new DM

[theboss]

so, basically we're 5 people playing 3.5e, in the last few years same guy was the offical dm(there was an andventure or 2 which the DM was diffrent guy). Now a diffrent guy wants the be the DM and the old one allowed it. so i was looking to get some optimaze class build with the necropolitan template and find out about the human heritage feat and the dread necromancer ritual. since these 2 basically remove the weak spots that undead have i wanted them , so i told the new DM about this- turn out he doesnt really like it, and moreover, turns out he bans it simply becuase it doesnt like the idea i get more HP and i cannot be rebuked/controlled/destroyed and still get Undead traits which is really awesome.Moreover, he also told us the Melee weapon mastery feat is not stack with (greater) WF/WS which it does because it is untype bonus.
anyway, i was thinking what should i do? how do you handle with that type of DM who decides to ban almost every idea comes to mind? thanks in andvance

[Crake]

so, basically we're 5 people playing 3.5e, in the last few years same guy was the offical dm(there was an andventure or 2 which the DM was diffrent guy). Now a diffrent guy wants the be the DM and the old one allowed it. so i was looking to get some optimaze class build with the necropolitan template and find out about the human heritage feat and the dread necromancer ritual. since these 2 basically remove the weak spots that undead have i wanted them , so i told the new DM about this- turn out he doesnt really like it, and moreover, turns out he bans it simply becuase it doesnt like the idea i get more HP and i cannot be rebuked/controlled/destroyed and still get Undead traits which is really awesome.Moreover, he also told us the Melee weapon mastery feat is not stack with (greater) WF/WS which it does because it is untype bonus.
anyway, i was thinking what should i do? how do you handle with that type of DM who decides to ban almost every idea comes to mind? thanks in andvance

Honestly, i'm not surprised he banned human heritage with necropolitan, it's a really cheesy combo that doesn't fit the fluff of what it's trying to achieve at all. RAW can be stupid, and I would also ban it right away, and I like to consider myself quite an open DM.

As for melee weapon mastery not stacking with weapon focus/weapon specialization, tell him that if it didn't stack, having those two as pre-requisites makes no sense. If it doesn't stack, then the overall benefit is merely +1 to hit, which can be achieved with greater weapon focus instead.

[bean illus]

Honestly, i'm not surprised he banned human heritage with necropolitan, it's a really cheesy combo that doesn't fit the fluff of what it's trying to achieve at all. RAW can be stupid, and I would also ban it right away, and I like to consider myself quite an open DM.

As for melee weapon mastery not stacking with weapon focus/weapon specialization, tell him that if it didn't stack, having those two as pre-requisites makes no sense. If it doesn't stack, then the overall benefit is merely +1 to hit, which can be achieved with greater weapon focus instead.

I understand the DM's desire for you not to break him during every session, but MWM DOES stack with WF/WS. You will find a cheesy combo, so don't feel shorted that he held some back, but he's wrong about the feats.

[theboss]

Honestly, i'm not surprised he banned human heritage with necropolitan, it's a really cheesy combo that doesn't fit the fluff of what it's trying to achieve at all. RAW can be stupid, and I would also ban it right away, and I like to consider myself quite an open DM.

As for melee weapon mastery not stacking with weapon focus/weapon specialization, tell him that if it didn't stack, having those two as pre-requisites makes no sense. If it doesn't stack, then the overall benefit is merely +1 to hit, which can be achieved with greater weapon focus instead.

What about the dread necromancer ritual? is that stupid RAW? Or does it make sense?
and you still didnt answer my question: how do you handle such DM who bans almost everything comes to mind?

[Mystral]

Until now, you have only mentioned one ban (which is entirely reasonable) and a false ruling.

I'm sorry, but you come of as complaining a bit too much.

[theboss]

Until now, you have only mentioned one ban (which is entirely reasonable) and a false ruling.

I'm sorry, but you come of as complaining a bit too much.


I dont think you read right what i said. i mentioned *3* bans which he gave me no RAW reason for it.

[Mystral]

He doesn't need a RAW reason, he is the DM. He just needs a reason.

And his three bans are all about that human heritage necropolitan cheese, aren't they?

[theboss]

He doesn't need a RAW reason, he is the DM. He just needs a reason.

And his three bans are all about that human heritage necropolitan cheese, aren't they?

I dont understand why you guys think DM is like a god. i dont see why DM would ban things with now RAW reason for it, it just makes the players less excited about him being a DM. And i mentioned the necromancer ritual, human heritage and MWM... just read the whole thread next time, would ya?

[eggynack]

And you still didnt answer my question: how do you handle such DM who bans almost everything comes to mind?
I'd agree with the assertion that the DM isn't necessarily banning in an arbitrary manner. However, my general solution to this problem is to construct a character for whom banning is more inconvenience than actual problem. The usual contenders for this role are druid, or maybe cleric, in both cases because of automatic access to their entire list, and in the druid's case, for the ability to swap out their class features on an immediate or relatively short term basis. Druids in particular are famous for their ability to provide high power characters with the only actual build element being natural spell at 6th, and with the class in hand, you should be able to respond to any given spell bannings by preparing a whole new list of equal effectiveness, to form bannings by swapping forms within six seconds, and to companion bannings by picking a new companion within a day or so.

Druids also react well to tacit bannings and situational, which makes them particularly well suited to DM's you don't know the nature of. They do well in low wealth campaigns while still having access to a pile of good items if more wealth is added, they have a spell list versatile enough to handle most situations, including spontaneous summons with broad applicability, and even in a dead magic zone, you're still two characters in one. Druids adapt better than just about anything out there, and there's very little they can't adapt to. Of course, other casters can do similarly along these lines, though spontaneous casters suffer from a fixed list in the short term, clerics have to deal with lacking access to solutions not granted through preparation, and wizards/archivists can be partially stymied by keeping you away from new spells and/or stealing your spell book. The underlying philosophy is pretty simple, however. If you have no way to know what to be prepared for, then just prepare for anything.

Edit:
I dont understand why you guys think DM is like a god. i dont see why DM would ban things with now RAW reason for it.
Because there are plenty of non-RAW reasons to ban things. To use an example that takes things to their natural conclusion, are you saying that, as DM, you wouldn't stop a player from becoming pun-pun because there's no RAW basis for stopping him, despite the fact that such a thing could easily break the game into infinite tiny pieces?

[Mystral]

if you refer to rule 0 as "treating the dm like a god", you are only undermining yourself.

[Nifft]

I dont understand why you guys think DM is like a god. i dont see why DM would ban things with now RAW reason for it, it just makes the players less excited about him being a DM.

I suspect that, if you were to offer to be the DM instead, you'd find that it's not really like being a god.

It's more like being an over-worked parent.

And, just like a parent, he might feel the need to make rules which you don't yet understand.

That's not an abuse of power. That's just trying to make a game which works for his goals (which you don't necessarily know yet).

[theboss]

I'd agree with the assertion that the DM isn't necessarily banning in an arbitrary manner. However, my general solution to this problem is to construct a character for whom banning is more inconvenience than actual problem. The usual contenders for this role are druid, or maybe cleric, in both cases because of automatic access to their entire list, and in the druid's case, for the ability to swap out their class features on an immediate or relatively short term basis. Druids in particular are famous for their ability to provide high power characters with the only actual build element being natural spell at 6th, and with the class in hand, you should be able to respond to any given spell bannings by preparing a whole new list of equal effectiveness, to form bannings by swapping forms within six seconds, and to companion bannings by picking a new companion within a day or so.

Druids also react well to tacit bannings and situational, which makes them particularly well suited to DM's you don't know the nature of. They do well in low wealth campaigns while still having access to a pile of good items if more wealth is added, they have a spell list versatile enough to handle most situations, including spontaneous summons with broad applicability, and even in a dead magic zone, you're still two characters in one. Druids adapt better than just about anything out there, and there's very little they can't adapt to. Of course, other casters can do similarly along these lines, though spontaneous casters suffer from a fixed list in the short term, clerics have to deal with lacking access to solutions not granted through preparation, and wizards/archivists can be partially stymied by keeping you away from new spells and/or stealing your spell book. The underlying philosophy is pretty simple, however. If you have no way to know what to be prepared for, then just prepare for anything.

Edit:
Because there are plenty of non-RAW reasons to ban things. To use an example that takes things to their natural conclusion, are you saying that, as DM, you wouldn't stop a player from becoming pun-pun because there's no RAW basis for stopping him, despite the fact that such a thing could easily break the game into infinite tiny pieces?

Problem is my build is melee(12 pathfinder fighter, 2 champion of C.L, 1 crausder). and i like use two weapon fighting, i like melee because it is much more fun then spellcaster(in my opinion anyway). I dont think spellcasters are low powered- i think excatly the way around and that's why i think melee PC should be a little more stronger than the writer wrote them, and to make them strong you need to provide them immunties to some spells(in my case: necropolitan). Then you should cover up the weak spots undead have, thats why the human heritage. and finally the hp bonuses... Im just trying to be more balanced...

EDIT: yes to your question, if my team is optimaize i'll make the battles optimaize. Cause i want to make them enjoy about the role-playing and the battles and thats the whole point in d&d... in my opinion anyway.. Not to ban everything- seems to me like a power abuse...

[Uniquoi]

Keep in mind that the DM has to accept and reject character ideas from the rest of the party as well. If he's banning stuff like Necropolitan cheese then it's most likely because the rest of the group is not at the same level of optimisation as you are.

[Mystral]

Just ask him what you wish to accomplish and work with him to create just that.

And a character without weaknesses is boring.

[theboss]

Keep in mind that the DM has to accept and reject character ideas from the rest of the party as well. If he's banning stuff like Necropolitan cheese then it's most likely because the rest of the group is not at the same level of optimisation as you are.

Dont think so, the old DM which is now part of the party(i expended about it the thread) is playing level 16 wee jus cleric, and its very simple for him to beat me with no more than 1 extraordinary abilliy (rebuke undead) the chances of him fails is very low (about 25%)...

[theboss]

Anyhow, i think i'd be best for me if i convince the old DM to take control.. he's more premissive DM than the new guy... cause he's more experienced than him and he knows if your team is above the defult CR they should handle, so he'd put a creature 1 or 2 CR above.. As simple as that...

[Crake]

Dont think so, the old DM which is now part of the party(i expended about it the thread) is playing level 16 wee jus cleric, and its very simple for him to beat me with no more than 1 extraordinary abilliy (rebuke undead) the chances of him fails is very low (about 25%)...

Party balance is not about who can beat who. It's a team game, so party balance is about who can contribute to any given scenario at any time.

Also, there are feats and items out there that grant you turn resistance which would make you less susceptible to turning if you're that worried about it. The improved turn resistance feat grants +4 turn resistance, on top of the +2 that necropolitans get, and the cloak of turn resistance grants you another +4. That gives you a total of +10 turn resistance, so unless you're going against a highly optimized turn cleric, you probably need not worry about getting turned.