Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 zombiegleemax Aug 26, 2003 23:52:21	is DL still in that age where magic users have very little magic? if they want to sell books it better not be. i think every wizard players dream when playing in DL is to do what raistlin did but pull it off.
#2 talinthas Aug 26, 2003 23:58:54	its in the fifth post wos. You can use whatever magic you want. And any wizard in my game who wants to be raistlin is welcome to find another game, far far away from me.
#3 baron_the_curse Aug 27, 2003 0:11:31	Talinthas, that’s not very fair of you. I welcome and encourage my players to do whatever they please with their characters in my campaign. None are so foolish to dream of taking over a gods place, but I’ve had players attempt many great and stupid things. As for magic, no wizard wants his/her magic to be limiting. There is nothing wrong with dreaming to be the next Raist… not very original… and not likely to come true either.. so what’s the problem with letting them try?
#4 zombiegleemax Aug 27, 2003 0:12:05	Posted by Talinthas: And any wizard in my game who wants to be raistlin is welcome to find another game, far far away from me. hehehe, I wish I had ten dollars for every time I've had a Raistlin or Dizzt do'Urden knock-off cross my gaming table... Arandur
#5 zombiegleemax Aug 27, 2003 0:30:11	Baron you actually want a player in your game that is willing to screw over everything (including the other PCs) in order to attain power? I don't know about you but that fits the description of many of the Villains in my game... Arandur
#6 talinthas Aug 27, 2003 0:50:33	Originally posted by Baron the Curse Talinthas, that’s not very fair of you. I welcome and encourage my players to do whatever they please with their characters in my campaign. None are so foolish to dream of taking over a gods place, but I’ve had players attempt many great and stupid things. As for magic, no wizard wants his/her magic to be limiting. There is nothing wrong with dreaming to be the next Raist… not very original… and not likely to come true either.. so what’s the problem with letting them try? It's my game. I'm allowed to allow who i want. There are a few rules at my table. No evil characters. I don't want em anywhere. No breaking off from the party. I hate lone wolves, and don't want to leave the rest of the party hanging while someone decides to control the flow of my campaign. No being a total jerk to the rest of the group. If you think you're high and mighty, find another table that cares. Suffice to say, raistlin as portrayed in chronicals is the worst munchkin jerk pc i've ever seen. Any player in my game who acted like he did would be asked to leave.
#7 baron_the_curse Aug 27, 2003 1:24:47	Originally posted by Arandur Baron you actually want a player in your game that is willing to screw over everything (including the other PCs) Arandur Arandur, I don’t care. I’ve DM for so many years I’ve learn to deal with all types. And to be honest it really depends on the campaign I’m running. Also, a lot of times I don’t have to do anything to players that act too selfish or are willing to sacrifice the party. The other players are not stupid and more often than not take care of the problem on their own. If the same troublesome player continues to make clone, “power-hungry-loner-characters” then I’ll tell the guy to make a real effort to play the character well and keep some of his ambitions a secret from the others. Oh, and Raistling was not a BS munchkin jerk, that would be Mr. I have every class including psionics Elminster.
#8 zombiegleemax Aug 27, 2003 10:48:01	Well, duh! Elminster? Overpowered?!?!?! OMG!!!!!!!!!! I'd never thought of it before! Blasphemer, speak not of the Realms! ::Cough:: BUT I dunno about disallowing characters with far overreaching personal ambition and all that jazz. I would have agreed readily with Tal if I hadn't started reading "Addicted to Fireballs", best piece of work I've read in a while. So, I end with, do whatcha will! YMMV!
#9 zombiegleemax Aug 27, 2003 17:14:12	Baron, if the player is playing a character much like Raistlin, when the other players KNOW about the treachery it will be too late for them to do anything about it. Imagine playing through two years of sessions only to have your favourite character killed off by another party member on purpose. Imagine if the Raistlin clone's ambition was to basically destroy your campaign world so he can fulfill some stupid power-gaming fantasy of ruling the world. It leads to hard feelings on all sides of the gaming table. Seen it, dealt with it as a GM and definately prefer to keep it out of my games. Just 'cause it works well in the novels doesn't necessarily mean it translates well to the gaming table. Personally I think Tal's gaming rules sound pretty much like the rules our gaming group has. The only real exception is that I personally allow Lawful Evil characters of a certain 'attitude' into the mix (and I have a dislike for the Chaotic Neutral alignment so I discourage that slightly). The game has to be fun for everyone at the table, not just one player who is woefully ignorant of the other players. Think of the best game sessions you have had. Did they come from a single player screwing the rest? Or did they come from the party pulling together and dealing with the moment? I know which of the two my recollections come from... Arandur
#10 shugi Aug 27, 2003 17:43:56	My favorite game sessions usually did involve some characters screwing over others. This was a campaign that delved heavily into both magic and politics, and double-dealing was pretty much encouraged. The end result was that no one trusted any of my characters for about 3 years, but my group chalks it up to my devious mind and decent RP with the one character.
#11 zombiegleemax Aug 27, 2003 17:53:26	My favorite game sessions usually did involve some characters screwing over others. This was a campaign that delved heavily into both magic and politics, and double-dealing was pretty much encouraged Yes but were they anyone elses favourite sessions at that gaming table? They may have been memorable but perhaps not their favourite... It more than likely comes down to the maliciousness of the player I guess. I admit I have played in games where characters tried this sort of thing. As a player I didn't mind it when it was played by one character because it was part of his character and he played his other flaws really well (though I was probably the only one). The second however was just plainly out to screw the other characters (that sucked). That is where I think most players who choose the ultimate power goal are really coming from (the need to rule over everyone else at the table)... Political campaigns I think should be exempt from the Evil rules of my campaign and the screwing others characters over thing and replaced by the inability to use truth-divining magic...;) Arandur
#12 shugi Aug 27, 2003 18:05:05	Yes but were they anyone elses favourite sessions at that gaming table? They may have been memorable but perhaps not their favourite... A number of people liked individual sessions, even when we were on the receiving end of someone's latest plot. Favorite is subjective... my favorite session in that game involved a 3-person trek through the nastiest forest on that world. Political campaigns I think should be exempt from the Evil rules of my campaign and the screwing others characters over thing and replaced by the inability to use truth-divining magic...;) IIRC, our campaign had no alignment restrictions (though I don't think anyone played CN or CE). Divination magic is incredibly easy to fool when you know how to expect it, but I don't want to share my secrets on the board. :D
#13 baron_the_curse Aug 27, 2003 18:16:27	I know this example is not D&D but it’s still by far one of my fondest gaming experience recollections. I ran a Vampire game where I allowed the players to create Elder characters that would sit as the primogen council of Boston. I then secretly had an NPC inform each player that the Prince of Boston is being relocated by the Camarilla and they are being considered for the position. What followed was a year of games involving secret alliances, backstabbing, brown nosing, and intrigue. All that from a group that’s accustomed to firing off fireballs at every problem, and the best part, that NPC that gave them the inside scope was a Giovanni that lied to them to split the Primogen apart and have his clan move in and take the city with little resistance. It worked. The Prince could not rule without their support, and the Giovanni moved in. The players had a great time, and learned a valuable lesson.
#14 zombiegleemax Aug 27, 2003 18:28:17	Hmmm I should have used the sarcasm icon for the last paragraph... I think a political based campaign is much different to a regular campaign however. Different rules because each character has different goals (more than likely in competition to each other). Much like a Vampire the Masquerade game is very different in it's party outlook than a D&D game. I think that political struggles & hidden agendas are pretty much an inbuilt part of the VtM setting. Vampire seems to be more of a collection of individuals rather than a cohesive unit. Pretty hard to create a loyal party when everyone is from a differing clan (especially if they use the clan opinions of other clans as a guide). Anyway I'm beginning to ramble and this is a DL board... I know that when the group played Birthright we had a hoot screwing each others realms from here to the Abyss -but that, for our group, didn't last very long. It was more of a 'vacation' between our games than anything else. Give me a good quest and some stout-hearted companions anyday!... Arandur
#15 baron_the_curse Aug 27, 2003 19:30:33	Originally posted by Arandur I think a political based campaign is much different to a regular campaign however. Arandur Arandur, of course they are very different. I’m just pointed out a very fun gaming moment for me. I even pointed that out from the beginning this is not a D&D moment.
#16 zombiegleemax Aug 27, 2003 19:43:13	Actually that political campaign comment was more to Shugi than to yourself... Some of my favourite gaming moments are non D&D also (hell, I have one or two from Vampire myself!). Diversity makes the world go round... Oh and Werewolf the Apocalypse sucks on more levels than one could possibly ever imagine. I mean WTF were they thinking?...*slap myself* Damn lucky I caught that little rant in time ;) Arandur
#17 baron_the_curse Aug 27, 2003 20:55:11	Werewolf only sucks because the Storyteller System sucks for a combat oriented game. But like you said, topic for another forum.
#18 zombiegleemax Nov 14, 2003 13:59:05	I disagree. I think Werewolf is pretty good, I really liked the quasi-ecological attitude, and the combat system is simple, realistic, and efficient. And I'm NOT the one who brought this topic to the forum, so we'll just let it pass.
#19 Dragonhelm Nov 14, 2003 15:18:45	Originally posted by Baron the Curse But like you said, topic for another forum. Agreed. Let's get back to Dragonlance, please.
#20 zombiegleemax Nov 14, 2003 20:59:27	I hate knockoffs. The only reason I despise D&D literature. It can be the best story out there, but you know once a game starts, someone is going to try and make the bad*ss character. Like everyone trying to play a jedi with the PsiHB. There is a d20 Star Bores book out there. Anyway, I like the DL book in that the default age is the 5th age after the gods returned, but because of the handy little history of Krynn, one could feasably set their games in any age. I'm actually considering running a game set in the early-mid 5th Age where magic users get screwed over if they don't play Sorcerers or Mystics. I'm not trying o be cruel to my players, but I happen to like that era and it makes for some interesting stories. The Naga Slayer PS- I only play Werewolf in the Wild West. Othewise Werewolf bores me. Vampire politics are too boring. You want the best court room adventures? Go with Changeling. High magic, high adventure, lots of intrigue and romance. And, while it is gothic, it doesn't specifically pertain to the creepy goth chicks who pretend to be witches.