I'm sorry Blue. I'm rootin' for you in this because the Oracle is plainly wrong in this case, but, it's the DM's job to adjudicate things like this, not just mechanics. This has spilled out of roleplay between characters and is obviously causing problems at his table. He should totally be the one to "fix" this, it's his game. If you two cannot resolve it quickly, it falls to the DM.
I'm sorry Blue. I'm rootin' for you in this because the Oracle is plainly wrong in this case, but, it's the DM's job to adjudicate things like this, not just mechanics. This has spilled out of roleplay between characters and is obviously causing problems at his table. He should totally be the one to "fix" this, it's his game. If you two cannot resolve it quickly, it falls to the DM.
I'm not saying he shouldn't fix this. I'm saying he shouldn't HAVE to fix this, as in this problem, and thus this thread, should have never occurred. Also, thank you for being on my side.
The offending item should never have been dropped into the party.
The party should never have been railroaded with a geas or die.
The party should never have been restrained from getting gear of their choosing and appropriate to their desires and/or abilities (if someone without proficiency truly wants to use a weapon, why shouldn't they get that choice, it is their character after all). Within reason of course (limited by character wealth for example).
Frankly, the source of these problems is a crappy GM and a non-team player (when faced with a crappy GM, being a team player is that much more important). Stop whining about symptoms and deal with the causes.
The offending item should never have been dropped into the party.
The party should never have been railroaded with a geas or die.
The party should never have been restrained from getting gear of their choosing and appropriate to their desires and/or abilities (if someone without proficiency truly wants to use a weapon, why shouldn't they get that choice, it is their character after all). Within reason of course (limited by character wealth for example).
Frankly, the source of these problems is a crappy GM and a non-team player (when faced with a crappy GM, being a team player is that much more important). Stop whining about symptoms and deal with the causes.
How was he supposed to know she would freak out over it?
I agree, but it's not like any of us cared.
He's seen a few too many groups become insanely powerful through items, so he wanted to try the other way, turns out the other way isn't that much better. Especially when one player goes completely off the rails unexpectedly.
No one else will run a game, it's hard finding a GM, in general, at the store I go to especially, because there are only a few people who are even remotely good at it, and most of them suffer from burn out because they run all the time.
It's not perfect, but nothing ever is, and mistakes were made. Now let's see if I can convince the gaming group to clean it up.
after reading the thread lastblacknight, I get the feeling that Blue Star does not think it will end there.
I get the feeling too. since she didnt take No for an answer.
Correct, that's why I'm going to chain as many ideas as I can together (so long as they are compatible) to get the desired result.
I just have to reiterate this -- the Oracle does not want the Sun Blade for RP reasons. She wants it for childish reasons. An Oracle worshiping a sun god has no more RP reason to have a sun blade than a Thief who worships Torag has to claim a suit of +3 stoneplate.
A GM's job is handling encounters, judging rule mechanics, and other game related resolutions.
Handling a player that's immature enough to want to destroy the campaign over a shiny isn't a job for a Gamemaster, it's a job for a nanny.
Too true.
I would agree that if you really wanted to continue gaming with everyone in here, even the "insane" woman (frankly, when a man describes a woman as "crazy"/"insane"/"hysterical", I have to be a bit skeptical if that man would describe another man, acting in a similar method, in the same way) then you should probably give up the sword.
I mean considering you are a ninja and are "tanking" as you claim, I have to question if this is really the best weapon for your character. You say you use it in your off-hand, that means you have to make full attacks, taking penalties for THF, and sucking up multiple attacks from the foes instead of springing attacking. I wouldn't think you really should be placing a character like yours in that type of situation, requiring the party healer to prop up such poor decisions. Now if this was your on-hand weapon, I could see the argument for you keeping being stronger.
If you want to give the weapon to her, but not "reward" her behavior (as you see it), ask the GM to drop a half-way decent light weapon (say a +2 wakizashi). Then make a big deal about how you finally got a decent weapon to use in your off-hand that fit your concept. Then give her your "left-overs", the sun blade. In this case you aren't giving her the sword because she whined but instead because you got a better weapon for your character's concept. If you can't or won't get the GM involved, then just keep an eye out for ANY light weapon that is half-way decent and then come up with a reason why it fits your concept better than the sun blade.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I see that the OP has been hogging a lot of the best items, under the guise of “My character wants to survive so he deserves all the good stuff”. I don’t think he ever answered the question about how often he’d use the Sun Power (which is the last thing I’d see a Ninja type ever using, as it makes you a clear and obvious target). I note the OP has been dodging the WBL question. I think the Oracle players wants the sword as she sees that her WBL is about half the ninjas and also she wants to whup some undead tail rather than just being a boring healbot all the time- good for her!
It also appears to me that another big reason the OP doesn’t want the Oracle to have the sword as she will be in there fighting instead of keeping HIS PC alive by being a good little healbot.
Give her the sword.
PS- if you invite her to this thread and have her post her side, I might change my mind.
PS- if you invite her to this thread and have her post her side, I might change my mind.
Honestly I think most of us would love to hear her side too.
Well, having read the entire thread, I've got an idea that nobody has brought up before.
Do you have any friends you could recruit into the game? Someone to provide competent healing, ensuring that her threat lacks teeth, and perhaps some buffing when she's actually helping.
Having played in various groups where the players just didn't work, I can understand the frustration.
Something that separates this from the situations that many people deal with is that this isn't a home game where everyone playing is expected to be friends and there's relationships at stake. This is a semi-public game in a store, and it seems to be at least somewhat drop-in, drop-out.
I'm trying to figure out why the DM isn't helping resolve the issue, I'm coming up with some possible answers, and most likely, it's political.
You don't want to rely on her, bring in someone you can rely on and just ignore her issues.
You keep saying I think I deserve it, that will not change my response. Am I more deserving of it than a person who sits in the back and heals all day? Yes, but am I truly deserving of such a powerful weapon? Probably not.
I'm merely responding in kind, when people act like jerks, I'm not going to stand there and take it. Especially when not only are they jerks, but they are wrong.
No, it wouldn't end there, and if you think it will, then you haven't been paying attention.
Oddly, yes it is one of the best weapons in the game for my character, the only thing better, truly, would be a +5 or better wakizashi, even with a bunch of properties it's probably going to come up short in comparison to the Sun Blade. A lot of the monsters we face only do 1 or 2 attacks, the Scorpions do 3, but they have an incredible amount of reach. Hitting and running isn't a very good option, because all of our opponents have 10-15 foot reach or cast spells, making such an action a waste of time. Were we fighting melee-based humanoids, this might be a different story, but it isn't.
I really don't intend to give her the weapon, she's not going to use it, she's eventually going to drop it(losing it permanently, because she's haunted) or get killed, and I'm not going to get her brought back to life this time.
I even noted I was dodging the WBL questions, this isn't about math. If she wanted to do something else, then she probably should have built to do something else. You can be a healer and a combatant, you just have to build for it.
Keeping my PC alive is a bad reason? Since when? No, I'm not giving her the sword.
@TheeGravedigger: I'm trying to have the guy who dies a lot build a healer/archer paladin.
@Darkthorne:I've been asking that very same question and I've never gotten a satisfactory answer from her. I wish that were an option, but we are in the middle of a dungeon, a little too far from civilization to really do it.
Keeping my PC alive is a bad reason? Since when? No, I'm not giving her the sword.
Good lets let this thread die then. You have made a decision WOO HOO!! Half the forum thinks you are right and are da man! The other half thinks you are a selfish wanker. None of that really matter you got advice and have made a choice go with it. If you must, come back and tell us what happens when you play and leave it at that.
Failed my Will save again...sigh
Hearing her side might help. However the one side that I've heard so far reeks of self-entitlement. Although once she's read what the player and others here have posted about her she might end this by leaving your table.
I hope so, odds are by the time she reads this, the game will be over, much less the argument.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my group we argue over who gets the last Dew...
Otherwise one of you, and I'm not specifying which, needs to grow up and end the argument. Either by giving her the silly imaginary sword, or she conceding and letting you keep it.
The above has probably been said and if she is SO incredibly unwilling to let you keep it be the man and give her the sword. Is it worth all the trouble?
|
Giving her the sword is a bad idea because of the same reason the US doesn't negotiate with terrorists: you give them one thing, they'll ask for another, they'll keep asking, and you'll keep giving. What part of that don't you get?
Like, really ?
Make everyone a favor. Breathe deeply, stop being what you are complaining about, and let her the sword. Then talk to the DM about this. No one here has any power to bring back your candy from the weird kid's hands, but the Master may give others.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly, as no doubt you’re dodging the WBL questions as your PC has a lot more loot than her. Which is why you should give her the sword.
(PS, I did read the thread, and like I said- you have not yet nor are likely to use the BIG ability of the sword, while she may well do so. Thus, in a “best use” argument”, you have also lost. Give her the sword)
Everyone wants their character to stay alive. Your reasoning that your PC must be selfish and grabby because it’s good roleplaying to want to stay alive also applies to all the other PC’s. Which means they should get their fair share. Give her the sword.
And, it appears your character got the sword by just grabbing it and proclaiming “it’s mine!”, which is not how mature roleplayers divide loot. Give her the sword.
Exactly, as no doubt you’re dodging the WBL questions as your PC has a lot more loot than her. Which is why you should give her the sword.
(PS, I did read the thread, and like I said- you have not yet nor are likely to use the BIG ability of the sword, while she may well do so. Thus, in a “best use” argument”, you have also lost. Give her the sword)
Everyone wants their character to stay alive. Your reasoning that your PC must be selfish and grabby because it’s good roleplaying to want to stay alive also applies to all the other PC’s. Which means they should get their fair share. Give her the sword.And, it appears your character got the sword by just grabbing it and proclaiming “it’s mine!”, which is not how mature roleplayers divide loot. Give her the sword.
I'm dodging the WBL question because it isn't pertinent in a roleplaying situation, which is what I'd like to keep this as, if this was about WBL, someone would have taken the other pieces I offered up by now.
No, I said I would use it the moment it became useful, which isn't any slower than she would use it, in fact it's probably faster, because I would actually think to use it. The only problem is that it's not always tactically sound.
Again, no, I've got the gear I have because no one else will use it, except that necklace (again, gift from my current boss, not going to just hand it to the next Tom, Dick, or Harry who wants to use it) and I will use it all the time. The sun blade is no exception. Were she to get that she would use it once or twice a session, where as I use it once or twice a round.
Handing the weapon to the Summoner is just as good an idea. Only, unlike her, he won't accept the thing, because he knows he isn't going to use it!
How often does your group meet? And have you decided what you're going to do about the sword? I'm curious to see how this goes for you.
Giving her the sword is a bad idea because of the same reason the US doesn't negotiate with terrorists: you give them one thing, they'll ask for another, they'll keep asking, and you'll keep giving. What part of that don't you get?
Excellent. We're only 2 posts away from Godwin's Law now.
How often does your group meet? And have you decided what you're going to do about the sword? I'm curious to see how this goes for you.
Every Friday. I have: I'm not giving her the sword, I'm going to take my chances with my roleplaying options, and if they all come up short I'm going to ask the GM to resolve this.
@Lorekeeper: I already tried the child analogy earlier, what do you expect, especially when only a few people understood it? Also, I'm trying to avoid Godwin's Law, though it would have been a more appropriate example, even if the entire thing is inappropriate.
I can't even imagine having such a petty argument, are you guys FRIENDS at all? Or do you just meet to meet?
Someone call Homeland Security this Oracle is probably on their top 10 list, you know for her crimes against humanity. /sigh
I hate* to be sarcastic but this situation just seems silly.
*love
I can't even imagine having such a petty argument, are you guys FRIENDS at all? Or do you just meet to meet?
Someone call Homeland Security this Oracle is probably on their top 10 list, you know for her crimes against humanity. /sigh
I hate* to be sarcastic but this situation just seems silly.
*love
No, I'd never consider someone who acts like this (in their 40s no less) a friend of mine. We met a few months back she asked to join a game.
Yes, it is silly, but it's also incredibly frustrating to deal with personally.
No, I'd never consider someone who acts like this (in their 40s no less) a friend of mine. We met a few months back she asked to join a game.
Yes, it is silly, but it's also incredibly frustrating to deal with personally.
Give her the sword, put the entire ordeal behind you, feel better cause you were the bigger man.
Giving her the sword is a bad idea because of the same reason the US doesn't negotiate with terrorists: you give them one thing, they'll ask for another, they'll keep asking, and you'll keep giving. What part of that don't you get?
Here's another analogy.
I feel that you have wronged me, even though I am incorrect, I still feel wronged.
I hit you and feel justified.
You do not feel that you wronged me, but now I hit you, so you feel justified in hitting me back.
Now, I feel I have been wronged twice and only taken vengeance once, so I hit you again.
See the never-ending cycle?
In this situation if she is truly the only problem player, the only permanent solution is to remove her from the group. The best way to point out that SHE is the problem player and not BOTH of you is to remove your participation in the conflict. In the above scenario, you have to be the first person to stop throwing punches. Until you do, you are BOTH participating in a conflict and it looks like BOTH of you are the problem. Once SHE is the only person participating in the conflict, she is clearly in the wrong and can be removed.
Governments don't behave the way people are expected to behave. Would you teach your kid to behave like the government?
Give her the sword, put the entire ordeal behind you, feel better cause you were the bigger man.
I'll try to explain this a little better than I have before: By all appearances (and from what I've been told by my friends) she is a person who will fixate on an item/concept/etc., on an OCD-like level, and I'm not going to give in to that. Ever.
I give her the Sun Blade, the next thing she will want is the headband, then I'll give her that, the next thing she'll want is the necklace, I'll give her that, the next thing she'll want is the boots, I'll give her that, and the cycle will continue until she has everything in the party.
I'm not even going to let that start, she can ask for the Sun Blade all she likes, I'm not giving it to her, yes it will end -THIS- argument, but it will only cause more down the line.
A GM's job is handling encounters, judging rule mechanics, and other game related resolutions.
Handling a player that's immature enough to want to destroy the campaign over a shiny isn't a job for a Gamemaster, it's a job for a nanny.
Game Mastery Guide say this about it:
Mediator: Just as GMs make sure all of a game’s plots and rules work together to entertain, they must also ensure that the players themselves mesh and cooperate.It has been that way since my first game of AD&D and still is.
While I agree it shouldn't be required in the first place, it is, in fact, the GM's job.
Here's another analogy.
I feel that you have wronged me, even though I am incorrect, I still feel wronged.
I hit you and feel justified.
You do not feel that you wronged me, but now I hit you, so you feel justified in hitting me back.
Now, I feel I have been wronged twice and only taken vengeance once, so I hit you again.
See the never-ending cycle?
In this situation if she is truly the only problem player, the only permanent solution is to remove her from the group. The best way to point out that SHE is the problem player and not BOTH of you is to remove your participation in the conflict. In the above scenario, you have to be the first person to stop throwing punches. Until you do, you are BOTH participating in a conflict and it looks like BOTH of you are the problem. Once SHE is the only person participating in the conflict, she is clearly in the wrong and can be removed.
Governments don't behave the way people are expected to behave. Would you teach your kid to behave like the government?
Giving her the sword only starts a different cycle, you do have a point about how I should behave though, someone else mentioned that, and I do intend on giving it a try. Again, it all depends on how she behaves, if she stops healing my character I have to stop the game, tell the GM that this game can't continue if she's going to be like that, and he determines what happens next.
No, but she's acting like one, that was the example I was providing, because I know this isn't going to stop at the sword.
I'll try to explain this a little better than I have before: By all appearances (and from what I've been told by my friends) she is a person who will fixate on an item/concept/etc., on an OCD-like level, and I'm not going to give in to that. Ever.
I give her the Sun Blade, the next thing she will want is the headband, then I'll give her that, the next thing she'll want is the necklace, I'll give her that, the next thing she'll want is the boots, I'll give her that, and the cycle will continue until she has everything in the party.
I'm not even going to let that start, she can ask for the Sun Blade all she likes, I'm not giving it to her, yes it will end -THIS- argument, but it will only cause more down the line.
You both are looking very immature. Give her the sword, if she becomes all grabby with every piece of loot she sees, okay that's different. So far she hasn't and you're just theorizing she will, and using this assumption as reasoning for you denying her request for an item she'd like.
I had a similar experience where two players wanted an oath bow. Luckily both of them are sane, and the argument ended before it began. I understand people can be unreasonable, and in those cases the responsibility falls to YOU.
I am new to this thread. I have two comments to make that have not already been made.
There is no indication that Blue Star has invited the other player to view/post in this thread. I assume that Blue Star has not done so. (No doubt Blue Star has an excuse about how this would be futile or counter-productive.)
I am glad that I do not play with Blue Star.
Nah, I just have no way of contacting her. I'm not sure if that would help at all, but at least we'd know what magic items she has, that would be a start. We could get her side of the argument and I'm pretty sure that would be helpful to my side of the argument, but who knows, right?
I agree with ZeboJQ: give her the blade; if she goes crazy about items afterwards, then you can be a hardliner on those items. The blade is perfectly appropriate in her possession. This is a social situation that needs to be handled in a social manner: give and take.
Note, once you have given her the blade, she is still entitled to whatever future loot becomes available that is appropriate.
You both are looking very immature. Give her the sword, if she becomes all grabby with every piece of loot she sees, okay that's different. So far she hasn't and you're just theorizing she will, and using this assumption as reasoning for you denying her request for an item she'd like.
Yeah, if she hasn't been grabby before now about things like the headband, cloak, boots, portable hole, etc, I don't see how he can reasonably make the assumption she'll be grabby about everything if he relents on the sword.
For my money, all if his rationalizations sound like he may be the really grabby one.
I agree with ZeboJQ: give her the blade; if she goes crazy about items afterwards, then you can be a hardliner on those items. The blade is perfectly appropriate in her possession. This is a social situation that needs to be handled in a social manner: give and take.
Note, once you have given her the blade, she is still entitled to whatever future loot becomes available that is appropriate.
How is a melee weapon perfectly appropriate in the hands of a dedicated caster? Especially when there is a melee character, who needs a weapon, (or second weapon as the case may be, given that the melee character is a 2-weapon fighter) literally right there?
Yeah, if she hasn't been grabby before now about things like the headband, cloak, boots, portable hole, etc, I don't see how he can reasonably make the assumption she'll be grabby about everything if he relents on the sword.
For my money, all if his rationalizations sound like he may be the really grabby one.
She was grabby for the boots and the headband, when I offered them later she was already going on about the sword. Honestly it seems like no one wants the portable hole, it is party loot, but no one wants to carry it.
For my money, all if his rationalizations sound like he may be the really grabby one.
I've been getting that feeling as well. I try to give the benefit of the doubt but I fear you're absolutely correct.
Bluestar you're being just as unrelenting as she is, imo. You refuse to give her the sword based on an assumption. So now she wants it, you have it, and you are both completely unwilling to give in. Both of you are immature and this isn't going to end well given the above.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
She was grabby for the boots and the headband, when I offered them later she was already going on about the sword. Honestly it seems like no one wants the portable hole, it is party loot, but no one wants to carry it.
Apparently, she can't be too grabby if you're the one who managed to grab them.
Apparently, she can't be too grabby if you're the one who managed to grab them.
She wasn't as bad as this about them.
How is a melee weapon perfectly appropriate in the hands of a dedicated caster? Especially when there is a melee character, who needs a weapon, (or second weapon as the case may be, given that the melee character is a 2-weapon fighter) literally right there?
Oracle is a ¾ BAB, who can be a decent fighter. Also the main ability of the Sword is not melee, perfect for her, and something that you have not used yet. You also have a great primary weapon and a couple of decent secondary weapons.
The idea that “I can’t give into her on this, as she will then demand more” is a perfect example of a slippery slope logical fallacy.
You asked for our opinion, we have given it- give her the sword (sez most of us)