Slumbering Tsar, Core-Only Dispute

[DystopianDream]

Hi everyone, I've started a Slumbering Tsar game and we're two sessions in. For this campaign, I restricted character creation to core-only with a system of unlocking new things (abilities, spells, classes) as they probe deeper into Tsar. One player, however, has challenged this decision, stating that it is a power play to keep the playing field uneven between the player characters and the opposition due to the fact that there are creatures converted from Tome of Horrors and Creature Collection III.

The player had a character die in the first session, and repeatedly called attention to anything that was not core afterward, and in the session that followed. What I don't want is this to fester and grow into something more severe, compounded by each character death. I have talked to him a few times since, but I wonder if anyone else has dealt with this before. Any advice for moving forward?

[kestral287]

Tell him to grow up?

I mean, ideally civilly, but that's what it boils down to.

Sit down with him and ask him explain why he feels the way he does. Explain why you limited it to core-only in return. Get it all out in the open like reasonable adults.

If he refuses to be a reasonable adult, point him to the door.

[RCW]

Going to agree with Kestral here. If it works for you and the other players then it's fine. My only advice is, and you may have already done it, it to let your player's know upfront who the publisher of that adventure is. Frog God Games adventures are notoriously brutal.

[Rub-Eta]

Only problem about "uneven fields" could be that a few things aren't possible with Core-only characters or not available enough for them to reliably use it to get by. Can't come up with any specifics though (Make your player do that).

When a player says anything like this to the DM, the DM should tell them "trust me, I know what I'm doing" (and the DM should make sure they do). If they still don't trust you, assure them once again.

I've had players say similar things to me, it spawns from them not knowing what what I'm planing. I'm not a DM to be "fair", I'm there to challange my players.

All in all, the argument provided by your player is null and void, he just doesn't like being limited to core-only but won't admit that that's why he's whining.

[Movin]

the standard adventuring party baseline for pathfinder stuff is core cleric, core rogue, core wizard, core fighter.

Anything more than core is sprinkles added to the parfait of your game. Perhaps the player in question is unaccustomed to lack of caution resulting in immediate and painful death in his games. If this is the case he will not find Slumbering Tsar very enjoyable.

[Bob Bob Bob]

Basically have to agree with everyone else with the standard solution to GM/player problems, sit down and talk about it like adults, though I have a different problem with the player behavior here. As far as I can tell they're complaining that you're using non-core bestiaries. Both of which, as far as I can tell, were made when only Core Pathfinder stuff existed. Bestiaries, by their nature, don't really have a lot of player options in them and need to be balanced around the lowest common denominator, i.e. a Core-only campaign.

[hogarth]

I have seen players try to browbeat a GM into allowing something a few times in my life, but luckily it has been pretty rare.

As long as you were clear on your rules before character creation started, I don't see what grounds he has for complaining. He had the chance to pass on the campaign from the get-go.

[Dennis Deadsky]

Movin wrote:

the standard adventuring party baseline for pathfinder stuff is core cleric, core rogue, core wizard, core fighter.

No need for the Rogue. Most parties would be better off with almost anything else. A Bard makes a much better rogue than does a Rogue.

[Eponine Lokrien Savet]

Core-Wizard is the best rogue in core.

[Gentleman Wizard]

DystopianDream wrote:

One player, however, has challenged this decision, stating that it is a power play to keep the playing field uneven between the player characters and the opposition due to the fact that there are creatures converted from Tome of Horrors and Creature Collection III.

I think this player has made a critical misinterpretation. Pathfinder is not intended as any sort of "competition" between the GM and the Players. The Players are trusting the GM to show them a good time. What this "good time" might be depends on the group and the GM.

A "power play" would be if you created a death-trap (by the core rules) that could only be detected if the trap-finder rolled a natural 20. If you played that 19 intelligence vampire "accurately" and had him react with the full might of his resources to crush any hint of a threat. Or if you permitted an asteroid to strike the planet with enough force to end all life.

You have the power to DEVASTATE THEM at any moment. You control everything: The monsters, the geography, the weather, the GODS! The rules do not limit you in any meaningful way. Even if he had access to every official supplement ever published he couldn't stop you from ending him on a whim.

I apologize for the rant (not very gentlemanly), but his stance is simply... Un-examined.