Community

ElberethSilverleaf wrote:

Then they brought in 7of9 running around in a stupid cat suit with high heeled boots and bazooka torpedo t*ts from a 50's b-movie.
They did the same with T'Pol in Enterprise.

I figure they told her, "do an impression of 7 of 9 doing an impression of Tuvok." And, unfortunately, she succeeded admirably.

Optimized_Commoner wrote:

What don't I like in my D&D?

Inconsistency.

If the world is consistent then I'm fine with it, it can have ninjas shooting laser beams from their eyes and as long its consistent with how it applies and clear on what kind of ninjas can shoot eye lasers, then I'm happy.

I usually hold to this unless doing a comedic campaign. Though my standards for consistency are harsh. As i demand magic and alignment be applied consistently and logically.

yak..... read JulesCARV's original post.

I'm not here to criticise what others don't want in their campaigns, just express what I don't want in mine.
Some people can't stand psi, but I have no problem with it if there is a viable and explainable reason for it in the mileau.

The purpose of this thread is for different people to express what they don't want incorporated into their D&D campaigns.
I have nothing against anime cartoons or games that aren't RPG's. I just don't want that nonsense (my opinion) incorporated into a D&D game I'm playing.

I think it's ridiculous for a player to think D&D is about having his 15th lvl ninja/10th lvl assassin/10th lvl duskblade running around swinging a 6-7 ft long +12 Vorpal sword.

I may be in the minority but I actually enjoy starting a character out at level 1 or 2 and building him from a weak neophyte to an adventurer with a reputation that was EARNED.

The purpose of this thread is to express what YOU don't want in your D&D gaming sessions, not complaining about the rest of us who have opinions that differ from yours.

I tend to say "no psionics", because it's a pain to have two different magic systems in one game. I also ban paladins, as the character (and player) personality associated with it is not something I want in my games. I also drop any and all alignment restrictions on classes, including absolute morality/ethics. If you break the law to save a kingdom, you're still lawful. If you stab a baby to save a bus full of nuns, you're still good. I think the alignment "system" in general is absurd; there is no logical reason why you can't have an otherwise very chaotic person (i.e. someone who follows their own set of rules rather than someone else's) can't learn martial arts. There's no reason a morally indifferent person can't learn how to gouge out someone's throat and kidneys in one swing. And so on.

Lots of arbitrary restrictions... I like being able to create characters for any idea. Options are the most interesting part of D&D. The reason I play D&D over video games (though I do play those) is because of options. No matter how good a video game is, it can't come close to the options present in D&D. I can play a mind mage, a Vancian spell caster, a great leader, a suave bard, soulmelder, Kenshin, chosen of the gods, beastial fighter, binder of forbidden spirits, speaker of the true language, caster who fuels his powers with emotions, ect, ect.

Thus, I enjoy games with psionics, Incarnum, magic, Tome of Battle, ect allowed. I can't stand games with lots of restrictions on ideas, because that ruins my creativity. And sometimes I just like the mechanics and reflavor them to suit general fantasy stuff.

And never ever Core Only. Least balanced Rule Set. Ever.