And when a DM takes these things from the players, but leaves the monsters/NPCs untouched, he/she is throwing things out of whack. This is even worse with the spot/listen thing from it's relevant thread. This reeks of being frustrated by NPCs/monsters being spotted too soon, and trying to fix it in a ham-fisted way. With all that I've heard about what the DM is doing, it really sounds like this will not be a good game. It actually sounds like your friend D (yes, that one. I posted in that thread too.) may have had some mitigating factors in his favour.

This is a very bad sign.

I strongly, strongly recommend looking for another game, as this one doesn't sound like it will be fun at all. And as for the comment you made in the Spot/Listen thread, about not wanting to kick up a fuss and leave if no one else does? Bull. This is your free time we're talking about here, what you do because you enjoy it. If you're not having fun in a game, then the game is failing on it's most basic purpose; to have fun. Sure, you can make your own fun out of the game, but in this case it sounds like it will be far too much work for too little return. Your gaming group should be treated like any other relationship you have, in that you shouldn't settle for garbage like this.


With that said, if you're going to stay with the group regardless, that's your call. In that event, I can only foresee you having a poor time in this particular game, with this particular DM. Just don't expect it to be anything else, and you'll probably come out alright.

[/rant]

[Arbane]

He has warned against enchanting armor, he has a tendancy to take gear away from players constantly and never be seen from again.

What's his beef with magic armor? Does he feel like he's 'failed' if at least one PC isn't face-down in a pool of their own blood at the end of each fight?

(Speaking of which, if you guys don't have healing magic, each fight is going to need a week or so of downtime to recuperate.)



His balancing is throwing more loot and gold at us per encounter, but still.
His love of taking gear away of players (Permanently) makes me heavily consider taking Vow of Poverty at times.

If he sticks anywhere near close to WBL but denies access to the vast majority of magic items, by level 8 you'll have more gold than you can spend without building your own castles.


I strongly, strongly recommend looking for another game, as this one doesn't sound like it will be fun at all. And as for the comment you made in the Spot/Listen thread, about not wanting to kick up a fuss and leave if no one else does? Bull. This is your free time we're talking about here, what you do because you enjoy it. If you're not having fun in a game, then the game is failing on it's most basic purpose; to have fun. Sure, you can make your own fun out of the game, but in this case it sounds like it will be far too much work for too little return. Your gaming group should be treated like any other relationship you have, in that you shouldn't settle for garbage like this.


With that said, if you're going to stay with the group regardless, that's your call. In that event, I can only foresee you having a poor time in this particular game, with this particular DM. Just don't expect it to be anything else, and you'll probably come out alright.

[/rant]


Listen to ZeroSpace9000, here. He/She/It is wise.

[Renen]

He has warned against enchanting armor, he has a tendancy to take gear away from players constantly and never be seen from again.

His balancing is throwing more loot and gold at us per encounter, but still.
His love of taking gear away of players (Permanently) makes me heavily consider taking Vow of Poverty at times.



1. Very minor spell, not a game breaking one
2. I'm hoping he doesn't catch on to this and remove yet another benefit we may need


Not like it matters. You WILL die. Its kind of a fact. In a world with magic, if you cant use it, OR any magical items, you are so screwed...

[The Trickster]

Here is my dilemma. Magic (and manuvers, wild shape, etc) help make D&D interesting. Could you play a game with no magic or magic-like abilities? Sure you could, but then combat basically becomes "I swing my -insert weapon here- at the bad guy" over and over again. Even if you consider other attacks, like tripping, grappling, etc., doing those things over and over again gets really boring really quick. Add this to the fact that the DM will have to make encounters weaker then normal to compensate for your lack of spells/abilities, and the game may not be as fun as advertised.

Some magic is ok. No magic is kinda lame.

[ZeroSpace9000]

...Now that's interesting. I don't believe I've ever had anyone here suggest that my thoughts on something are correct.

Please don't mistake that for any sort of pig-headedness on my part. It's just the last poster I gave advice in this vein, I was calling them out for wanting to bring a TO build to wreck his DM's campaign. And I was supposedly the bad guy in that thread!

[TuggyNE]

It's ridiculous. It's like "Hey guys. let's play chess, okay? Chess is a fun and interesting game! But, let's get rid of those queens, cause they're overpowered, with their combined rook and bishop move. And while we're at it, let's get rid of rooks and bishops as well. And the knight ... don't even get me started on the leaping ability - totally unbalanced! So we're getting rid of the knights too. There, now we can play an interesting and balanced game of chess."

Bam, XKCD (http://xkcd.com/1112/).

[Gwazi Magnum]

I have to ask - what redeeming features does this campaign have? Because it sounds terrible.

Not necessarily the "low magic" part - that's a valid thing, although 3.x is not the system I would use for it. But "low magic for you, epic-level NPC wizards and magi-tech for me" sounds like a huge pile of BS. And then you mix in weird house-rules like the Spot/Listen thing ... this game would have to be extremely awesome in other ways to be worth staying in.

Honestly it's just the continuing campaign.

The campaign has the initial attraction high challenge.
But the closer we get to starting it the more obvious it becomes that high challenge means, more penalties for players.

Our current DM wants to be a player, with me, him and Player E being the only three with experience DM'ing. But the group is already pretty convinced I wouldn't do a good job as DM from how quickly my last campaign fell apart.

Plus if I were to leave now and start my own they would probably see it as me being a ****, who just isn't happy with what I'm getting etc.

Note: I refer to the one that fell apart from Player E making a character just to ruin it.


I feel the need to chip in at this point. OP, it seems like when your DM is stating 'no magic', he really means no magic for you. I've heard of several games that were like this, and they were all just power-trips for the DM in question. And with what you've stated about the DM in your 'listen/spot' thread, it's sounds like that's the case here too.

Here's the thing; D&D assumes that you have access to magic and magic items. Monsters, challenge ratings, and the like, are calibrated against you having these things. And when a DM takes these things from the players, but leaves the monsters/NPCs untouched, he/she is throwing things out of whack. This is even worse with the spot/listen thing from it's relevant thread. This reeks of being frustrated by NPCs/monsters being spotted too soon, and trying to fix it in a ham-fisted way. With all that I've heard about what the DM is doing, it really sounds like this will not be a good game. It actually sounds like your friend D (yes, that one. I posted in that thread too.) may have had some mitigating factors in his favour.

This is a very bad sign.

I strongly, strongly recommend looking for another game, as this one doesn't sound like it will be fun at all. And as for the comment you made in the Spot/Listen thread, about not wanting to kick up a fuss and leave if no one else does? Bull. This is your free time we're talking about here, what you do because you enjoy it. If you're not having fun in a game, then the game is failing on it's most basic purpose; to have fun. Sure, you can make your own fun out of the game, but in this case it sounds like it will be far too much work for too little return. Your gaming group should be treated like any other relationship you have, in that you shouldn't settle for garbage like this.


With that said, if you're going to stay with the group regardless, that's your call. In that event, I can only foresee you having a poor time in this particular game, with this particular DM. Just don't expect it to be anything else, and you'll probably come out alright.

[/rant]

Wait, are you arguing that Player D may make a better DM than he would? o.O

If I were to just back out and say I was worried it wouldn't be fun, I don't see any overly bad reactions to that happening.
But if I were to turn around to start another d&d group with people from that group they'd see it as me being anal and trying to take over.

Plus I don't really know anyone else outside of those people who would play d&d.

So if I were to leave, and not try to DM my own group with those people I would have no group period.


What's his beef with magic armor? Does he feel like he's 'failed' if at least one PC isn't face-down in a pool of their own blood at the end of each fight?

(Speaking of which, if you guys don't have healing magic, each fight is going to need a week or so of downtime to recuperate.)



If he sticks anywhere near close to WBL but denies access to the vast majority of magic items, by level 8 you'll have more gold than you can spend without building your own castles.




Listen to ZeroSpace9000, here. He/She/It is wise.

I tried to state this balance thing to him, he replies with saying he's only send CR at us equal to our level so it's fine...

But to be fair level 8 gold is 22,000.

That's maybe enough for a +3 or +4 weapon, still much room to invest gold in.

Missing the fact that equal CR = assuming we aren't being raped in terms of magic and gear

[Arbane]

But to be fair level 8 gold is 22,000.

That's maybe enough for a +3 or +4 weapon, still much room to invest gold in.


So... he's ok with magic weapons but not magic armor? bwuh?

[Renen]

Honestly it's just the continuing campaign.

The campaign has the initial attraction high challenge.
But the closer we get to starting it the more obvious it becomes that high challenge means, more penalties for players.

Our current DM wants to be a player, with me, him and Player E being the only three with experience DM'ing. But the group is already pretty convinced I wouldn't do a good job as DM from how quickly my last campaign fell apart.

Plus if I were to leave now and start my own they would probably see it as me being a ****, who just isn't happy with what I'm getting etc.

Note: I refer to the one that fell apart from Player E making a character just to ruin it.



Wait, are you arguing that Player D may make a better DM than he would? o.O

If I were to just back out and say I was worried it wouldn't be fun, I don't see any overly bad reactions to that happening.
But if I were to turn around to start another d&d group with people from that group they'd see it as me being anal and trying to take over.

Plus I don't really know anyone else outside of those people who would play d&d.

So if I were to leave, and not try to DM my own group with those people I would have no group period.



I tried to state this balance thing to him, he replies with saying he's only send CR at us equal to our level so it's fine...

But to be fair level 8 gold is 22,000.

That's maybe enough for a +3 or +4 weapon, still much room to invest gold in.

Missing the fact that equal CR = assuming we aren't being raped in terms of magic and gear

Well, first of all, Sit the other players down and either show them this thread, or just tell em what a moron the DM is.
Second and this is VERY VERY important
HE CANT give you your CR in challenge because you WILL DIE. The whole CR thing does not assume you are all tier 4 or below. Since you arent familiar with tiers, ill explain.

CR is calculated off your party's level. A monk and a Wizard can have the same level, but while a monk might struggle with one bandit, the wizard can take on 5 of the same bandit. This is why its hard making a low magic campaign. Because one has to balance the monsters for the players who have to make do with no magic.
In your case its 10x worse. You DONT have magic, and enemy does. By looking at CR, you are evenly matched, but in reality, you will literally NEVER touch them

[Gwazi Magnum]

Note my reply below reminds me of

To give you a guys a mindset on his d&d know how.

He can open different manuals and put a pretty good character together fine.

But when it comes to allowing/not allowing things as a DM there's one case I remember where for a character concept I wanted a female halfing, a very weak looking one who walked with a quarter staff, but in a fight she'd jump around like crazy and beat up everyone (kind of like Yoda does tbh).

But for this I needed Shadow Blade to work with Quarter staff or she is mechanically dead in combat. When I asked for this variant he said no, but the reasoning behind was 'He didn't know enough about that kind of stuff to make a change to it'.


So... he's ok with magic weapons but not magic armor? bwuh?

It's not that he's not ok with it, but he warns against it because we'll probably end up losing it fast.

Why the same warning isn't for weapons though I don't know, maybe he's just assuming we'll use common sense and know both are at the same risk.

But his rulings and rationale behind them haven't followed common sense either.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Well, first of all, Sit the other players down and either show them this thread, or just tell em what a moron the DM is.
Second and this is VERY VERY important
HE CANT give you your CR in challenge because you WILL DIE. The whole CR thing does not assume you are all tier 4 or below. Since you arent familiar with tiers, ill explain.

CR is calculated off your party's level. A monk and a Wizard can have the same level, but while a monk might struggle with one bandit, the wizard can take on 5 of the same bandit. This is why its hard making a low magic campaign. Because one has to balance the monsters for the players who have to make do with no magic.
In your case its 10x worse. You DONT have magic, and enemy does. By looking at CR, you are evenly matched, but in reality, you will literally NEVER touch them

This is true.

I should note though I'm not a 100% stranger to tiers.
I know the core basics like Wizard > Monk by a long shot

But I never concerned myself with more specifics like which class is under which tier and why.
I just have a general idea of where core classes and ranked on it.

[Renen]

Yeh. So you, with all that stuff banned, will likely be around the level of monks. Now imagine a full monk party trying to take on the same CR thats designed for a party with 1 wizard, one bard, one Paladin and one Rouge. Note that the previous classes have all their casting intact.

So do tell, you think your DM is smart enough to balance that out? I reeeeeeeeeeeally doubt it.

I dont even know why this thread went on for so long. Looking at that game, I would never play with the DM. Not because i might not like these mechanics, but because the DM's actions look so stupid, that there is a 99% chance the game will suck.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Yeh. So you, with all that stuff banned, will likely be around the level of monks. Now imagine a full monk party trying to take on the same CR thats designed for a party with 1 wizard, one bard, one Paladin and one Rouge. Note that the previous classes have all their casting intact.

So do tell, you think your DM is smart enough to balance that out? I reeeeeeeeeeeally doubt it.

I dont even know why this thread went on for so long. Looking at that game, I would never play with the DM. Not because i might not like these mechanics, but because the DM's actions look so stupid, that there is a 99% chance the game will suck.

To be fair, we are gestalt which helps a bit and can use out of core feats.
So I don't think we'd be monk level, but I do get where you're getting to.

[Renen]

While gestalt would help, you can still only have a max of 20 BAB at lvl 20.
I also doubt you will get above 18 in a single stat (i dont count the points from leveling)
As such, you will eventually arrive at monsters who's AC will be too high to hit w/o resorting to magic items or spells like bear's strength, or the like.
But oh wait, you cant cast spells or use magic items... :smallbiggrin:

[ZeroSpace9000]

With my earlier post, I am not saying that D would be a better DM than the current one. Far from it. What I meant was that with how your current DM is acting, the sorts of things he's house-ruling and all that, this may be part of the reason why D always seems so standoff-ish.

This is not to defend D's actions in any way, just that this DM's actions may be partially to blame for D's behaviour. You've said in earlier threads that D gets upset real easily by hard games. With the BS challenge that this DM is bringing to bear, I can see that really setting D off, and fast.


Just took a quick look back at my post, and it wasn't terribly clear on the matter. Hope this fixes that.

[Vamphyr]

I'm pretty sure I've read through every thread that has been posted about this DM/group, and honestly, I'd say bail on them. Take a break, start your own game, just something other than playing. I've played with DM's who try to run things "realistically" and it is not fun. Generally what happens is "realism" comes into play when it favors them and hinders you.

I'm not telling you to stop being friends with anyone, but I've been in your position, stuck for months in a game I hated, so to not offend my friend. All it did was waste hours upon hours of my time for an experience that left a bad taste in my mouth.

No matter how many threads you start asking the playground for advice, your DM's ego will always win out, and your fun will lose.

Best of luck.

[Gwazi Magnum]

With my earlier post, I am not saying that D would be a better DM than the current one. Far from it. What I meant was that with how your current DM is acting, the sorts of things he's house-ruling and all that, this may be part of the reason why D always seems so standoff-ish.

This is not to defend D's actions in any way, just that this DM's actions may be partially to blame for D's behaviour. You've said in earlier threads that D gets upset real easily by hard games. With the BS challenge that this DM is bringing to bear, I can see that really setting D off, and fast.


Just took a quick look back at my post, and it wasn't terribly clear on the matter. Hope this fixes that.

The person making these rules is not the person DMing that group.
He is a player in that group.

These rules being discussed now are plans he has for a future d&d group, within a month from now where he will be DMing.

[Darius Kane]

No gaming is better than bad gaming.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I'm pretty sure I've read through every thread that has been posted about this DM/group, and honestly, I'd say bail on them. Take a break, start your own game, just something other than playing. I've played with DM's who try to run things "realistically" and it is not fun. Generally what happens is "realism" comes into play when it favors them and hinders you.

I'm not telling you to stop being friends with anyone, but I've been in your position, stuck for months in a game I hated, so to not offend my friend. All it did was waste hours upon hours of my time for an experience that left a bad taste in my mouth.

No matter how many threads you start asking the playground for advice, your DM's ego will always win out, and your fun will lose.

Best of luck.

I did kind of did make a good amount of threads around this group haven't I?
I lost track tbh.

I don't want to bail on them as a whole though, there are a number of them that are good.

Player Z although he can't understand simple fighter builds even to save his life is a fun and entertaining player.

Player A not only is a fun and great player but the best DM we've ever had. He's only stopping because he wishes to be a player again.

Player T is a very skilled and enjoyable roleplayer as well.

Player E (the person in question here) is a good player too (given when his alignment doesn't conflict with the rest of the party, when it is he turns from good player to troll player with good and memorable moments), he just gets too power crazy when put in a DM position.

Player D does have the violence and tantrums which does it make it hard to play. But if he is actually able to fix those issues (in the middle of an approach on that, with his parents too) his only issue is lack of RP skills which can be worked on.

Player L, he is a troll player. No argument about it, but still an entertaining player whose trolling for the most part is humurous and only gets out of hand once in a while.

[Vamphyr]

I did kind of did make a good amount of threads around this group haven't I?
I lost track tbh.

I don't want to bail on them as a whole though, there are a number of them that are good.

Player Z although he can't understand simple fighter builds even to save his life is a fun and entertaining player.

Player A not only is a fun and great player but the best DM we've ever had. He's only stopping because he wishes to be a player again.

Player T is a very skilled and enjoyable roleplayer as well.

Player E (the person in question here) is a good player too (given when his alignment doesn't conflict with the rest of the party, when it is he turns from good player to troll player with good and memorable moments), he just gets too power crazy when put in a DM position.

Player D does have the violence and tantrums which does it make it hard to play. But if he is actually able to fix those issues (in the middle of an approach on that, with his parents too) his only issue is lack of RP skills which can be worked on.

Player L, he is a troll player. No argument about it, but still an entertaining player whose trolling for the most part is humurous and only gets out of hand once in a while.


In no way am I suggesting abandoning your friends, far from it. What I meant was take a hiatus. See your friends as much as you'd like, continue doing normal stuff, but just skip this next particular game. Probably the best way would be to tell them you need a break from RPGs to keep from burning out.

I would just hate to see you suffer though a game with that many ridiculous rulings. If the plot was good, well that might be a different story, but from everything you've told us it won't be.

[Gwazi Magnum]

In no way am I suggesting abandoning your friends, far from it. What I meant was take a hiatus. See your friends as much as you'd like, continue doing normal stuff, but just skip this next particular game. Probably the best way would be to tell them you need a break from RPGs to keep from burning out.

I would just hate to see you suffer though a game with that many ridiculous rulings. If the plot was good, well that might be a different story, but from everything you've told us it won't be.

I get that you're not saying to ditch them as friends.

I'm just saying that I could still have fun with d&d with a number of them and that not every player in the group is the problem.

It probably would be best though if I just didn't play for a while though. I'll need to think on it though.

[Karnith]

[N]ot every player in the group is the problem.
Only one person needs to be a problem for a game to be ruined. Particularly if said person is the DM.

I'm not necessarily saying that you should leave, but you should at least consider how much fun you would have playing the game, and how much of your enjoyment in the sessions would be despite the game.

[Gnome Alone]

I work as a chess instructor for K-6 kids; chess with nothing but pawns and kings is a variant called "pawn wars." Good endgame practice.

We don't have a variant for when black starts with 3 pawns and white has his whole army, and pawns on the 7th rank.

[FleshrakerAbuse]

Gwazi Magnum, you have shown an extreme amount of caution and kindness in your attempts to reason with your friends and trying to accept various proposals here. Most of the game balance stuff has been talked over, yeah, so for other things...
(If you haven't done so)Try to make an appeal to your current DM as a friend, not a player. It might work better this way, and then if you begin to make leeway, try to show how giving only the DM's creatures magic would severely handicap your games. Also, try to show how the magic of those not-full caster classes don't make them much more powerful, just more versatile and more vivid. Explain how various spellcasting classes like the bard, dread necro, and warlock aren't overpowered, but about equal to the barbarian or rogue or fighter.
Really, you have done extremely well in regards to this. Sitting out just this one game might do the trick.
As others have asked, how are the rest of your friend's opinions on this?


This is just extra tips if you do play. If all fails, and you still want to play, then some gesalts may give you a chance. Fighter/monk gesalts with improved unarmed attack and the ki strike will help hit those incorporeals, high speed and ranged attacks/readied actions or spiked chains might work for teleporting hit-run creatures, and high BAB might can be overcome with heavy amounts of otherwise bad feats and magic enchantments (atk bonus) and a barbarian dip could make it a bit easier.

[Black Jester]

Some people tend to slightly over-react in this context. It is not impossible or particularly problematic to hift D&D games to a more mundane and realistic level. It requires a few thoughts and the game will have a relatively clear ending point when player characters will have difficulties to compete, but at low levels, it works out fine, as long as you keep the specific restrictions of the setting in mind.
If it is so desired, I can post a few ideas about how to run a decent low magic/ low fantasy game in D&D, but getting to the point where this works requires a bit trial and error. The Gestalt rules are already a step in the right direction, I would also strongly suggest to allow for the Tome of Battle classes and focus on a martial arts style campaign - every player takes a Martial Adept on one side and a decent supplementing class on the other side, and the game could actually work.

[SaintRidley]

Wait, are you arguing that Player D may make a better DM than he would? o.O

I think just about any being with a pulse that is not the prospective DM of this campaign would probably make a better DM.

[TuggyNE]

I think just about any being with a pulse that is not the prospective DM of this campaign would probably make a better DM.

Well, not Chief Circle. Or Lanky's original DM. But other than that, yeah could be! :smallwink:

[Gnome Alone]

Y'know, I say do play this campaign, even if he won't listen to reason. Why?

Step 1: Roll gestalt expert//monks. Max spot & listen.
Step 2: Swift, horrible deaths.
Step 3: Suddenly Gwazi as DM, or Player T with A advising, doesn't sound so bad.

[only1doug]

If you want to play with your friends then play in the game, just assume from the start that any character you play has the life expectancy of a mayfly and enjoy playing whacky character concepts and roleplaying the wierd characters.

Make sure that at the start of each session you have at least 5 backup characters prepared (for the inevitable deaths of the PC's) and enjoy playing (without investing too much emotional commitment to any one PC).

Some ideas:

The one man Band: utilise the penalty to high listen checks by becoming a cacophony of awful noise (ensure the party have wax earplugs avauilable first). Your party roll is debuffer, as the enemies (without earplugs) suffer from the penalties of having a listen skill that isn't in the negatives.

Team Rogue: convince your fellow players to all have stealth based characters, now you can all sneak around bypassing the enemies.
Extra points for the team gnoring the DM's adventure as "too dangerous" and sneaking around stealing from / framing townsfolk instead.

The Stereotypes: either play up to them or break them, either can be fun. You could play a halforc Barbarian, stupid and mighty ("Thud SMASH!") or a halfling barbarian, Nimble, quick but relatively weak.

[Wings of Peace]

The guy sucks. Man up, grab the DMG and tell people they meet in a bar already.

This guy has the right idea. And if that doesn't work out, meet up at a real bar!

Edit: Who's Chief Circle?

[TuggyNE]

Edit: Who's Chief Circle?

Read it and weep. (The nickname for the DM comes up a few pages in, IIRC. It's borrowed from Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions.)

[Krazzman]

I'm gonna dash my portion of thoughts into this thread...

about your rules... or better said the thought of it.

Seems a good start but a not quite good handled execution.

Restricting choice to Tier 3 and 4 would be a good start.
Maybe fixing Paladins and a few others. Spell casting isn't that bad it just has a low ground and a damned high ceiling.
Duskblade, Beguiler and Warmage are "good" casters, together with a Warlock and such stuff there can be really great options for playing a caster.

Otherwise restricting spells, banning certain spells and such stuff to mitigate the problems you had would be another way.

About your Group/DM.

As you wrote yourself your DM already gave you a choice. Then just accept his offer. Since he doesn't seem to be mature enough to be in a campaign of you without breaking it this can save you some nerves. Accept it and stay away from this campaign.

I know how hard it is to let things like this go. It is hard but necessary. If you really want to play on the other hand:

Any Race that doesn't need to sleep/and grants the possibility to get Fast healing or regeneration or similar:
Monk 2/ BarbarianX//Fighter 2 (or 6 if DUngeoncrasher or Ranger[the variant] for Endurance)/anything... rogue? or something with willsaves.
The point is: Not needing to sleep and having endurance gives you an armor that can't be taken away as you have to be knocked out to have someone steal this from you. Monk 2 or until Ki Strike Magic to get a few unarmed fighting techniques and being armed at all times. Barbarian after that gives you an excuse to not bath and well rage. Ranger can get you endurance and Skillpoints. Your preferred armor is a Chainshirt or, depending on your Wis Mod, nothing.

Or for total MADness you could go Monk//Paladin. Just joking.

I personally would either go Raptoran Ranger//Rogue or Ranger//Monk/Rogue focusing on Archery through Zen Archery. Maybe getting a way to use your Flurry of Blows with a Bow... I think there was a feat for that.
But seriously nothing in the description of the campaign would interest me in playing.

Still it is your decision what you want to do now. Many guys here already told you to let this one skip. If you can't see how this one is going to be fun then don't play. Maybe even tell them that you are going to be DMing another campaign but will skip this one to prepare for it so you can DM as soon as the other one is done. Maybe even say this burning out thing or whatever.

I hope this helps...

[smashbro]

So, originally, it sounded fine as a low magic campaign, something that everyone agreed on. But I think the DM did take it too far. You need to have everyone get together and talk so that everyone is clear on what people believe the rules should be. From there, find a middle point to agree on for what can be allowed and should be allowed in the campaign.

Alternately, have people switch being the DM so the usual DM has to play. If there's only one new dm to do this, they should be exactly like the old dm, who will hopefully see the problems while playing. Or, if you have a few people willing to do this, have them all interpret the rules on their own and be more lenient. This could show the DM what he should be more like, and the players will probably be more willing to call out that DM once they've played with others.




As for the DM in general, I wouldn't say I'm a fan of him. I mean, I was originally in the other direction (sure, why not let them do _____?) which led to the premature end of a campaign. But the players had fun with it while it lasted. I feel like I'm better now, but the most important part of my job is that players can do what they want within reason.

If it's supposed to be a high magic world, then you could still do the no casters thing, but the DM needs to remember this and give appropriate challenges. I'm not saying for him to let everything be too easy, but he needs to remember you're not casters and don't have access to what the enemies will likely have.

The whole plot wizard thing was odd too. I could see it as a joke being used once or twice, but if he's retconning the things the party does, then there's no reason for you to play. you're not doing anything that matters in the world. (Can't find the post you talked about that in, but I'm sure you said it).


Anyway, good luck with this, but getting the group to sit and talk is where you should go from here.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Gwazi Magnum, you have shown an extreme amount of caution and kindness in your attempts to reason with your friends and trying to accept various proposals here. Most of the game balance stuff has been talked over, yeah, so for other things...
(If you haven't done so)Try to make an appeal to your current DM as a friend, not a player. It might work better this way, and then if you begin to make leeway, try to show how giving only the DM's creatures magic would severely handicap your games. Also, try to show how the magic of those not-full caster classes don't make them much more powerful, just more versatile and more vivid. Explain how various spellcasting classes like the bard, dread necro, and warlock aren't overpowered, but about equal to the barbarian or rogue or fighter.
Really, you have done extremely well in regards to this. Sitting out just this one game might do the trick.
As others have asked, how are the rest of your friend's opinions on this?


This is just extra tips if you do play. If all fails, and you still want to play, then some gesalts may give you a chance. Fighter/monk gesalts with improved unarmed attack and the ki strike will help hit those incorporeals, high speed and ranged attacks/readied actions or spiked chains might work for teleporting hit-run creatures, and high BAB might can be overcome with heavy amounts of otherwise bad feats and magic enchantments (atk bonus) and a barbarian dip could make it a bit easier.

I've tried addressing this to him at both a player and a friend already.
It makes no difference, it's still just someone not liking his system and him getting defensive over it.

To be fair though, the non-spell caster thing was a player put restriction. And honestly I'd rather we keep it unless someone can find a miracle cure to prevent spell casters from overshadowing non spell casters.

The issue isn't with the non-magic classes, but with how far the DM took it and ran with it after the fact.

I should note, part of the reason a number of stuff from non-core isn't allowed like classes is also because I have a well established reputation in our group of being the munchkin. Being able to dig through manuals and make very broken/powerful characters, at least when compared to any typical casually put together one with core only content.

But what kind of character is it that gave me this rep? An Orc Kensai Fighter 12/Battle Sorcerer 1/Lion Totem Barbarian 1/Dragon Disciple 3.

He wields only an axe, his Strength is almost 50. If he's in melee of anything they're good as dead, that's it.
He doesn't even have a bow... simple range could screw him over.
Almost any spell could break him as he has no anti-magic protection.

They do nothing to slow him down, hinder him, exploit a weakness or anything.
So he does what he does best and slaughters monsters up close, and then people claim I'm either breaking the game or messing up the difficulty curve.

So the DM is trying to prevent this by cutting off some of the sources I have... even though my guy in the above example is 90% core anyways, only non core stuff is one or two weapon spec feats and the Kensai, battle sorcerer and lion toten variants.

I've never 'munchkined' a character that took advantage of status's, DR or spells that would make them unkillable or completely broken without someway to restrict him, like the above example... a simple god damn bow or flier would stop him.

Closest I had to completely broken never even entered play, those were...

1. Warforged Artificer, and he was restricted to item creation. Damn cheap creation but limited himself to his free xp pool so it was at most 10 decent magic items at the start.

2. Any Lycanthrope, and anytime this was a concept I pre-warn the DM they may want to make silver weapons more common.

As for your build advice, I considered a monk like character but didn't want my whole concept to be not being screwed by the DM every moment of play.


Some people tend to slightly over-react in this context. It is not impossible or particularly problematic to hift D&D games to a more mundane and realistic level. It requires a few thoughts and the game will have a relatively clear ending point when player characters will have difficulties to compete, but at low levels, it works out fine, as long as you keep the specific restrictions of the setting in mind.
If it is so desired, I can post a few ideas about how to run a decent low magic/ low fantasy game in D&D, but getting to the point where this works requires a bit trial and error. The Gestalt rules are already a step in the right direction, I would also strongly suggest to allow for the Tome of Battle classes and focus on a martial arts style campaign - every player takes a Martial Adept on one side and a decent supplementing class on the other side, and the game could actually work.

He's banned ToB classes for being too close to magic.
And in this case it was too close *cough*effective*cough* mechanic wise, he didn't even look at fluff.

If he did though he'd see some stuff like teleport and shadow maneuvers and then also have a magic nature reason to ban it.

Besides the fact, I offered help to the other players to build their characters.
They turned it down because they didn't want to bother with anything beyond core.


If you want to play with your friends then play in the game, just assume from the start that any character you play has the life expectancy of a mayfly and enjoy playing whacky character concepts and roleplaying the wierd characters.

Make sure that at the start of each session you have at least 5 backup characters prepared (for the inevitable deaths of the PC's) and enjoy playing (without investing too much emotional commitment to any one PC).

Some ideas:

The one man Band: utilise the penalty to high listen checks by becoming a cacophony of awful noise (ensure the party have wax earplugs avauilable first). Your party roll is debuffer, as the enemies (without earplugs) suffer from the penalties of having a listen skill that isn't in the negatives.

Team Rogue: convince your fellow players to all have stealth based characters, now you can all sneak around bypassing the enemies.
Extra points for the team gnoring the DM's adventure as "too dangerous" and sneaking around stealing from / framing townsfolk instead.

The Stereotypes: either play up to them or break them, either can be fun. You could play a halforc Barbarian, stupid and mighty ("Thud SMASH!") or a halfling barbarian, Nimble, quick but relatively weak.

You mean treat it like Call of Cthulu?

Interesting...
It's tempting, but if the DM learns I made things expecting that he might either take it as an attack or revive my character just to spite it.

But at the same time it does fit with his whole 'challenge' theme.

For the Band idea, tempting... but that's typical Bard taken to an all new extreme and I hate playing normal bard cause I don't like the idea of someone singing in the middle of a bloody fight.

Plus if I were to do that it's pretty much pissing right on his rule and saying '**** you DM, I'll use this against you now' which can't end well.

Stealth, maybe that could work but if not mixed with a '**** you' DM thing like the Band idea he'll probably find some lookout/magical security system reason to find us out.

Similliar example in past campaign: We're trying to free some kidnapped girls from a group of slavers. We found them tied up in the woods and the slavers found us, but left us alone because they now think we'll deliever the girls to them for pay.

Instead we casted disguise on some of us to pretend to be the girls and fool them.
Now I'm playing a sorcerer in this case so I use detect magic before hand to get a general feel for the area.
The DM forgot about that spells existence, me using it reminded him (and this was something he outright stated, I'm not just assuming here).
Then he says the slaver mages had it on too so we get caught before even able to RP our plan.


I'm gonna dash my portion of thoughts into this thread...

about your rules... or better said the thought of it.

Seems a good start but a not quite good handled execution.

Restricting choice to Tier 3 and 4 would be a good start.
Maybe fixing Paladins and a few others. Spell casting isn't that bad it just has a low ground and a damned high ceiling.
Duskblade, Beguiler and Warmage are "good" casters, together with a Warlock and such stuff there can be really great options for playing a caster.

Otherwise restricting spells, banning certain spells and such stuff to mitigate the problems you had would be another way.

About your Group/DM.

As you wrote yourself your DM already gave you a choice. Then just accept his offer. Since he doesn't seem to be mature enough to be in a campaign of you without breaking it this can save you some nerves. Accept it and stay away from this campaign.

I know how hard it is to let things like this go. It is hard but necessary. If you really want to play on the other hand:

Any Race that doesn't need to sleep/and grants the possibility to get Fast healing or regeneration or similar:
Monk 2/ BarbarianX//Fighter 2 (or 6 if DUngeoncrasher or Ranger[the variant] for Endurance)/anything... rogue? or something with willsaves.
The point is: Not needing to sleep and having endurance gives you an armor that can't be taken away as you have to be knocked out to have someone steal this from you. Monk 2 or until Ki Strike Magic to get a few unarmed fighting techniques and being armed at all times. Barbarian after that gives you an excuse to not bath and well rage. Ranger can get you endurance and Skillpoints. Your preferred armor is a Chainshirt or, depending on your Wis Mod, nothing.

Or for total MADness you could go Monk//Paladin. Just joking.

I personally would either go Raptoran Ranger//Rogue or Ranger//Monk/Rogue focusing on Archery through Zen Archery. Maybe getting a way to use your Flurry of Blows with a Bow... I think there was a feat for that.
But seriously nothing in the description of the campaign would interest me in playing.

Still it is your decision what you want to do now. Many guys here already told you to let this one skip. If you can't see how this one is going to be fun then don't play. Maybe even tell them that you are going to be DMing another campaign but will skip this one to prepare for it so you can DM as soon as the other one is done. Maybe even say this burning out thing or whatever.

I hope this helps...

I can see where you're coming from and I did have an unarmed concept at some point for this reason. But I ultimately decided I didn't want my whole character to be based around preventing the DM from ****ing him over.

Plus with the armor bit, he'd find a way to knock me out and my armor will be gone.
Gas, kidnapping, magic, all have been used before when he used to DM.


So, originally, it sounded fine as a low magic campaign, something that everyone agreed on. But I think the DM did take it too far. You need to have everyone get together and talk so that everyone is clear on what people believe the rules should be. From there, find a middle point to agree on for what can be allowed and should be allowed in the campaign.

Alternately, have people switch being the DM so the usual DM has to play. If there's only one new dm to do this, they should be exactly like the old dm, who will hopefully see the problems while playing. Or, if you have a few people willing to do this, have them all interpret the rules on their own and be more lenient. This could show the DM what he should be more like, and the players will probably be more willing to call out that DM once they've played with others.




As for the DM in general, I wouldn't say I'm a fan of him. I mean, I was originally in the other direction (sure, why not let them do _____?) which led to the premature end of a campaign. But the players had fun with it while it lasted. I feel like I'm better now, but the most important part of my job is that players can do what they want within reason.

If it's supposed to be a high magic world, then you could still do the no casters thing, but the DM needs to remember this and give appropriate challenges. I'm not saying for him to let everything be too easy, but he needs to remember you're not casters and don't have access to what the enemies will likely have.

The whole plot wizard thing was odd too. I could see it as a joke being used once or twice, but if he's retconning the things the party does, then there's no reason for you to play. you're not doing anything that matters in the world. (Can't find the post you talked about that in, but I'm sure you said it).


Anyway, good luck with this, but getting the group to sit and talk is where you should go from here.


Honestly I think the others are willing to accept anything to prevent another argument/conflict in the group.
They're burned out of those from the entire Player D fiasco.

Switching DM's wouldn't really work.

We have three people in our group with the know how to DM.

One is our current DM who wants to be a player soon and he's done such a good job no one wants to not allow him that.

The second person is the one being debated now.

The third is me, and it's his world, his story, his rules. He will not want me touching it.
Plus they can easily argue player bias when DMing.

Additionally I'm the only one who ever speaks up when he does something against the players, so I'm the last person he'd want to take over for his campaign.

For appropiate challenge, this where double standards come in.

He'll say "Not my fault. I made my campaign to be pre-built for a normal d&d group, if you want to handicap yourselves that's your choice but don't expect me to change anything".

But then turns around and goes "No this, this and this because it's too magical".

Our non-magic goal was originally player only, and loose enough we still had ways to deal with magical things. Now it is DM enforced rule expanded ten times over.

As for the plot wizard.
He had a pre-built story and plot which he out right railroaded us into.
Plot wizard was used whenever we did stuff that didn't continue the story or altered it too much.

[Asgardian]

Here is a radical concepts...

Most everyone seems to be knocking a game proposal that hasnt even been played yet.. HOw about giving the DM a chance to see if he can actually pull it off first?

I play with a deliberately non-optimized group (players choice) and magic exists in our campaign world but it is NOT an overwhelming force. Do you know why it works for us?

We have a decent DM

Most of the material things that can be taken out by magic are also given a mundane way to defeat it if we are smart enough to realize it

A red dragon was killed when we noticed it was standing under a portcullis
Flying creatures have been slain by leap attacks of of balconies
etc..

[Krazzman]

I understand your own limitations. That's where it is still good. Like you said he amplyfiing it to make it ten times worse.

I meant you pause, saying you are making an own campaign because you want to present something, with player input and yadda yadda and need time for this as he already gave you an option: "If you don't like it, don't play." For right after his campaign is finished.

Sometimes this is really hard to force yourself through.

You don't need to mess with HIS campaign, or gameworld or whatever. Build your own. Or use a preexisting like faerun eberron or greyhawk.

The reputation as Powergamer is hard to let slide. Sometimes it's justified sometimes not. I was called it in our old group for being the one trying to bring new books/new ideas to the table and using them. But it wasn't "Powergaming" when they used them.

Basically if you want a character to be constantly working agianst the dm's shenanigans... A warforged is going to be your best bet... Or something else that gives: 1.) no breathing, 2.) immunity to sleep and other things making your char go unconcious, 3.) no need to eat/drink and so on.

But this is not the point. Your rule of "no casters" has been there to make sure people don't step on each others toes. But basically doing this due to this ban and more or less due to the dm enforcment. How many roles do you have with this? Your melees are able to sneak, your skillmonkeys are able to fight and well that's it. With LoH being your only healing your best bet would be to roll Paladin/Monk, Paladin/Rogue, Paladin/Ranger and Paladin/Fighter to get at least some sort of healing source established.

I know the problem with the others... only wanting to play "Core" or similar but I just can't be interested in playing a fighter in 3.5. Same thing for rogues, except for some corner cases I just need some interesting mechanics in the class. This makes my Characters more complex on a build basis but sometimes they are strong.

I played a Warblade. We got to level 5 and he is a Warblade 2/FIghter 2/Warblade 1. I am smacking things up in melee, have enough skillpoints to climb a mountain in my Breastplate and thanks to maneuver have some cool things to do. The first 2 levels all he did... a fighter with cleave could do all the time instead of every other round. (selection of feats/maneuvers) Yet he was called "OP"... until the DM realised how maneuvers work and that he is going to be better than a fighter but not that much better.

In the most current campaign I play a Cleric, going to be Eldritch Disciple. Quite simple? Except everyone else is probably going: Druid 20, Sorcerer 20, Swordsage 20, Factotum 20 and Wizard/Prestige class. I use both Multiclassing and Prestige class and theurging... makes it more complex. This can be too much for people. Or a "simple" totem rager. Some people just are that way in not liking your style of things you want with your character and therefore trying to hit a weak point. Therefore calling you munchkin or powergamer or whatever.
I think in my old group the thing called OP the most was a Soulknife.

[The Boz]

Here is a radical concepts...

Most everyone seems to be knocking a game proposal that hasnt even been played yet.. HOw about giving the DM a chance to see if he can actually pull it off first?

I play with a deliberately non-optimized group (players choice) and magic exists in our campaign world but it is NOT an overwhelming force. Do you know why it works for us?

We have a decent DM

Most of the material things that can be taken out by magic are also given a mundane way to defeat it if we are smart enough to realize it

A red dragon was killed when we noticed it was standing under a portcullis
Flying creatures have been slain by leap attacks of of balconies
etc..

This dude gives players penalties for having a high Listen skill because the ambient noise is disorienting them.
Not a good DM.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I understand your own limitations. That's where it is still good. Like you said he amplyfiing it to make it ten times worse.

I meant you pause, saying you are making an own campaign because you want to present something, with player input and yadda yadda and need time for this as he already gave you an option: "If you don't like it, don't play." For right after his campaign is finished.

Sometimes this is really hard to force yourself through.

You don't need to mess with HIS campaign, or gameworld or whatever. Build your own. Or use a preexisting like faerun eberron or greyhawk.

The reputation as Powergamer is hard to let slide. Sometimes it's justified sometimes not. I was called it in our old group for being the one trying to bring new books/new ideas to the table and using them. But it wasn't "Powergaming" when they used them.

Basically if you want a character to be constantly working agianst the dm's shenanigans... A warforged is going to be your best bet... Or something else that gives: 1.) no breathing, 2.) immunity to sleep and other things making your char go unconcious, 3.) no need to eat/drink and so on.

But this is not the point. Your rule of "no casters" has been there to make sure people don't step on each others toes. But basically doing this due to this ban and more or less due to the dm enforcment. How many roles do you have with this? Your melees are able to sneak, your skillmonkeys are able to fight and well that's it. With LoH being your only healing your best bet would be to roll Paladin/Monk, Paladin/Rogue, Paladin/Ranger and Paladin/Fighter to get at least some sort of healing source established.

I know the problem with the others... only wanting to play "Core" or similar but I just can't be interested in playing a fighter in 3.5. Same thing for rogues, except for some corner cases I just need some interesting mechanics in the class. This makes my Characters more complex on a build basis but sometimes they are strong.

I played a Warblade. We got to level 5 and he is a Warblade 2/FIghter 2/Warblade 1. I am smacking things up in melee, have enough skillpoints to climb a mountain in my Breastplate and thanks to maneuver have some cool things to do. The first 2 levels all he did... a fighter with cleave could do all the time instead of every other round. (selection of feats/maneuvers) Yet he was called "OP"... until the DM realised how maneuvers work and that he is going to be better than a fighter but not that much better.

In the most current campaign I play a Cleric, going to be Eldritch Disciple. Quite simple? Except everyone else is probably going: Druid 20, Sorcerer 20, Swordsage 20, Factotum 20 and Wizard/Prestige class. I use both Multiclassing and Prestige class and theurging... makes it more complex. This can be too much for people. Or a "simple" totem rager. Some people just are that way in not liking your style of things you want with your character and therefore trying to hit a weak point. Therefore calling you munchkin or powergamer or whatever.
I think in my old group the thing called OP the most was a Soulknife.

To be perfectly honest, a warforged does sound like a fun race to play as.

But I don't want my motivation for playing as one being DM resistance and really that would be the motivation if used for this campaign in question.

It is annoying though being labeled as a munchkin/power gamer just for putting more effort into your character.
I'm just stuck with an overly casual group.

The only three who go out of core is

-The DM in question
-Player D who has the tantrum issues, he mostly just copies what I bring to the table
-Player L, but in truth he mostly gets his stuff from the Monster Manual which is still core, just not PHB.

I'll be honest, I did kind of munchkin my strength with the character in my last example, but it was experimentation on powerful builds then. My only character history at that point (It was a bit over a year ago) was a typical sorcerer from core only.

Plus his strength became such a joke/thing in the group with stuff like

*Urik (My guy) kicks down the wall and takes the gold from the valut*
*Urik grabs the warg and tosses him 50 feet in the air*

That it just became part of his character.