I am a new GM and I have a player who wants to make a gnome fire & x Mystic Theurge. The basic idea is to build an Oracle with the fire mystery and a sorcerer with a non-fire elemental bloodline. However, I can't see how that a gnome with pyromaniac would take a non- fire elemental bloodline. Is this even legal?
Yeah, though bloodlines can come from a variety of sources, most often, they are simply bloodlines that the sorcerer in question is born with.
An undine can be a pyromaniac just as readily as a coldblooded sorcerer can be one, heh.
Don't confuse an out-of-game meta decision for an in-game one. This is clearly a meta decision on the player's part, but not necessarily a choice on the character's part. The gnome could no more choose his bloodline than any other aspect of his heritage (but the player absolutely can make that decision for the gnome).
Not only are such characters possible, they can do things like wield flaming frost weapons or cast fireballs that do both cold and fire damage with the elemental spell feat.
It's even possible, though unlikely, to have a red dragon with the white half-dragon template or the cold elemental sorcerer bloodline (I'd describe it as being a pink dragon, heh).
If you want to prevent such things in your game as a GM, that's your prerogative, but their isn't any kind of rule against it.
Of course it's legal, don't make up rules to stifle player creativity -_-
|
Pyromaniac:
Gnomes with this racial trait are treated as one level higher when casting spells with the fire descriptor, using granted powers of the Fire domain, using the bloodline powers of the fire elemental bloodline or the revelations of the oracle's flame mystery, and when determining the damage of alchemist bombs that deal fire damage (this ability does not give gnomes early access to level-based powers, only affecting the powers they could use without this ability). Gnomes with Charisma of 11 or higher also gain the following spell-like abilities: 1/day—dancing lights, flare, prestidigitation, produce flame. The caster level for these effects is equal to the gnome's level; the DCs are Charisma-based. This racial trait replaces the gnome magic and illusion resistance racial traits.
Nothing in this pigeon holes you into a certain variant of a class. That is what the early days of 1st edition D&D did by making gnome wizards only be illusionists.
I appreciate all the input. I still can't quite grasp what a racial trait "is". My basic response to the player was " that was unexpected, I'll need some kind of backstory on this. . ."
Racial traits can be understood as both cultural and inherit. Dwarfs have Darkvision, which probably an inherited biological trait. They also have a bonus to identify stonework, likely a result of their upbringing.
What about gnome with Pyromaniac? Since it grants magical abilities based on charisma, i.e. magic 'from within' rather than learned, its probably an inherited trait. Something in this gnomes body, perhaps the remnants of a fire based ancestor or just a quirk of nature, gives this gnome fire related magical abilites.
This is in no way conflicting with any sorcerer bloodline. It's entirely possible to have two bloodlines (There's an archetype for that) so a hint of fire ancestory from a racial trait in a fey blooded sorcerer (or whatever your player chooses) isn't exactly breaking new grounds.
Hope that helps you conceptualize your player's character =)
Racial traits have absolutely 0 baring on class limitations at all, open your mind to the possibility of heroes beyond the ones you have already pigeon holed.
Not sure if it is intentional but some of the posts sure seem overly hostile to a new GM trying to get his bearings.
Desert Rose, racial traits are just innate aptitudes and weaknesses. Just like real people that doesn't mean that they have to play into those aptitudes. Sort of like the stereotype that "tall people make good basketball players". That doesn't mean that all tall people want to play or are even good at basketball just that being tall gives an advantage. Likewise, a pyromaniac gnome is good with fire spells but that doesn't mean that they even have to be a caster much less a caster who uses fire spells. Just because someone excels at something doesn't mean that they must take advantage of their natural talents.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure if it is intentional but some of the posts sure seem overly hostile to a new GM trying to get his bearings.
I agree. Let's dial it back a notch fellas'.
I'm sorry, when DMs decide to put unnecessary barriers to player creativity in the way of players and then respond to people's advice that there is no need to do so with, I don't get it and the barrier is still there, I'm not endeared towards them or encouraged by their response to believe they're open minded.
To much experience with DMs who won't allow players to play their characters or be creative. Is the point of the game not to have fun?
I'm sorry, when DMs decide to put unnecessary barriers to player creativity in the way of players and then respond to people's advice that there is no need to do so with, I don't get it and the barrier is still there, I'm not endeared towards them or encouraged by their response to believe they're open minded.
To much experience with DMs who won't allow players to play their characters or be creative. Is the point of the game not to have fun?
Clearly you're confused; the point of the game is to placate and amuse the GM. :P
What about gnome with Pyromaniac? Since it grants magical abilities based on charisma, i.e. magic 'from within' rather than learned, its probably an inherited trait. Something in this gnomes body, perhaps the remnants of a fire based ancestor or just a quirk of nature, gives this gnome fire related magical abilites.
Nah, it's something learned. They just like playing with fire. The reason that it's based on Charisma is because gnomes tend to be passionate about their obsessions. :)
Clearly you're confused; the point of the game is to placate and amuse the GM. :PI'm sorry, when DMs decide to put unnecessary barriers to player creativity in the way of players and then respond to people's advice that there is no need to do so with, I don't get it and the barrier is still there, I'm not endeared towards them or encouraged by their response to believe they're open minded.
To much experience with DMs who won't allow players to play their characters or be creative. Is the point of the game not to have fun?
nothings more toxic than a Punpun!
Oh yeah?Try a GM who thinks you're a character in his novel
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I appreciate all the input. I still can't quite grasp what a racial trait "is". My basic response to the player was " that was unexpected, I'll need some kind of backstory on this. . ."
Think of racial traits and something they are inherently good at or something that comes natural to them. The gnome with pyromaniac trait has a natural affinity with fire, but doesn't necessarily mean they only like things on fire.
For an example, a player could make a Boreal Bloodline sorcerer with pyromaniac alternate racial trait. From a role playing standpoint, without any background information, I can definitely see how it would not make sense to a GM. The player may just like the spell like abilities and think they would compliment what they want to do. As a GM, I would be inclined to ask what the player had it mind for their build to make sure they were not limiting their character in an unneeded fashion. They may have been from a fire based family and are being a rebellious teenager saying "screw your fire, I am going to use ice!".
Instead of saying they "need" to explain it, let them do it and ask if they could provide some background for the character. It is always nice to have the players give a short little character background.
What about gnome with Pyromaniac? Since it grants magical abilities based on charisma, i.e. magic 'from within' rather than learned, its probably an inherited trait. Something in this gnomes body, perhaps the remnants of a fire based ancestor or just a quirk of nature, gives this gnome fire related magical abilites.Nah, it's something learned. They just like playing with fire. The reason that it's based on Charisma is because gnomes tend to be passionate about their obsessions. :)
Fair enough =)
Clearly you're confused; the point of the game is to placate and amuse the GM. :P
At my table this is appropriately accomplished with liberal offerings of Oreo cookies and heaven help the poor fool who brings those double stuffed or mint flavored abominations!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What about the orange Halloween ones?Clearly you're confused; the point of the game is to placate and amuse the GM. :PAt my table this is appropriately accomplished with liberal offerings of Oreo cookies and heaven help the poor fool who brings those double stuffed or mint flavored abominations!
<gasp> Heretic!
|
<gasp> Heretic!What about the orange Halloween ones?Clearly you're confused; the point of the game is to placate and amuse the GM. :PAt my table this is appropriately accomplished with liberal offerings of Oreo cookies and heaven help the poor fool who brings those double stuffed or mint flavored abominations!
:3
|
I'd also want to see the character's backstory - not because the player needs approval to make this choice, but because contrasts are an interesting place to add character development and it would be a shame to overlook that opportunity.
The character has a particular talent for fire. Do they appreciate it or not? How did they become aware of it? Did they court the attention of whatever entity gave them oracular powers over flame, or are they the willing target of divine attention (possibly because of their special talent)? Is the contrasting bloodline an unfortunate accident that distracts from their true calling? Or does it represent a heritage that the character values? That the character's family values? Do both sides of the family have the same opinion or do the two sources of power represent different family heritages? Does the character struggle to balance the two powers - or to justify their magical path to those close to them who might be invested in one type of magic or the other?
There are just so many neat directions to take this.
Thank you for the constructive comments. I had assumed the racial traits were inherent and might had potential rules conflict. I can see that really, my situation is likely to just generate internal character conflict from being dual natured. I do want to hear what backstory the player has in mind to define/describe his character. Hopefully, it is something interesting like "My pc is like the Paul Atreides of the gnome world" vs something like, "uh, my pc is like insane & stuff. He has split personalties & stuff". As a new GM, I' am hoping for fun sessions, not sessions full of face-palms.
Clearly you're confused; the point of the game is to placate and amuse the GM. :PI'm sorry, when DMs decide to put unnecessary barriers to player creativity in the way of players and then respond to people's advice that there is no need to do so with, I don't get it and the barrier is still there, I'm not endeared towards them or encouraged by their response to believe they're open minded.
To much experience with DMs who won't allow players to play their characters or be creative. Is the point of the game not to have fun?
nothings more toxic than a Punpun!
Oh yeah?
Try a GM who thinks you're a character in his novel
Chromatic, your new alias frightens me when they yell so loud.
Also, nothing annoys me more than a purposely obstructive DM, but sometimes restrictions are important. This should come after long talks between DM's and players, of course.
Chromatic, your new alias frightens me when they yell so loud.
I know right? That guys so angry shouting all the time. What a downer.
Also, nothing annoys me more than a purposely obstructive DM, but sometimes restrictions are important. This should come after long talks between DM's and players, of course.
Sometimes I agree they are. This I would argue is not one of those times.
|
Sometimes I agree they are. This I would argue is not one of those times.
I'd argue that it *could* be one of those times.
Novice GM: I've decided to take the plunge and run a game for the first time. Hopefully you guys will all be as supportive as you can be.
Experienced Player: Excellent, I've got an insanely complicated and extremely bizarre character build I've been looking to try out, and this looks like the ideal opportunity.
This probably isn't the situation here - looks like all the stuff is in the Core Rulebook and the APG - but I think a new GM is entitled to request that everybody keeps things as simple as possible for their first campaign.
He isn't complaining that it's complex he thought it was illegal as per the rules because it wasn't an easily identifiable trope to have a fire guy that doesn't only do fire.
Not being a recognisable trope is
1) not illegal
2) not a bad thing.
3) nothing to do with being complicated.
|
|
He isn't complaining that it's complex he thought it was illegal as per the rules because it wasn't an easily identifiable trope to have a fire guy that doesn't only do fire.
I'm not as convinced as you are.
Getting the rules wrong because "it wasn't an easily identifiable trope" is one explanation.
A novice DM being unsure because it was more rules complexity than he or she could handle in the first campaign is another possible explanation. And this is a DM who didn't initially know what a Racial trait was.
Not being a recognisable trope is
1) not illegal
2) not a bad thing.
3) nothing to do with being complicated.
Nobody here is arguing that it is, although I get the impression you might have had that argument in the past.
Nothing about
However, I can't see how that a gnome with pyromaniac would take a non- fire elemental bloodline. Is this even legal?
Suggests complication is the problem he is having. Furthermore he signed off on a mystic theurge, if anything is complex that is, not having a bloodline and a racial trait that don't mesh in a cookie cutter way.
Guessing at my motivations isn't going to achieve anything and you're probably not going to get the write answer so I'd suggest not bothering.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What about gnome with Pyromaniac? Since it grants magical abilities based on charisma, i.e. magic 'from within' rather than learned, its probably an inherited trait. Something in this gnomes body, perhaps the remnants of a fire based ancestor or just a quirk of nature, gives this gnome fire related magical abilites.
One of my Homebrew settings was a world inhabited almost entirely by Gnomes, and they all went to a Hogwarts-Like school of magic during their adolescence. So in that world their magic was taught (some gnomes never received an invitation to magic school, and got Spell Resistance as a racial ability instead. I also wrote dozens of 'branches' of gnomish magic for gnomes so they could select different 'majors'. For example:
Corruption: This branch of gnomish magic grants you the ability to cast Acid Splash (at-will), and Corrosive Touch (2/day) as arcane spell-like abilities with caster levels equal to your character level.
Additional Spells: Accelerate Poison (1/day), Acid Arrow (1/day), Break (2/day), Euphoric Cloud (1/day), Nauseating Dart (2/day), Poison (1/day), Putrefy Food and Drink (at-will), Ray of Sickening (2/day), Touch of Fatigue (at-will).
Said rules also included an "Expanded Gnomish Magic" and "Extra Gnomish Magic" feats you could take to expand your list of spell-like abilities (ergo the "Additional Spells" entry), or grant you more uses per day of them respectively
Nothing aboutHowever, I can't see how that a gnome with pyromaniac would take a non- fire elemental bloodline. Is this even legal?Suggests complication is the problem he is having. Furthermore he signed off on a mystic theurge, if anything is complex that is, not having a bloodline and a racial trait that don't mesh in a cookie cutter way.
Guessing at my motivations isn't going to achieve anything and you're probably not going to get the write answer so I'd suggest not bothering.
Chromatic Durgon, I think you are getting me wrong. Literally any other bloodline would not have bothered me (though Boreal would have had me thinking interesting, what's the story). My problem was having a player tell me that "yeah, my gnomish magic is fire, but really, it's not, my bloodline is X element." If you think me narrow minded or cookie cutter, you are dead wrong. But your attitude is so off-putting, that if I had to have you at a table, I would not volunteer to DM. As a DM, I have a right to have fun too if I am going to put a lot of time & effort into running. Just an FYI.
Explain to me how it's problematic for you that being a Gnome he is naturally inclined towards fire but has the influence of a water or whatever other elemental in their bloodline history somewhere. Yet having the influence of a tree people in his passed (flammable) giving him the Verdant bloodline would not be a problem for you at all? Unless you see that these two areas of the character are unrelated and do not interact.
His gnomish magic is fire
His bloodline is something else
Gnomish magic racial trait =/= bloodlines.
Dms have a right to have fun of course(I am one from time to time), that doesn't change that their job is to make the game fun and stopping players doing what they want for no other reason than the character concept doesn't perfectly fit into what your idea of a sorcerer can be isn't a good way of facilitating that fun.
As a general rule saying 'yes' or 'let's try' is good saying 'your idea is weird and illegal' is not.
You'll never have to worry about having me at your table so I don't see how that comment is relevant.
A GM has every right to say that a given character concept doesn't fit well with his chosen campaign.
But that's not what's happening here. The GM is saying "no" to a perfectly valid combination for, well, no one really knows for sure why. Cause it feels icky to him and would somehow ruin his fun I guess?
When it comes to good GMing, that's not a promising sign.
Explain to me how it's problematic for you that being a Gnome he is naturally inclined towards fire but has the influence of a water or whatever other elemental in their bloodline history somewhere. Yet having the influence of a tree people in his passed (flammable) giving him the Verdant bloodline would not be a problem for you at all? Unless you see that these two areas of the character are unrelated and do not interact.
His gnomish magic is fire
His bloodline is something elseGnomish magic racial trait =/= bloodlines.
Dms have a right to have fun of course(I am one from time to time), that doesn't change that their job is to make the game fun and stopping players doing what they want for no other reason than the character concept doesn't perfectly fit into what your idea of a sorcerer can be isn't a good way of facilitating that fun.
As a general rule saying 'yes' or 'let's try' is good saying 'your idea is weird and illegal' is not.
You'll never have to worry about having me at your table so I don't see how that comment is relevant.
[/QUOTE/I think I understand now. It was my poor word choice that set this in motion. My apologies on that account. A more accurate & neutral tone would have been far wordier, but would have given me more of the information I needed. Your last posted was actually helpful, and I do honestly appreciate your response in this case.
People need to move away from the idea that GMs are blameless martyrs who can do no wrong and run ruff shot over everyone else at the table because they uttered those magic words 'I'll GM'. GMs are fallible they can ruin a game just as easily as anyone else can, if not easier.
The OP may be a fine GM but as Ravingdork says, the signs aren't encouraging.
I think I understand now. It was my poor word choice that set this in motion. My apologies on that account. A more accurate & neutral tone would have been far wordier, but would have given me more of the information I needed. Your last posted was actually helpful, and I do honestly appreciate your response in this case.
I still don't understand what you're trying to do but sure you're welcome for whatever help I was.
A GM has every right to say that a given character concept doesn't fit well with his chosen campaign.
But that's not what's happening here. The GM is saying "no" to a perfectly valid combination for, well, no one really knows for sure why. Cause it feels icky to him and would somehow ruin his fun I guess?
When it comes to good GMing, that's not a promising sign.
Fortunately, that's not what's happening here either. But go ahead and keep picking on the newb so he knows his place, right?
Just trying to understand the situation. No offense intended.
I EAT SCRUB GM'S LIKE THIS FOR BREAKFAST!
YOUR IGNORANCE IS MY SUSTENANCE!
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
New GM is confused about something that seems inconsistent.
New GM expresses doubt to player, but instead of knee-jerk banning it asks for advice.
New GM admits he was wrong and expresses a preference that the player put some thought into roleplaying this thematically unusual choice.
I understand there's a lot of emotion involved in the tension between player creativity and the GM's right to set limitations on the type of characters they want to run games for, but that's not what's going on here. So maybe keep it civil?
OP, good luck with your game!
What is this a /tg/ thread?