Quote from: Omega on January 28, 2022, 03:07:21 AM

Quote from: Pat on January 26, 2022, 07:19:47 PM
I can't think of a better way to discourage players from ever playing a cleric than strategically withholding spells.

Why? Theres always going to be situations where you cant cast one, two, or all your spells for whatever reason. Anti-magic zones go way back and at least one older module had players investigating why certain spells had stopped working. And this applies to magic users too. Moreso because a MU can only get more spells, past their personal research each level, from scrolls and other sources. And BX didnt even allow for that.

So the cleric cant use certain spells for an adventure? Oh boo-hoo-hoo. Cry me a river.

You can play crybaby all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that routinely withholding powers from a class will make players avoid it like rats fleeing a sinking ship.

QuoteSo the cleric cant use certain spells for an adventure? Oh boo-hoo-hoo. Cry me a river.

See I don't play some fantasi quasi-superheroes to be constantly depowered by GM's fiat.
I'm not gonna avoid playing cleric. I'm gonna avoid OSR GM's as fire.

So fighters can never everrrrrrrr lose their swords. MUs cant everrrrrrr be tied up or denied their spellbooks. No surface a thief cant climb... etc ad crymeanoceanium.

There's a big difference between getting captured and having your spellbooks taken away, and the DM telling you one morning that you're not allowed to use your spells.

The equivalent of missing one sword in fight is missspell. Possibly tragic. I'm all for dangerous uncertain magic.
Damn I'm even not againt "enchantment spells in hamlet Ridiculus stopped working, Magic Guild send their most famous enchanter Kanye West to investigate. Go figure." but when it's given as a method to depower PC's because their powers are wonky or unwieldy for GM's that's bad.

Quote from: Wrath of God on February 02, 2022, 04:38:04 AM
Damn I'm even not againt "enchantment spells in hamlet Ridiculus stopped working, Magic Guild send their most famous enchanter Kanye West to investigate. Go figure." but when it's given as a method to depower PC's because their powers are wonky or unwieldy for GM's that's bad.

In The Keep on the Borderlands, which was supposed to teach newbie DMs how to write adventures, Gary gave all the undead Amulets of Protection from Turning (and that amounts to 68 magical amulets) - apparently because he thought the numbers required for turning were too low. Incidentally this is corroborating evidence that the numbers for turning are one of the few bits taken wholesale directly from Dave Arneson!

Quote from: Pat on January 26, 2022, 07:19:47 PM
I can't think of a better way to discourage players from ever playing a cleric than strategically withholding spells.

I think it's a matter of expectations.  If the DM unexpectedly says "sorry, you can't have that spell today" when it's always worked before, you're going to have an unhappy player.  But if the DM tells the players at chargen that sometimes the spells asked for might not be granted due to character behavior / conflict amongst the gods / phase of the moon / deity on vacation / whatever, then it's not necessarily a bad technique.

Quote from: Mishihari on February 02, 2022, 05:37:32 AM

I think it's a matter of expectations.  If the DM unexpectedly says "sorry, you can't have that spell today" when it's always worked before, you're going to have an unhappy player.  But if the DM tells the players at chargen that sometimes the spells asked for might not be granted due to character behavior / conflict amongst the gods / phase of the moon / deity on vacation / whatever, then it's not necessarily a bad technique.

Exactly.  No player is entitled to play whatever they want, in the rules or not, in the GM's campaign.  Players can reasonably expect some information on any rules differences when they join the campaign.  Players can rightfully be annoyed with any bait and switch from the GM.

I've actually started campaigns with variations on these statements about rules:  "There will be no rules changes whatsoever during the campaign, which is defined as when we finish whatever becomes the major story arc, expected to be around about 9th level characters."  And "I want to explicitly try these rules changes, which might not work or might not be exactly correct when we start, and might require additional related changes.  You can expect those to change often until we settle on something that works for the campaign."

Quote from: Mishihari on February 02, 2022, 05:37:32 AM

Quote from: Pat on January 26, 2022, 07:19:47 PM
I can't think of a better way to discourage players from ever playing a cleric than strategically withholding spells.

I think it's a matter of expectations.  If the DM unexpectedly says "sorry, you can't have that spell today" when it's always worked before, you're going to have an unhappy player.  But if the DM tells the players at chargen that sometimes the spells asked for might not be granted due to character behavior / conflict amongst the gods / phase of the moon / deity on vacation / whatever, then it's not necessarily a bad technique.

I don't think it's a matter of expectations, I think it's a matter of arbitrariness. One of the biggest concepts in the OSR is the idea that the world should have a life of its down, and not simply exist in response to the PCs. The DM is responsible for creating the world, yes. But once part of the world is created, it doesn't change just to suit the latest needs of the plot. In a situation like that, players quickly learn that they can choose their own path, instead of following a pre-defined one. And while terrible consequences may befall the PCs, it feels fair because the threats and dangers would have been there, regardless of the players' choices.

That's strongly contrasted with the type of DM who likes linear adventures that the players are expected to follow like rats in a maze, and who tweaks things on the fly to make them "challenging", or to prevent certain outcomes, like missing a plot hook, or a TPK. This disenpowers the players, because they know, no matter what happens, the story will continue. And all their efforts to prepare and make the best use of their resources don't matter, because the monsters will just get tougher. While some players do like the more structured environment, many others chafe in the velvet ropes. It makes the game feel arbitrary and unfair, and any victories feel hollow.

Natural consequences that flow from the world and the situation, like losing spellbooks because you were foolish enough (and lucky enough) to be captured, don't create this sense of unfairness. But the DM picking and choosing each morning which spells work and which don't because of the "phases of the moon" or some other hard-to-pin down excuse, are the equivalent of setting off a fire alarm to the type of player who prefers an independent world that has an existence beyond the plot.

Now I can conceive of a world where gods play favorites, or have principles and won't bend, yet still avoids setting off that fire alarm. But threading that needle would be challenging, because you'd have to clearly distinguish between the DM's whim and the whim of the gods. That would require having a clear and consistent set of guidelines under which gods select or reject certain spells. Which is tough to do from a setting standpoint, because religion in D&D has never that well defined. This selection could even be random and arbitrary, but it would have to be a consistent and independent type of random and arbitrary, not the DM's whim. Something like a random table, rolled on each morning. Being clear and consistent about these rules would be vital, because once the DM creates the impression it's being used to punish or reward the players -- even if behind the scenes, the DM is employing rigorous and objective criteria and not just picking and choosing -- the sense of trust needed to support that kind of verisimilitude is lost. And once that trust is lost, it takes almost forever to rebuild.

Not that difficult at all to manage, given a certain level of trust between GM and players.  Absent that trust, I'm out of the game anyway, because of a variety of problems that will arise. 

That's no different than any other setup, though.  There's certain things that you just can't do in a, say, pickup one-shot game in a store as opposed to a long-running campaign with the same players.

I agree that if it's obvious that a DM is denying a spell because he has a preferred solution, it's a problem.  I also agree that it's useful to have the players understand why such things come up - verisimilitude and all that.  I've tried this to a limited extent myself - I had a good goddess who was merciless to evil and if her clerics cast a heal spell on an evil creature it simply failed.  But it doesn't seem all that hard to create a system for whatever result you want, though I've never had occasion to try it myself.

Okay, and since I can't get this out of my head, I'll share it.  There's a Biblical precedent.  It essentially went "Oops, I guess your flamestrike didn't work.  Maybe your god's on vacation.  Cry harder!"  Not many things in the Bible make me laugh, but that one does every time.

Quote from: Pat on February 02, 2022, 02:07:26 AM
There's a big difference between getting captured and having your spellbooks taken away, and the DM telling you one morning that you're not allowed to use your spells.

Quote from: Wrath of God on February 02, 2022, 04:38:04 AM
The equivalent of missing one sword in fight is missspell. Possibly tragic. I'm all for dangerous uncertain magic.
Damn I'm even not againt "enchantment spells in hamlet Ridiculus stopped working, Magic Guild send their most famous enchanter Kanye West to investigate. Go figure." but when it's given as a method to depower PC's because their powers are wonky or unwieldy for GM's that's bad.

1: There is? How?
Oh. Thats right. There is no difference.

2: And again. In what way is this bad.
Oh. Thats right. It isnt. Because there is no difference.

The rust monster ate your armour and shield. Welcome back to AC 9 = gollie gee willakers thanks! Thats fine!
The area doesnt allow casting certain spells because of a curse = "YOU MONSTER! I DEMAND MY RIGHTS! FUCK THIS IM OUT OF HERE!"

Storygamers gotta shackle that horrible DM from opresededeing you.

"Your god is god; you are not." - 1st rule of playing a cleric.

Greetings!

Take everything away. All of these crybaby players. Fuck them. It's good to be stripped down to nothing. Then, you can grab a dagger, or a club, or a hammer, and just jump in! Biting your enemies, crushing them in simple, bloody combat.

Improvise! Learn to overcome and adapt! All these crybaby players that need all these special powers and spells. Whaa! Whaa!

You have to get simple, brutal, and ruthless.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK