This one is for fellow DMS. I have often come across the players who truly immerse themselves in the world and absolutely enjoy putting in the work in between sessions. My question is how you (as a DM) handle the players that slap together these meta builds in your campaign setting.
For example, recently a player has used AI to essentially compile a list of the most powerful creatures he can alter self into then polymorph and finally shape change. His character wouldn't have access to that type of information no bestiary no libraries nothing he's a low-level character who has built this compendium of powerful monsters. I appreciate the work he put in but I find it unrealistic that someone with no personal knowledge of a monster can turn into one. What are your thoughts?
Normally I discourage this type of meta to encourage my players to better explore the worlds and do the research in game but that's just me and I enjoy a sense of realism.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A DM who loves the game. I am a 3.5e dungeon master of 25+ years experience. It has been my passion since I discovered the starter box set as a kid. My table is always fair and fun, we like to laugh and leave the table excited for the next session.
Avid hiker and explorer IRL. Getting outside is the best unplug. I hope to hear from anyone curious about 3.5 edition and would love t include you in my next campaign.
I typically wouldn't allow someone to transform into a form they hadn't seen before, or at least academically studied. If someone had a very specific thing they wanted that hadn't come up yet in the campaign, I'd probably allow them to roll something like a History or Nature check to see if they had knowledge of it from some other source, or let them go on some little side adventure to track down information about it.
That said, I'm not a big fan of hyper-optimization in general, nor do I want anyone using AI tools for anything related to any of my games, but I know not everyone agrees with me on either of those things. It may come down to different people wanting different things from the game, and the player maybe needing to find a different group if he wants to do that sort of thing.
I go into "what makes sense". If it doesn't make sense for them to know anything about a particular monster, I'm not allowing them to shapeshift into it or polymorph someone to such a creature, etc.. My group has mixed experience players (some veterans and some first timers) and in the first session I said that there's obviously going to be some monsters they know as a player, but if it doesn't make sense for their character to know anything about it, I hope they play accordingly, even if the player knows better. So far it has worked fine, but it does require a bit of commitment from the players.
If they enjoy planning their character in such details, maybe you can plan a few encounters where they meet some of those monsters to "unlock" them for the character.
I’m a little confused. For starters, alter self has three options players can use, and none of them allow you to turn into a creature so much as give yourself a little boost.
Polymorph has the restriction of only turning into a beast, a specific creature type, with a specific CR limit. Most of the time, those limits will keep the polymorphed creature much weaker than the wizard would be if they just stayed a typical pc species and cast spells at the enemies. So are you enforcing those restrictions?
And shapeshift is a 9th level spell. At that point, all the characters will be doing some crazy crap, if the campaign even lasts that long.
And beyond that, as others have said, it’s perfectly reasonable to say the character can’t benefit from the plsyer’s metagame knowledge.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This one is for fellow DMS. I have often come across the players who truly immerse themselves in the world and absolutely enjoy putting in the work in between sessions. My question is how you (as a DM) handle the players that slap together these meta builds in your campaign setting.
For example, recently a player has used AI to essentially compile a list of the most powerful creatures he can alter self into then polymorph and finally shape change. His character wouldn't have access to that type of information no bestiary no libraries nothing he's a low-level character who has built this compendium of powerful monsters. I appreciate the work he put in but I find it unrealistic that someone with no personal knowledge of a monster can turn into one. What are your thoughts?
Normally I discourage this type of meta to encourage my players to better explore the worlds and do the research in game but that's just me and I enjoy a sense of realism.
A DM who loves the game. I am a 3.5e dungeon master of 25+ years experience. It has been my passion since I discovered the starter box set as a kid. My table is always fair and fun, we like to laugh and leave the table excited for the next session.
Avid hiker and explorer IRL. Getting outside is the best unplug. I hope to hear from anyone curious about 3.5 edition and would love t include you in my next campaign.
I typically wouldn't allow someone to transform into a form they hadn't seen before, or at least academically studied. If someone had a very specific thing they wanted that hadn't come up yet in the campaign, I'd probably allow them to roll something like a History or Nature check to see if they had knowledge of it from some other source, or let them go on some little side adventure to track down information about it.
That said, I'm not a big fan of hyper-optimization in general, nor do I want anyone using AI tools for anything related to any of my games, but I know not everyone agrees with me on either of those things. It may come down to different people wanting different things from the game, and the player maybe needing to find a different group if he wants to do that sort of thing.
pronouns: he/she/they
I go into "what makes sense". If it doesn't make sense for them to know anything about a particular monster, I'm not allowing them to shapeshift into it or polymorph someone to such a creature, etc.. My group has mixed experience players (some veterans and some first timers) and in the first session I said that there's obviously going to be some monsters they know as a player, but if it doesn't make sense for their character to know anything about it, I hope they play accordingly, even if the player knows better. So far it has worked fine, but it does require a bit of commitment from the players.
If they enjoy planning their character in such details, maybe you can plan a few encounters where they meet some of those monsters to "unlock" them for the character.
I’m a little confused. For starters, alter self has three options players can use, and none of them allow you to turn into a creature so much as give yourself a little boost.
Polymorph has the restriction of only turning into a beast, a specific creature type, with a specific CR limit. Most of the time, those limits will keep the polymorphed creature much weaker than the wizard would be if they just stayed a typical pc species and cast spells at the enemies. So are you enforcing those restrictions?
And shapeshift is a 9th level spell. At that point, all the characters will be doing some crazy crap, if the campaign even lasts that long.
And beyond that, as others have said, it’s perfectly reasonable to say the character can’t benefit from the plsyer’s metagame knowledge.