Recent content by Minigiant

I was talking about the common complaint how a 2014 ranger negates too many challenges in a single terrain themed game. Natural Explorer: Arctic would be Difficult terrain doesn’t slow your group’s travel ever. Your group can’t become lost except by magical means. Even when you are engaged in...

That's how most online discussions are. Most people default to the neutral rules or their experiences. Just like many DMs here are in long standing tables or friend groups where Session 0 is barely more that base character creation.

Just a hypothesis. I think Enworld is heavily skewed to .. 1) DMs with long standing established groups 2) Players who are in a mix of established and random tables. 3) People who are 1 and 2 4) Players who are currently not in a group for unfortunate circumstances So the sides butt heads.

No it's not a misunderstanding it's unclear because clear instructions were not given. Misunderstanding would be if he said something and then he interpreted those words as something else. But Arctic as words in Dungeons and Dragons only are linked to the ranger class and the druid class as...

People don't ask questions. Players don't ask questions. So if setting integrity matters to you. You need to speak up and state setting restrictions and gameplay expectations which are contrary to the book the players get their creation rules from. I'm sorry. I'm mostly a GM and pro-DM, but...

I'm not saying it's unclear to the player. That's the point we're not talking about a person who is confused about what kind of player they're allowed to be play. We're talking about ADM who did not clearly tell a player that the idea that they have in their head are not allowed at that game...

Why should they? The players were given the parameters and came to the table with ideas that met them. Again it's more work but idea should not be forced to run for something they don't want to run. Because of that they must tell someone what they don't want to run. That's on them.

But if it isn't defined...@Gobhag doesn't have a sense of what is suitable. If the instructions are unclear, why should they care about what is suitable? That is how these things happen. Because the player shows up and get the ban list after they sit down.

Again what is a character suited for an Arctic campaign anyway?

But if they fight the demon boar, their side of the fight is 75-90% based on their class depending on level. D&D is a class based game.

Going back to the Original Post. Part of the issue I find is with the OP was the the belief that D&D always supported multiple styles of play. That it always was a toolbox. Yeah it did. D&D always "supported multiple styles of play as as toolbox". But it did so poorly. D&D for the first 3...

No. But my next group amongst the 4 players has 3 PHBs, No Tashas, and no Eberron books. They didn't asked for Tasha's stuff because none of them own the book. AND QUITE FRANKLY The majority of Tasha's that is asked for are the Artificer class, some subclasses and feats which some are found...

Artificer isn't in the free Basic Rules in 2014 nor 2024. Artificer isn't in the PHB in 2014 or 2024. It costs an additional book to get access to any of it.

Think of it this way. I've never ever ever ever EVER heard of someone been in fighter in a setting. Even in the setting that is designed to be a magic wizard school they don't ban fighter.

Artificer isn't well known or free enough to get that treatment. That's the thing. The artificers cost money. So many people who would not willing to pay for a book to get access to mostly just the artificer won't be asking for the artificer outside of the setting book that it comes in: Eberron