PDA

View Full Version : Closed Thread Don't bother commenting



PlatinumJester
2007-06-16, 12:04 PM
Just closed this thread. Thanks for replies.

SoulCatcher78
2007-06-16, 12:19 PM
Sounds like the DM made their judgement call and is trying to get the point across that it's not time to haggle. Some things are not debateable in the DMs eyes and trying to make them that way is just going to make things harder.

If I tell you something is set in stone and you ask why, I will give you an explanation (for this example, I believe that something is overpowered...it doesn't matter if I am right or wrong, I believe that this is so and since I am making the rules, it just is). If you try to find a way around it (not listening to my reason and you continue to argue a point) I will impose additional restrictions until you either accept my ruling or leave. Rules (house or otherwise) are not up for debate unless the DM leaves them that way. Strictly defined rules will make you either think harder (no easy ropetrick way out of this burning room) or react in a way that he has planned for you to react.

I_Got_This_Name
2007-06-16, 12:27 PM
A lot of the issue with the spells you mentioned isn't that they're too good for their level. They're too good for any level.

3.0 Haste, which gave you an extra action per round (and so you could cast two spells) was a good example of this. Now you need Shapechange (6 levels higher) to do the same thing. . .

. . . and it's still overpowered.

Rope trick gives you a near-guaranteed safe rest; it might just be that it has too few weaknesses. Tack some extra weaknesses on (I have no idea what, though), and it's probably balanced. It destroys flavor, though.

As for the polymorphs, the issue is that they let you comb through the Monster Manual (and every other monster book) for forms. These things are often built in ways that are only balanced when they're on the scene for one encounter and in the hands of someone who isn't trying to exploit them for power. Not to mention the buffs you can cast. Limit their lists, I suppose, if you want to balance them.

Then shivering touch, if I'm understanding you right. That spell's just broken. 3d6 dexterity damage is often instantly fatal. No save makes that even worse; you can seriously one-shot dragons at least half the time with this. Its touch range doesn't even balance it, since there are ways to get around that. This spell is broken. It might actually be the only example you have of a spell that is actually just way too low level. Kick it up to, say, 7th, or even 9th, and you have a great, balanced spell.

Phantom steed is a decent spell. The issue here is that it does too much. It lets you fly (at the higher levels) for a 4th level spell slot, and outfly the overland flight spell, which is a close equivalent and a level higher. It also gives you a ridiculous speed. This spell needs a rewrite.

Alter self: See polymorph.

Shrink item: When used for its intended use, it's not that bad. The problem is that it's used far too often as a weapon. If that functionality can be stripped from it, it would end up a fine and balanced spell.

These spells deserve to be gone or nerfed. Removing them is a perfectly valid alternative to nerfing them; it saves effort, and, so long as people aren't too attached to them for flavor reasons, it works.

As for the issue of DMs abusing power, the DM only has the power the players give them. If you don't like what your DM is doing, complain, or walk. If you think you can do better, make your own group.

skywalker
2007-06-16, 12:30 PM
This is not, as far as I can tell, against forum rules.

It is, as far as I can tell, abusive of power.

But my question to you is, what are you gonna do about it? You can horribly up-end your session by arguing about it, by trying to trick the DM, there are a number of ways, but most of them are going to wind up making the other players unhappy, and if you do succeed, your victory will be a hollow one. If this happens on a consistent basis that you aren't having fun because person X continually bans certain spells, then leave the group. There's not much else you can do about it, a gaming group is a covenant between the players and the DM, sworn on the table chosen to do gaming, that the DM is God at that table.

So yes, he is abusing his power. Is there anything to stop him, however? Short of you punching him in the face,(which you might want to do anyway) no. All you can do is leave. Fortunately for you, he is only God at THAT table. Although banning some of the spells you mentioned is a pretty common DM occurrence. You can find another DM who will allow those things.

I'm on your side, I would prefer a DM who didn't ban those spells, especially with no reason, and mega-especially after he banned others because you were arguing. But the only way we can solve that is to vote with our feet and find a new group.

PlatinumJester
2007-06-16, 12:37 PM
Ok but who are we to decide whats overpowered. If Monte Cook, Skip Williams and Jonathon Tweet don't think so they we shouldn't since they are the experts.

Yuki Akuma
2007-06-16, 12:47 PM
Ok but who are we to decide whats overpowered. If Monte Cook, Skip Williams and Jonathon Tweet don't think so they we shouldn't since they are the experts.

...Erm...

Because in playtesting it's almost impossible to test for every single eventuality, due to the relatively low number of playtesters? Because with such a huge sample size as the entire fanbase of a game, you're bound to come up against things that the designers never thought of? Because, generally, those three don't know what the hell they're talking about? Because a low level spell that can one-shot a CR 23 dragon 80% of the time is obviously a bad idea?

Pick one.

Ryuuk
2007-06-16, 12:48 PM
We´re the people playing the game. The DM is in charge of running it and can change it as he like, as stated in the DMG. Besides, the designers are still human. They can´t double check every book published beforehand to see if combining their new feat/spell/class/monster with an already existing one would cause problems.

The fact that errata exists should be proof enough that mistakes will happen.

Tequila Sunrise
2007-06-16, 12:49 PM
Ok but who are we to decide whats overpowered. If Monte Cook, Skip Williams and Jonathon Tweet don't think so they we shouldn't since they are the experts.
I think of it this way: of all the players in a group, the DM has the most responsibility. He/she has to provide/create the adventure and then perform/run it. So of all the players, the DM is the one that should be most comfortable with the rules of the game. So if the DM bans something because he/she is not comfortable with it, who am I to argue with them? If I feel that a DM is just being crazy or arbitrary with the rules, I will express my opinion clearly and civilly. If that doesn't help, I just leave the game.

Quietus
2007-06-16, 12:51 PM
Ok but who are we to decide whats overpowered. If Monte Cook, Skip Williams and Jonathon Tweet don't think so they we shouldn't since they are the experts.

If this were the case, why do we have errata? The FAQ? CustServ?

Yuki Akuma
2007-06-16, 12:54 PM
We have CustServ because the Spooky Wizard hates us.

Kish
2007-06-16, 01:07 PM
Ok but who are we to decide whats overpowered.
I'm Kish. Who are you?

If Monte Cook, Skip Williams and Jonathon Tweet don't think so they we shouldn't since they are the experts.
Oddly enough, I once thought a little like that. Then I heard some game developers explain the rationale behind some of their rules and rules changes...and I realized I didn't agree with all of them, and they didn't all apply to my games, and so on. More importantly, though, they're humans, not gods. They can make mistakes like anyone else. "Who are we to decide what's overpowered?" is really no more--or less--valid than, "Who is Monte Cook to decide what's overpowered?" I'm Kish. He's Monte Cook.

Fax Celestis
2007-06-16, 01:18 PM
I'm Kish. Who are you?

Oddly enough, I once thought a little like that. Then I heard some game developers explain the rationale behind some of their rules and rules changes...and I realized I didn't agree with all of them, and they didn't all apply to my games, and so on. More importantly, though, they're humans, not gods. They can make mistakes like anyone else. "Who are we to decide what's overpowered?" is really no more--or less--valid than, "Who is Monte Cook to decide what's overpowered?" I'm Kish. He's Monte Cook.

Kish wins. That is all.

Vaniel
2007-06-16, 01:40 PM
Ever seen those crazy builds?

Do you think the developers thought of that?

I don't think so.

/Vaniel