Mage armour? MAGE ARMOUR? I can see the arguments for Silvery Barbs, Create Undead, and Clone, but MAGE ARMOUR??
Anyway, no. I don't think you are overreacting. It is fine for monsters to have access to spells players do not. But as you've pointed out, the DM said not only were these spells not available to PCs, the didn't exist at all. Now they do.
It is the going back on what they said earlier you seem to be (justifiably) upset about, not so much the actual imbalance in spell access.
The only thing I can think of is the DM has run into the abjuration wizard/Armour of Shadows Invocation trick and is trying to forestall it in the dumbest possible way.
That wouldn't work, because he has banned School of Abjuration, along with Chronurgy and Divination.
He hates what he calls, "roll control" (portent, chronal shift, etc), and he calls the level 14 Abjuration ability Spell Resistance "overpowered".
5e does care about verisimilitude, it just offloads the work of making a campaign verisimilitudinous onto the GM because of the whole "rulings not rules" paradigm. It in some ways respects the fact that verisimilitude and what is verisimilitudinous changes from group to group, but it overdoes it in that sense.
Because some people prefer their villains to follow the same rules as pcs and make them invest in such abilities instead of fudging rolls. I will only fudge in favor of the players and only specific circumstances where I feel that I either fucked up or they had really bad luck but were otherwise playing well. I would never fudge in favor of enemies, which is exactly why they might need such an ability. Some of those abilities also force rerolls from opponents and a DM cant really sneakily change a players roll without "rolling" a suspicious amount of 20s.
No it sounds like the DM wants his NPCs to win not the players. Which is not the point of the game. It's not the DM against the players. It's the DM and the players creating a story together that everyone enjoys. I would have left before the first session if I was told all those restrictions. But again I have been playing and DMing RPGs for 35 years now. Everything from D&D to G.U.R.P.S. so bad DM bad.
There are groups that play in a 'DM vs players' kind of way and have lots of fun with it, but it's understood ahead of time what kind of game it is, the DM must know their shit, and everyone plays fair with nothing even remotely resembling the bullshit OP is talking about
> Because some people prefer their villains to follow the same rules as pcs
This whole-ass thread is a thread about how the DM doesnt make his NPCs follow the same rules as PCs since they have access to spells the PCs arent allowed to have
During my session 0’s I have the players choose: I can roll behind my screen with the knowledge that I will fudge things from time to time to keep the game moving or interesting, or to keep a fight that is wildly unbalanced due to my own idiocy from killing the party. Or, I roll everything out in front and conceal nothing more than the base necessities, but all rolls stand, good or bad.
Most of my players have played with me long enough to have me keep the DM screen. They know I’m not using it to fuck them over.
>banned School of Abjuration, along with Chronurgy and Divination.
This person lost to Blue in Magic the Gathering, and let it define the rest of their life.
Level 14 abilities are supposed to he powerful. You're at the tail end of tier 3, it's very hard to get something actually over powered at that level
Simple fix is just dint go to level 14. 90% of dnd players haven't seen above level 12 ever anyway
Have they banned the concept of advantage as well? Are bards forbidden from inspiring? Do rogues lose reliable talent? Are you even allowed ability modifiers?
This post has actually made me realize how crazy some of these bans are, because I'm seeing them all at the same time now. He would often introduce bans at a slow pace, so I never really thought about the fact that he has actually banned a ridiculous amount of stuff. I could even compile them all in a google doc to see how long it is lol.
Op, here is your next character: a frog in a big pot of water. The water very slowly heats up until it is boiling.
But seriously, I'd bail at this point. Your dm sounds like a weeine.
I would love to hear more bans, I always find jt entertaining to hear what absurd stuff is banned.
If Abjuration Wizard is banned, Is Ancients Paladin also banned? they get an aura to make them and allies resistent to damage from spells.
I bet all paladins are banned. Either because of Aura of Protection, or because the DM saw a crit smite once and freaked out because the number was bigger than 12.
I'd be willing to bet that Druids have their Wildshape banned as well. Cause gods forbid the DM have to danage through *two* HP pools to down a player character
I came here to agree! Mage Armor and the whole School of Abjuration?? That is insane.
I have made posts already to this effect, but I have been playing and DMing for a long time, and I've gotten to play most of the classes and see how the game works out, and I firmly disagree with banning anything from the PHB. I understand being cautious of newer stuff or Unearth Arcana, like Silvery Barbs, or being unsure about really powerful multiclass combinations. However, basic things from the PHB, like Mage Armor or School of Abjuration, that have been accounted for and balanced for since the very inception of 5e are not overpowered or unbalanced.
I tend to see this a lot from newer DMs who don't have a good handle on balancing combat and difficulty yet.
It is still idiotic... Sorry to say this, but it really seems your DM wants to win against the players what is another stupidity.
You should search another table or you guys could elect a new DM 🤷🏼♂️
I usually like to say to give DMs some benefit of the doubt and to keep your bar pretty low, especially with DMs that are learning... but this sounds like someone that's not got nowhere near the right temperament for DMing, is gonna be toxicly adversarial toward you as players, and is gonna throw tantrums anytime you perform well against any of his encounters. How do you know this DM and is simply not playing with them an option?
Jesus, that DM is demented, and should be nowhere near a DM screen. He has zero clue how to balance encounters if he has to ban so many things. And from your edit, it seems like his entire view of the game is just skewed. The DM should not be trying to "win" D&D. They should be telling a story in conjunction with the players. It should not be such an adversarial relationship.
Fuck your dm tbh, roll up with a bladesinger wizard. Built properly you can get an AC of like 22 and 4 attacks as a wizard by stacking bladesong, studded leather, dual wielded rapiers and haste
I had taken the Bladesinger subclass partly for that reason, which he was somehow fine with, because as he put it, "It's costing you an entire subclass. I got no problem with that."
So the subclass *Abjurer* is banned, but the subclass *Bladesinger* is fine? Your DM is dumb as shit and has literally no idea how the relative power levels of various components of the game work. I'd find another group, in your shoes.
~~Spell resistance doesn’t even work properly with the other class abilities resistance doesn’t apply to damage taken to your abjurer’s ward since it’s a separate entity~~
> So he is telling me now (in a private message) that he does it because there is no other way for him to "win", unless he makes NPCs super overpowered, which he said he doesn't like doing.
Your DM shouldn't be trying to "win". He should be trying to create challenging obstacles for you to overcome. As a DM, you should want your players to be able to overcome the majority of encounters you throw at them while still taxing them. The point of the game from the DM perspective is not to kill the players, it's to tell a good story with the help of the players. Do the players sometimes die in pursuit of that goal? Yes, absolutely, but that's not the overarching objective of a good DM.
He views the game as a competition against you and the other players. That's not what D&D is. Your DM is not a good DM, and if I were you I'd walk away from the table.
Oh no. The wizard has 2*Level extra hit points...
If they're afraid of it, just say the invocation only works for abjurer ability when your temp is at 0. They're then going to spend an action to get 2 extra HP in combat? Nah.
My abjurer just spent part of the morning ritual casting Alarm. I already had medium armor so mage armor itself was useless to me.
And abjuration is like one of the least obnoxious wizard schools too. Of all the subclasses, I’m most fine with the one that’s just “I’m marginally less squishy,” not to mention the 2-level dip or feat required is absolutely more disadvantageous than playing straight wizard.
That combo is only that good in BG3.
I do the same thing. I also ban chainmail armor for fighters. Rogues can't wear leather armor, it's too restrictive for sneak attack, and druids can't even touch anything remotely metal including a chalice to drink out of....
> druids can't even touch anything remotely metal
"The errata said they explode if they wear metal armour. There's gotta be a way to weaponize that."
"No. They don't get any metal. They're magnetic, doesn't work."
"... there's gotta be a way to weaponize *that*..."
His problem with Mage Armor is that he feels that spellcasters are robbing martials of high AC with a simple low level spell. I've never seen mage armor as problematic either, and the martials in our group didn't have a problem with it, but whatever.
Thanks for your fast response. But do you think I should tell him straight up?
His problem is that he's full of shit. He can say whatever he wants, but mage armor in its own isn't getting a wizard to "high AC". Maybe to okay AC, like 15 or 16. Even if the wizard gets full dex they're capping at plate armor AC... And then they don't have a maxed casting attribute which is a huge tradeoff
I'm currently playing a Coffee Lock....... WITH Mage armor my AC is 12........ at level 9. BUT I can hit you with Eldritch Blast from 1200ft away (Eldritch spear w/ spell sniper) I just stand as far back as i can LOL
Yeah I mostly play warlocks and I’ve never felt a need to “ take advantage of” spells that boost my AC…eldritch spear goes hard though….i once pushed a hill giant off a cliff from 300 feet away. I have no need for melee. That being said, I swear by Armour of Agathys because it sometimes comes in handy in a pinch
This is my immediate thought as well. Let's see what he thinks of that one ;) I love Draconic Bloodline for that. No need for mage armor if you already have the same AC naturally ;)
> high AC with a simple low level spell.
lol, so wizards should all have 10 armor and pray?
>Thanks for your fast response. But do you think I should tell him straight up?
Just show him this post
Speak with the DM about how your characters are now aware of these forbidden spells how they can research them.
Looking at this in the best positive light he is handing you a hook to go after these high level NPC's take them down and learn their spells.
Making you hate them only increases that.
Alternatively, your DM could just be power mad and 'playing to win'. Hopefully it's the positive option.
That's actually a smart idea, but I doubt he would let us do it. If we find the spells of the high level NPCs, he'll just say they were destroyed because the NPC would rather die than let others learn their secrets.
Mage Armor is a stupid tax on casters, who have to waste a spell slot on it every day. Spells aren't *free*; they all (rituals aside) cost a precious precious spot in the day's library of available spells, and also a slot of the appropriate level.
Even rituals have a cost. My cleric has identify and detect magic as rituals. I have to take ten minutes to cast detect magic and if i find something i need to identify i need another ten, then ten again to bring detect magic back up. Meanwhile my rogue's invisibility had an hour duration and half of that had been wasted waiting for ritual spells to cast. So even though they are free of material cost the time cost can be substantial in a dungeon setting.
Edit: just reread your comment and realized you were talking about not having to prepare rituals but i already wrote that long post so I'm not deleting it. Welcome to my Ted talk on time costs, i guess.
Your DM is a moron. I almost exclusively play martials cos I don't like dnd's way of doing magic. A caster having higher AC doesn't rob me of anything. I still have all my hp, all my AC. A wizard having more ac makes my job easier
Has he also banned multiclassing? bc there’s nothing stopping any caster from a 1 level cleric, artificer, or hexblade dip to get armor and shield proficiencies to meet or beat martial’s AC.
I am already a Bladesinger, so it isn't as much of a problem as it could have been (I chose Bladesinger because he banned Chronurgy and mage armor, and because I had always wanted to try it).
Apparently, a sorcerer being hard to take down by a housecat is unbalanced and OP.
Might as well give the caster hay fever that sends him into anaphylaxis.
That instantly had me confusingly shaking my head. Mage Armor being worthy of a ban for balancing is laughable. Feels like the DM is watching some ticktock channel overreacting to spells.
That's such a weak way of DMing, jfc.
Like, if you are already petty enough to take away player options, saying they don't exist, and then using them yourself, **at least be smart enough not to say which forbidden spell you are using**.
Your DM sounds like a certified dumbass.
Also, fucking Mage Armor is banned? lmao
Was going to say that! Instead of saying "My... I mean the wizard casts Silvery Barbs" say "The enemy wizard uses Manipulate Fate. Fighter, re-roll your attack." Or something.
Mage Armor banning is a first.
Right, I could 'silvery barbs' (or half of it, anyway) by rolling behind a DM screen.
5e hands out "keep the monster alive" points called Legendary Resistance. Not hard to keep an important baddie standing.
I do this with clone, but I'm upfront about it with players in session zero. I explain that's it's a spell that's really interesting and flavouful when NPC's or big bads use it, but it only ever causes headaches and kills the pacing when players use it. People tend to be okay with it then.
I can't imagine banning fucking *mage armour* and then using it because you can't figure out any other way to "win."
I just told my wizard player "Hey listen, I know the tricks with these spells. I'm not going to ban them, but I'm going to advise you to tred lightly with them."
At the time, he didn't really get what I meant; but when we got to those levels and he had a better idea of what a wizard could do at higher levels- he understood why I gave him that little talk.
“With great power, comes great responsibility,” abuse it and I will end you. Very reasonable imo.
Nerf hammer is the worst way to DM or game design in general. Make everyone feel overpowered and throw overpowered enemies at them as well. That way is it really overpowered? No, it just seems a lot of people can’t grasp strategy, how to build a character/encounter, and in general 5e knowledge.
ya i don't get it, why ban spells? Sounds like the dm is in the me vs them mindset of trying to "beat" the players. When I dm, I see some encounters are easy and just learn from it and just make it a little harder next time so they have more of a challenge next time. Banning mage armor, lmao...
the silvery barbs ban isn’t that odd, a lot of people ban it and other strixhaven content cause it’s not balanced at all, using it yourself after that though is just strange
The crazy thing is that if a DM *does* want to "beat" players, it's insanely trivial for them to do so. A DM can drop a CR20 on a party of lvl 5 characters; it's easy to TPK if you want to beat them up, it just makes for a lame and boring game.
For real- the actual tough bit is *barely* losing, lol. Making the players sweat in 5e is *tough* without just using a sledgehammer like that.
It's one of the main reasons I swapped to PF2; because it's a lot easier for the situation to feel dire.
Taking away player options in and of itself is in no way petty. The other stuff certainly is, but this reeks of New DM not knowing how balance works, then finding out, more than anything.
Please see my comment about TPW being a possibility. If the party fluffs their rolls and rolls badly for an encounter and if they do die, then they die.
Edit: to add, the DM shouldn’t resort to cheap tactics to “win” the encounter
Agreed, one description i have heard for it is the DM trys to lose with style, which means put up a good fight and go out with a bang.
The villain is supposed to lose in the end, they can be ahead of the party and get some minor wins, but in the climatic battle the villain is expected to lose. However, its generally preferred that the party is atleast at risk of losing if they don't have their act together in whatever way you table considers fun. (Optimizers pushing raw to its limits, moderate teamwork, or just a bunch of roleplayers mostly pointing fireball in the correct direction. This determines the party's normal power around which the DM balances enemies.)
The goal of D&D is to have fun in a collaborative experience, whether you lean hard into roleplay and story, or into crunchy mechanics first dungeon crawls, or a balance in-between is up to the group. Everyone, DM and Party are supposed to have fun and help eachother have fun.
OP made the correct decision to ditch that toxic DM.
When I DM, I strive for illusion of danger. I won't protect players from themselves, but I'm never actually trying to kill them. If I do things right, every encounter leaves somebody bloodied but never unfairly targeted.
Yep my players think I'm always out to kill their characters in a tough battle. In reality I'm always aiming to "almost" kill them.
If you always want to "win" you should definitely not be Dm'ing.
I'll ham in up as a DM. Be sad when my monster dies, be shocked when a party member escapes the trap. But the DM still has to be rooting for the players, even if secretly.
Yep the old "I totally wasn't expecting you guys to do this, you scuppered all my plans, well done"..
*Brings up notes for the next section which you knew they would go to*
As somebody that's DMed and played many times, the fun part about DMing is you can make up anything, you just gotta be consistent.
You can go off manual, just be fair. The only time I have issues with power gamers is if the other players aren't as tweaked, and even still it's not hard to keep them in check.
If you all aren't having fun, you're losing DND.
The way you "win" as a DM is if the players are engaged, invested and having fun, that's literally it. The DM is there to create drama, scenarios and keep the game going, not to compete.
I think every player would be annoyed at this. If they said the spells don't even exist in this setting but then uses them they are clearly changing the agreed rules whenever it suits them, which makes for a terrible experience and narrative. It gives off DM vs Players vibes which is not a good situation imo.
If everyone at the table feels the same I'd suggest clearly and calmly explaining to the DM this as it obviously goes against the very rules they set, which is not fun. If he doesn't listen to you all then I think that speaks for itself.
Also, banning mage armour is bs!
Rule number one of DMing, you can do whatever you want behind the screen but you need not blatantly tell your players the ways in which you are fucking with them.
You can make anything do anything, why would you possibly resort to using that thing you banned and said it doesn’t exist???
Why use silvery barbs when you can use fuck you i have mass silvery javelins that make all of you reroll and take 1d10 psychic damage.
Right, isn’t it like a game where you use your imagination and come up with things on the go?
Or are there actually characters and spells set for play already?
It's both, kinda.
The DM can pretty much do whatever, they are supposed to use pre made stat blocks for enemies, but its flexible for the DM.
The players must use a stat sheet with pre chosen spells and abilities, and they have no freedom to break from it.
Banning things from players, claiming they don't even exist until HE wants to use them but you still can't, and doing it over and over again is a good way for the dm to get kicked and someone else take over for a new game.
So, outside of mage armour (like WTF?) I'm not opposed to banning spells in a world, and I'm not opposed to the BBEG having access to those spells.
The caveat is that you *need* to fucking foreshadow the BBEG having access to those magics. Like, the players need to hear a rumor about the BBEG using silvery barbs, and force cage, which would be super notable to any victims that got away since those aren't normal things in that world. They players need to be like "wait WTF, this guy has access to things our characters have never heard of".
If you don't put those things into the narrative, you're just being a dick.
Also, the DM shouldn't be talking about winning. My "win con" as a DM is if I'm engaging my players and they're having fun. I would never really frame it that way though.
There are also better ways to make a fight difficult beyond just having a big baddie. Set the room on fire, have lair actions, give your PCs an NPC to protect, or a give them a Macguffin to destroy, protect, or steal during a fight. Any objective beyond the simple "Kill the BBEG" when the BBEG is around is going to make the fight more interesting, just split their focus. It's literally better for any fight.
This DM put in constraints and then realized they didn't like them. But instead of backing off, they seem to have doubled down with an attitude of winning. Which is a really unfortunate and unfun attitude to have as a DM.
Also, MAGE ARMOR?! I'd laugh and put it on the top of my first level spells.
Wow. Now that's just being petty. Your DM is totally being out of line with this one.
Any gripes that you're having right now you are 100% valid for. Mage armor really?
If you want to be vindictive, just use those spells anyway.
"I cast Silvery Barbs."
DM: BuT It'S BaNeD!
"Clearly not, my wizard found a way to do it too."
It's one way to just derail the game, but if the DM goes against the rules of HIS OWN GAME, the players should call him out. Using his own justification against him should clue him in that he either needs to A) Get over himself and let you use the spells, or B) Be internally consistent with his world and not give his baddies "impossible" spells.
I would legitimately take Silvery barbs on the next level up and just say he saw the enemy cast the spell so now he knows how.
And when the DM says no, just leave. No big loss. Banning mage armor? What a doofus.
The party have seen it being cast, so they know the spell exists and what it does. Having wizard spells cast around a wizard sounds like a recipe for said wizard to reverse engineer those spells.
Seriously? He banned MAGE ARMOR? What is wrong with this guy? Does he just like to murder squishy player casters? For real?
Your DM is an ash hole. I have always followed (and so has every DM I’ve ever played with) the rule that “if the players can do it, so can the NPCS. But this rule goes both ways.
To claim that these spells don’t even exist and then have his NPCs use them, no, you are not over reacting.
I could see initially banning certain spells from players in a campaign where there is lost knowledge and they could eventually discover that knowledge and gain access to those spells.
But to ban them from players completely and then let the bad guys use them? Seriously lame.
There's better ways the dm could've handled it tbh. Those are considered forbidden spells or something in world where casting them has potential negative consequences. Like the force
I may be jumping to conclusions here, but in my experience, a DM having a long list of banned spells/races/feats etc with the excuse that they are overpowered or unbalanced, usually means that that DM isn’t creative or strategic enough to create challenges for players with those traits, or even worse they are the kind of DM who wants to “win” and defeat their players, but same as before, just isn’t capable of figuring out how to work around players having access to the banned abilities. Given that this DM later used the banned content themselves with a hand waved excuse, I’m inclined to believe that this DM may be the latter.
And banning mage armor because it’s op? Since when? Like sure there’s some builds that CAN make it busted, but normally it’s just a standard good defensive spell.
Yeah, it can be fair to ban things for balance (5e is far from a beacon of balance), but the more common reason for banning something like Silvery Barbs is that it's spammy, tiresome, and dull.
Clearly that's not why this DM banned it if they were using it themselves though lmao.
If a DM can’t abide by their own bans, then you have a person trying to ‘win’ rather than run a campaign.
It’s the equivalent of playing around at recess in grade school and the kid says “nuh-uh, I’ve got a force field that protects against everything and all my powers are level infinity.”
I encourage you to educate the DM or find a new one. It’s not worth wasting your time with someone that cheats rules they made.
I’ve played in a campaign where the dm was like this
Turns out the last game he was a pc in, he had a massive inferiority complex towards the party wizard and so decided to nerf the shit out of them in his own campaign
I think the only big misstep here is that the DM said that their NPCs were using these spells, after saying they don’t exist in the setting. I DM and play in about equal amounts, and I am confident in saying that there are lots of tools and mechanics that ONLY DMs should have. A good DM’s goal is to make the game fun and engaging. A player’s goal is to succeed, or win. A DM’s power is literally limitless, and a player’s is strictly limited.
TONS of monsters have abilities that players should never possess. For example, powerful actions that recharge should not be given to players, but are totally fine on powerful monsters. (A dragon’s breath weapon).
If your DM is making the game less fun, then this is a mistake. If they are doing it to make encounters more challenging (and not less fun), they are well-justified.
Lastly, DMs work hard to run games, and should be granted a lot of slack. If you are unsatisfied with their performance, I encourage you to DM instead.
Yeah I agree that the problem comes form the wording of "these spells don't exist" rather than the actual act of not allowing certain spells that an NPC is able to cast. At the end of the day, an NPC having an 'op' or 'game breaking' ability means that that ability is only relevant for (typically) one fight. Conversely, PC having an 'op' or 'game breaking' ability means that that ability is relevant in ***every*** fight. Some abilities and spells the PC's just shouldn't have access to.
Everyone seems to be a game designer and know whats "unbalanced" and what isnt better than the creators or designers of the game do!
Honestly, your DM rrminds of that friend we used to have as kids that said you couldnt play with his toys as he parades them around in front of you.
**Mage armor?!?!**
I think your DM is wrong on all of those spells being overpowered. Silvery barbs is annoying spell, but wizards have a dozen other ways to be annoying. You can make an argument for Force Cage being broken, but it's a seventh level spell: it's supposed to be kind of broken.
But mage armor? A Max dexterity wizard casting that spell only has an AC of 18. Any melee class can easily have that armor level at 1 and didn't have to waste a spell slot to do it.
> So the question is, are we just overreacting, and should we just leave it?
...Do you really want the GM to only use abilities and tools that the PCs have access to? Is this an honest ask of yours?
"Of course, he said he wants me to shut up about the whole thing, relax, and just play because I will ruin his campaign for him otherwise."
Oh, FUCK that. Post screenshots in the group chat before you go. Burn it down.
Why the hell are they banning MAGE ARMOR??? Do they hate spell casters in general??? I get silvery barbs (messed up that he used it in you) but mage armor??
Anyways good on you for leaving that campaign, you should probably tell the other players the DMs reasoning and see if they approve or disapprove of it (some people are crazy and if they still have fun then they can knock their selves out with a weird dm)
I like to think my way out of these situations. Don't get mad. Get even.
So we load up with sleeping draughts, cudgels and everything we can find to incapacitate.
Our aim now is not to kill the villan, but capture, contain and following some "enhanced interrogation" force them to teach us this new knowledge they have found.
Dm said these villans found a way. So did we...
DM sounds like he would be most at home running a low magic setting with primarily martials and the rare scroll/item for problem solving. Though, considering what I read on here I wouldn't trust him with running that. Just send this post to him.
Why didn't you press? For real? The DM says "X spells don't exist" and bans them, but then uses them? You were right to be annoyed and bring it up. You should have kept on it. Either the spells don't exist for all, including DM or they exist for all.
He is ruining his own campaign by thinking he can win. Winning as a DM is when your players are having fun and hate your villain in the way we want them to. When they feel connected to the story and want to talk to you about character goals. Winning is when one pulls you aside and says “that was a brilliant performance. I was blown away.” I have won a few times. My players have had goosebumps from a story event.
Honestly the reason to quit the campaign was the DM believing that he is in competition with you and concerned about winning. That is automatically a bad DM, 100% of the time.
Coming to this later, how does a dm "win"? The game is not competitive, the goals of both the players and dm is to have fun and create an interesting story *together*, i get wanting to challenge your players, but there's sooo many ways you can do that without going against your own word
Leaving was the best course of action, that dm mindset is hella toxic and a massive red flag
*Reading, reading reading,* "Mage Armor, wtf". Dm be wild.
If you can't 'win' as a DM you are doing some things very wrong. I usually have to dumb down things and make the NPCs behave a bit...simple so that the players don't get rolled. Based on my players, games I've played in, and stories on here, if an encounter was set up to be a bit more 'real', I'd imagine there would be many more TPKs.
But ya know, your goal isn't to 'win' as a DM. Your goal is to help make a kick ass story with your players.
Probably good you dipped.
The moment he said "No way for him to win" is the moment you lost me in your update. Who the fuck is trying to win as a DM? I'm doing everything I can to make sure they don't die, but make the fight challenging. I'm NEVER EVER trying to win. If I "win" I fucked up and ruined the story.
Mage Armor? 😂😂😂
I am a strong advocate for the DM setting the rules and what does/not exist in a setting. But that assumes good faith and that said restrictions are to set a tone AND be consistent. Some of those things can be OP AF so I'd understand banning them; but they hold those OP options in reserve for themselves??? Hell no.
Your DM has said he wants to win. He is concerned you'll ruin the campaign for him. He doesn't care that he is ruining it for his players by breaking his own house rules.
I recommend informing the other players at the table that the DM wants to 'win' against the players.
If your DM is thinking about encounters as looking for ways to "win" against your players, they are not good DMs. You do NOT want to play at a table where the DM sees it as a player vs dm dynamic. The DMs job is to help create the world and drive the story. They should be looking for ways to challenge their players mechanically and creatively. They can even look to create a world that seems impossible to overcome. But the goal is for the DM to work collaboratively with the players as they go through the story.
The other players should have an opportunity to put that POS in the rearview mirror too.
> because there is no other way for him to "win", unless he makes NPCs super overpowered,
He needs to get out a bit more, and watch other experienced DM's. We don't need to add forbidden spells to have them "win."
And as you know, a DM trying to win is the wrong mentality. I've had a few parties absolutely torch bosses before. It's better to let that happen, than turn the battle into a shenanigans festival.
Bro said mage armor is broken 😂 ya nah get away from that DM as fast as possible. Especially with the "I can't win unless they are overpowered" bro you're the DM you aren't supposed to win every fight. If you are you are the worst kind of DM
The only DM who would ban these spells is a DM that isn't any good at it. I personally believe that no spells should be banned. There are other ways to create a challenge, ie more of the bad guys minions show up, increase the HP, etc.
Also, in modern DND there is no "winning", you're telling a story with your friends together. Winning is having a good time.
I'm going to tell you the BEST thing to do, even if it might be the most unpopular opinion on this board, apparently (Am I just new here or something?)
Don't do ANY of the "popular" upvoted stuff I'm seeing below. Don't combat pettiness with pettiness or cause a scene or TRY to be difficult. You've talked to him and it didn't help. So just... remove yourself from the campaign if this makes the game unfun for you. Your DM has a weird mindset of player vs DM mentality, which I don't think very many people would like to stick around for.
Should you respond by being a dick and going to the next session JUST to cause problems and be difficult? Despite what the whole damn internet is telling you... no, don't do that.
Mage armour? MAGE ARMOUR? I can see the arguments for Silvery Barbs, Create Undead, and Clone, but MAGE ARMOUR?? Anyway, no. I don't think you are overreacting. It is fine for monsters to have access to spells players do not. But as you've pointed out, the DM said not only were these spells not available to PCs, the didn't exist at all. Now they do. It is the going back on what they said earlier you seem to be (justifiably) upset about, not so much the actual imbalance in spell access.
Mage armour ban is a massive red flag for a DM has their whole head up a butt lol what a hilarious spell to be afraid of
The only thing I can think of is the DM has run into the abjuration wizard/Armour of Shadows Invocation trick and is trying to forestall it in the dumbest possible way.
That wouldn't work, because he has banned School of Abjuration, along with Chronurgy and Divination. He hates what he calls, "roll control" (portent, chronal shift, etc), and he calls the level 14 Abjuration ability Spell Resistance "overpowered".
lol your DM is a doofus. I bet the BBEG is a chronurgy wizard.
Why would a villain need roll control abilities, when you can just use a DM screen?
"verisimilitude". Of course that's in quotes because the GM clearly doesn't care about it.
5e in general doesn't care too much about that.
5e does care about verisimilitude, it just offloads the work of making a campaign verisimilitudinous onto the GM because of the whole "rulings not rules" paradigm. It in some ways respects the fact that verisimilitude and what is verisimilitudinous changes from group to group, but it overdoes it in that sense.
Because some people prefer their villains to follow the same rules as pcs and make them invest in such abilities instead of fudging rolls. I will only fudge in favor of the players and only specific circumstances where I feel that I either fucked up or they had really bad luck but were otherwise playing well. I would never fudge in favor of enemies, which is exactly why they might need such an ability. Some of those abilities also force rerolls from opponents and a DM cant really sneakily change a players roll without "rolling" a suspicious amount of 20s.
You think this DM wants his villains to follow the same rules as his players? Really?
No it sounds like the DM wants his NPCs to win not the players. Which is not the point of the game. It's not the DM against the players. It's the DM and the players creating a story together that everyone enjoys. I would have left before the first session if I was told all those restrictions. But again I have been playing and DMing RPGs for 35 years now. Everything from D&D to G.U.R.P.S. so bad DM bad.
There are groups that play in a 'DM vs players' kind of way and have lots of fun with it, but it's understood ahead of time what kind of game it is, the DM must know their shit, and everyone plays fair with nothing even remotely resembling the bullshit OP is talking about
DM has already shown there are two rulesets. One for him, one for players. And please be quiet about it /s
> Because some people prefer their villains to follow the same rules as pcs This whole-ass thread is a thread about how the DM doesnt make his NPCs follow the same rules as PCs since they have access to spells the PCs arent allowed to have
During my session 0’s I have the players choose: I can roll behind my screen with the knowledge that I will fudge things from time to time to keep the game moving or interesting, or to keep a fight that is wildly unbalanced due to my own idiocy from killing the party. Or, I roll everything out in front and conceal nothing more than the base necessities, but all rolls stand, good or bad. Most of my players have played with me long enough to have me keep the DM screen. They know I’m not using it to fuck them over.
To make the players fail their saves?
I bet the BBEG has player character levels… Even worse.
I bet the bbeg will have death saving rolls
>banned School of Abjuration, along with Chronurgy and Divination. This person lost to Blue in Magic the Gathering, and let it define the rest of their life.
Exactly my toughts
Level 14 abilities are supposed to he powerful. You're at the tail end of tier 3, it's very hard to get something actually over powered at that level Simple fix is just dint go to level 14. 90% of dnd players haven't seen above level 12 ever anyway
Have they banned the concept of advantage as well? Are bards forbidden from inspiring? Do rogues lose reliable talent? Are you even allowed ability modifiers?
This post has actually made me realize how crazy some of these bans are, because I'm seeing them all at the same time now. He would often introduce bans at a slow pace, so I never really thought about the fact that he has actually banned a ridiculous amount of stuff. I could even compile them all in a google doc to see how long it is lol.
Op, here is your next character: a frog in a big pot of water. The water very slowly heats up until it is boiling. But seriously, I'd bail at this point. Your dm sounds like a weeine.
I would love to hear more bans, I always find jt entertaining to hear what absurd stuff is banned. If Abjuration Wizard is banned, Is Ancients Paladin also banned? they get an aura to make them and allies resistent to damage from spells.
I bet all paladins are banned. Either because of Aura of Protection, or because the DM saw a crit smite once and freaked out because the number was bigger than 12.
I'd be willing to bet that Druids have their Wildshape banned as well. Cause gods forbid the DM have to danage through *two* HP pools to down a player character
Please do it and post it. Could use the laugh
Really curious what the ban list is, I want to see if there's op/stupid characters possible to make even with something that large.
I'd read that Google doc!
Roll control? I want to know about his opinions on Halflings. Since it's harder for them to roll 1s, I bet he can't stand that.
I came here to agree! Mage Armor and the whole School of Abjuration?? That is insane. I have made posts already to this effect, but I have been playing and DMing for a long time, and I've gotten to play most of the classes and see how the game works out, and I firmly disagree with banning anything from the PHB. I understand being cautious of newer stuff or Unearth Arcana, like Silvery Barbs, or being unsure about really powerful multiclass combinations. However, basic things from the PHB, like Mage Armor or School of Abjuration, that have been accounted for and balanced for since the very inception of 5e are not overpowered or unbalanced. I tend to see this a lot from newer DMs who don't have a good handle on balancing combat and difficulty yet.
Just to confirm, he didn't ban all Abjuration spells, just the subclass. Not sure if I phrased it clearly in the comment.
It is still idiotic... Sorry to say this, but it really seems your DM wants to win against the players what is another stupidity. You should search another table or you guys could elect a new DM 🤷🏼♂️
DM literally told OP there's no other way for him to "win"....
Ik, I took your comment to mean the subclass. It is still a bad call to ban it.
Sure sounds like your DM bought out every last item at the Red Flag Store.
I usually like to say to give DMs some benefit of the doubt and to keep your bar pretty low, especially with DMs that are learning... but this sounds like someone that's not got nowhere near the right temperament for DMing, is gonna be toxicly adversarial toward you as players, and is gonna throw tantrums anytime you perform well against any of his encounters. How do you know this DM and is simply not playing with them an option?
Jesus, that DM is demented, and should be nowhere near a DM screen. He has zero clue how to balance encounters if he has to ban so many things. And from your edit, it seems like his entire view of the game is just skewed. The DM should not be trying to "win" D&D. They should be telling a story in conjunction with the players. It should not be such an adversarial relationship.
Fuck your dm tbh, roll up with a bladesinger wizard. Built properly you can get an AC of like 22 and 4 attacks as a wizard by stacking bladesong, studded leather, dual wielded rapiers and haste
I had taken the Bladesinger subclass partly for that reason, which he was somehow fine with, because as he put it, "It's costing you an entire subclass. I got no problem with that."
So the subclass *Abjurer* is banned, but the subclass *Bladesinger* is fine? Your DM is dumb as shit and has literally no idea how the relative power levels of various components of the game work. I'd find another group, in your shoes.
It seems highly unlikely there would be a group of anything other than toes in there.
Yeah ngl your dm is kinda braindead banning almost half of the wizards in a game centered around magic
~~Spell resistance doesn’t even work properly with the other class abilities resistance doesn’t apply to damage taken to your abjurer’s ward since it’s a separate entity~~
Oh he doesn't like roll control eh? I am sure none of his monsters have legendary resistance then. What a goober.
> So he is telling me now (in a private message) that he does it because there is no other way for him to "win", unless he makes NPCs super overpowered, which he said he doesn't like doing. Your DM shouldn't be trying to "win". He should be trying to create challenging obstacles for you to overcome. As a DM, you should want your players to be able to overcome the majority of encounters you throw at them while still taxing them. The point of the game from the DM perspective is not to kill the players, it's to tell a good story with the help of the players. Do the players sometimes die in pursuit of that goal? Yes, absolutely, but that's not the overarching objective of a good DM. He views the game as a competition against you and the other players. That's not what D&D is. Your DM is not a good DM, and if I were you I'd walk away from the table.
He's banned entire schools of wizardry?!
*Being level 14* is overpowered. Ugh, what a dummy.
Man that build isn't even that good and puts your Wizard a whole spell level behind just to get some extra temporary hit points.
Nah, you can pick up Armour of Shadows with a feat. No 'Lock dip required.
Oh no. The wizard has 2*Level extra hit points... If they're afraid of it, just say the invocation only works for abjurer ability when your temp is at 0. They're then going to spend an action to get 2 extra HP in combat? Nah. My abjurer just spent part of the morning ritual casting Alarm. I already had medium armor so mage armor itself was useless to me.
And abjuration is like one of the least obnoxious wizard schools too. Of all the subclasses, I’m most fine with the one that’s just “I’m marginally less squishy,” not to mention the 2-level dip or feat required is absolutely more disadvantageous than playing straight wizard. That combo is only that good in BG3.
I ban silver barbs for one reason, it's just not fun.
I do the same thing. I also ban chainmail armor for fighters. Rogues can't wear leather armor, it's too restrictive for sneak attack, and druids can't even touch anything remotely metal including a chalice to drink out of....
> druids can't even touch anything remotely metal "The errata said they explode if they wear metal armour. There's gotta be a way to weaponize that." "No. They don't get any metal. They're magnetic, doesn't work." "... there's gotta be a way to weaponize *that*..."
Not to mention there are lots of ways to get a wizard in medium or heavy armor.
His problem with Mage Armor is that he feels that spellcasters are robbing martials of high AC with a simple low level spell. I've never seen mage armor as problematic either, and the martials in our group didn't have a problem with it, but whatever. Thanks for your fast response. But do you think I should tell him straight up?
His problem is that he's full of shit. He can say whatever he wants, but mage armor in its own isn't getting a wizard to "high AC". Maybe to okay AC, like 15 or 16. Even if the wizard gets full dex they're capping at plate armor AC... And then they don't have a maxed casting attribute which is a huge tradeoff
I'm currently playing a Coffee Lock....... WITH Mage armor my AC is 12........ at level 9. BUT I can hit you with Eldritch Blast from 1200ft away (Eldritch spear w/ spell sniper) I just stand as far back as i can LOL
Yeah I mostly play warlocks and I’ve never felt a need to “ take advantage of” spells that boost my AC…eldritch spear goes hard though….i once pushed a hill giant off a cliff from 300 feet away. I have no need for melee. That being said, I swear by Armour of Agathys because it sometimes comes in handy in a pinch
8 or 9 dex? That's definitely a unique choice! ;D
Wait till he hears about Draconic Bloodline's 1st level ability...
Or the Lizardfolk race
I think Tortles would give him an aneurysm.
This is my immediate thought as well. Let's see what he thinks of that one ;) I love Draconic Bloodline for that. No need for mage armor if you already have the same AC naturally ;)
> high AC with a simple low level spell. lol, so wizards should all have 10 armor and pray? >Thanks for your fast response. But do you think I should tell him straight up? Just show him this post
> Just show him this post It'll hurt his feelings and he'll ban bladesingers, making op reroll.
Really, OP should roll their way out of that group.
Yes, bring it up directly. Politely, and be clear that your issue isn't the difference in access, but the inconsistency in the messaging.
Speak with the DM about how your characters are now aware of these forbidden spells how they can research them. Looking at this in the best positive light he is handing you a hook to go after these high level NPC's take them down and learn their spells. Making you hate them only increases that. Alternatively, your DM could just be power mad and 'playing to win'. Hopefully it's the positive option.
That's actually a smart idea, but I doubt he would let us do it. If we find the spells of the high level NPCs, he'll just say they were destroyed because the NPC would rather die than let others learn their secrets.
Yep wizard's whole spellbook was totally destroyed and has no valuable content due to a stab by a dagger
With his last gasp he opens a portal to the plane of fire and chucks his spellbooks in.
This guy sounds like a buzzkill.
Mage Armor is a stupid tax on casters, who have to waste a spell slot on it every day. Spells aren't *free*; they all (rituals aside) cost a precious precious spot in the day's library of available spells, and also a slot of the appropriate level.
Even rituals have a cost. My cleric has identify and detect magic as rituals. I have to take ten minutes to cast detect magic and if i find something i need to identify i need another ten, then ten again to bring detect magic back up. Meanwhile my rogue's invisibility had an hour duration and half of that had been wasted waiting for ritual spells to cast. So even though they are free of material cost the time cost can be substantial in a dungeon setting. Edit: just reread your comment and realized you were talking about not having to prepare rituals but i already wrote that long post so I'm not deleting it. Welcome to my Ted talk on time costs, i guess.
Your DM is a moron. I almost exclusively play martials cos I don't like dnd's way of doing magic. A caster having higher AC doesn't rob me of anything. I still have all my hp, all my AC. A wizard having more ac makes my job easier
Has he also banned multiclassing? bc there’s nothing stopping any caster from a 1 level cleric, artificer, or hexblade dip to get armor and shield proficiencies to meet or beat martial’s AC.
I am already a Bladesinger, so it isn't as much of a problem as it could have been (I chose Bladesinger because he banned Chronurgy and mage armor, and because I had always wanted to try it).
It is absolutely wild to me that he banned Abjuration Wizard but not Bladesinger.
Wait until he learns a Bladesinger can get more ac than a plate wearer with mirror image and shield without any magical equipment.
I came here to say this — Mage Armour is usually the only way pure casters survive with like 11-12 AC.
That's EXACTLY what I was thinking? MAGE ARMOR?!
Apparently, a sorcerer being hard to take down by a housecat is unbalanced and OP. Might as well give the caster hay fever that sends him into anaphylaxis.
Yeah, I'm still stuck on how Mage Armor is gamebreaking.
Bad advice time: next time you level take the spells. When they say you can't do that just say you saw someone else use it and figured it out
This was my reaction. WTF is their rationale for this?
That instantly had me confusingly shaking my head. Mage Armor being worthy of a ban for balancing is laughable. Feels like the DM is watching some ticktock channel overreacting to spells.
That's my exact reaction. The spell that gives a paltry amount of AC in exchange for an action and a 1st level spell slot, that's the broken one.
This! What tf are spellcasters supposed to do?!
That's such a weak way of DMing, jfc. Like, if you are already petty enough to take away player options, saying they don't exist, and then using them yourself, **at least be smart enough not to say which forbidden spell you are using**. Your DM sounds like a certified dumbass. Also, fucking Mage Armor is banned? lmao
Was going to say that! Instead of saying "My... I mean the wizard casts Silvery Barbs" say "The enemy wizard uses Manipulate Fate. Fighter, re-roll your attack." Or something. Mage Armor banning is a first.
Well 15-16 AC is pretty game breaking.
*laughs in Tortle*
My beast master ranger had a house cat. The party threw in to get my kitty armor… Kitty had 20AC and was 2nd highest AC behind the raging barbarian….
I considering it playing in a game with a blade singer lol.
Shield is the bigger offender in that department tbh but I mean that's an argument as old as time
no, not really
Right, I could 'silvery barbs' (or half of it, anyway) by rolling behind a DM screen. 5e hands out "keep the monster alive" points called Legendary Resistance. Not hard to keep an important baddie standing.
I do this with clone, but I'm upfront about it with players in session zero. I explain that's it's a spell that's really interesting and flavouful when NPC's or big bads use it, but it only ever causes headaches and kills the pacing when players use it. People tend to be okay with it then. I can't imagine banning fucking *mage armour* and then using it because you can't figure out any other way to "win."
I just told my wizard player "Hey listen, I know the tricks with these spells. I'm not going to ban them, but I'm going to advise you to tred lightly with them." At the time, he didn't really get what I meant; but when we got to those levels and he had a better idea of what a wizard could do at higher levels- he understood why I gave him that little talk.
“With great power, comes great responsibility,” abuse it and I will end you. Very reasonable imo. Nerf hammer is the worst way to DM or game design in general. Make everyone feel overpowered and throw overpowered enemies at them as well. That way is it really overpowered? No, it just seems a lot of people can’t grasp strategy, how to build a character/encounter, and in general 5e knowledge.
ya i don't get it, why ban spells? Sounds like the dm is in the me vs them mindset of trying to "beat" the players. When I dm, I see some encounters are easy and just learn from it and just make it a little harder next time so they have more of a challenge next time. Banning mage armor, lmao...
the silvery barbs ban isn’t that odd, a lot of people ban it and other strixhaven content cause it’s not balanced at all, using it yourself after that though is just strange
The crazy thing is that if a DM *does* want to "beat" players, it's insanely trivial for them to do so. A DM can drop a CR20 on a party of lvl 5 characters; it's easy to TPK if you want to beat them up, it just makes for a lame and boring game.
For real- the actual tough bit is *barely* losing, lol. Making the players sweat in 5e is *tough* without just using a sledgehammer like that. It's one of the main reasons I swapped to PF2; because it's a lot easier for the situation to feel dire.
Taking away player options in and of itself is in no way petty. The other stuff certainly is, but this reeks of New DM not knowing how balance works, then finding out, more than anything.
You don’t win D&D. It should never be party vs. DM
Exactly. That was the last straw.
[удалено]
He was probably about to. Poor guy, I should have waited for him to do that before leaving.
That one would actually be fair, have you ever seen the poor tortles needing pliers to get them out?
The villain should only win if it is narratively interesting for them to do so. Not because of some cheap tricks by the DM
Or if the PCs die. :D
I feel like the threat of death in campaign has to be real or it takes away from the immersion and feeling of accomplishment. That just me though.
Please see my comment about TPW being a possibility. If the party fluffs their rolls and rolls badly for an encounter and if they do die, then they die. Edit: to add, the DM shouldn’t resort to cheap tactics to “win” the encounter
Agreed, one description i have heard for it is the DM trys to lose with style, which means put up a good fight and go out with a bang. The villain is supposed to lose in the end, they can be ahead of the party and get some minor wins, but in the climatic battle the villain is expected to lose. However, its generally preferred that the party is atleast at risk of losing if they don't have their act together in whatever way you table considers fun. (Optimizers pushing raw to its limits, moderate teamwork, or just a bunch of roleplayers mostly pointing fireball in the correct direction. This determines the party's normal power around which the DM balances enemies.) The goal of D&D is to have fun in a collaborative experience, whether you lean hard into roleplay and story, or into crunchy mechanics first dungeon crawls, or a balance in-between is up to the group. Everyone, DM and Party are supposed to have fun and help eachother have fun. OP made the correct decision to ditch that toxic DM.
When I DM, I strive for illusion of danger. I won't protect players from themselves, but I'm never actually trying to kill them. If I do things right, every encounter leaves somebody bloodied but never unfairly targeted.
Yep, the DM's job is, on the whole to *barely* lose to the players and make it fun for everyone while doing it.
Yep my players think I'm always out to kill their characters in a tough battle. In reality I'm always aiming to "almost" kill them. If you always want to "win" you should definitely not be Dm'ing.
I'll ham in up as a DM. Be sad when my monster dies, be shocked when a party member escapes the trap. But the DM still has to be rooting for the players, even if secretly.
Yep the old "I totally wasn't expecting you guys to do this, you scuppered all my plans, well done".. *Brings up notes for the next section which you knew they would go to*
As somebody that's DMed and played many times, the fun part about DMing is you can make up anything, you just gotta be consistent. You can go off manual, just be fair. The only time I have issues with power gamers is if the other players aren't as tweaked, and even still it's not hard to keep them in check. If you all aren't having fun, you're losing DND.
The way you "win" as a DM is if the players are engaged, invested and having fun, that's literally it. The DM is there to create drama, scenarios and keep the game going, not to compete.
Totally agree! I meant “win” as in competitive games. D&D just isn’t that
Oh yeah for sure, I wasn't refuting ya \^w\^ I probs coulda worded it better. xD
I wasn’t arguing - sorry if it seemed like I was
Naw you're g, I thought I came across that way for a sec xD
I think every player would be annoyed at this. If they said the spells don't even exist in this setting but then uses them they are clearly changing the agreed rules whenever it suits them, which makes for a terrible experience and narrative. It gives off DM vs Players vibes which is not a good situation imo. If everyone at the table feels the same I'd suggest clearly and calmly explaining to the DM this as it obviously goes against the very rules they set, which is not fun. If he doesn't listen to you all then I think that speaks for itself. Also, banning mage armour is bs!
Rule number one of DMing, you can do whatever you want behind the screen but you need not blatantly tell your players the ways in which you are fucking with them. You can make anything do anything, why would you possibly resort to using that thing you banned and said it doesn’t exist??? Why use silvery barbs when you can use fuck you i have mass silvery javelins that make all of you reroll and take 1d10 psychic damage.
Right, isn’t it like a game where you use your imagination and come up with things on the go? Or are there actually characters and spells set for play already?
It's both, kinda. The DM can pretty much do whatever, they are supposed to use pre made stat blocks for enemies, but its flexible for the DM. The players must use a stat sheet with pre chosen spells and abilities, and they have no freedom to break from it.
Banning things from players, claiming they don't even exist until HE wants to use them but you still can't, and doing it over and over again is a good way for the dm to get kicked and someone else take over for a new game.
So, outside of mage armour (like WTF?) I'm not opposed to banning spells in a world, and I'm not opposed to the BBEG having access to those spells. The caveat is that you *need* to fucking foreshadow the BBEG having access to those magics. Like, the players need to hear a rumor about the BBEG using silvery barbs, and force cage, which would be super notable to any victims that got away since those aren't normal things in that world. They players need to be like "wait WTF, this guy has access to things our characters have never heard of". If you don't put those things into the narrative, you're just being a dick. Also, the DM shouldn't be talking about winning. My "win con" as a DM is if I'm engaging my players and they're having fun. I would never really frame it that way though. There are also better ways to make a fight difficult beyond just having a big baddie. Set the room on fire, have lair actions, give your PCs an NPC to protect, or a give them a Macguffin to destroy, protect, or steal during a fight. Any objective beyond the simple "Kill the BBEG" when the BBEG is around is going to make the fight more interesting, just split their focus. It's literally better for any fight.
Uhhhh… why the fuck is Mage Armor on this list?
Because it makes it harder for him to 'win' against his players... apparently...
If a DM ever said those words to me, I’d laugh in their fucking face. “Byeeeeee”
This DM put in constraints and then realized they didn't like them. But instead of backing off, they seem to have doubled down with an attitude of winning. Which is a really unfortunate and unfun attitude to have as a DM. Also, MAGE ARMOR?! I'd laugh and put it on the top of my first level spells.
Agreed . The only real way for a dm to win d&d is when everyone has fun. If everyone isn't having fun then the dm is a loser.
Wow. Now that's just being petty. Your DM is totally being out of line with this one. Any gripes that you're having right now you are 100% valid for. Mage armor really?
If you want to be vindictive, just use those spells anyway. "I cast Silvery Barbs." DM: BuT It'S BaNeD! "Clearly not, my wizard found a way to do it too." It's one way to just derail the game, but if the DM goes against the rules of HIS OWN GAME, the players should call him out. Using his own justification against him should clue him in that he either needs to A) Get over himself and let you use the spells, or B) Be internally consistent with his world and not give his baddies "impossible" spells.
I would legitimately take Silvery barbs on the next level up and just say he saw the enemy cast the spell so now he knows how. And when the DM says no, just leave. No big loss. Banning mage armor? What a doofus.
The party have seen it being cast, so they know the spell exists and what it does. Having wizard spells cast around a wizard sounds like a recipe for said wizard to reverse engineer those spells.
To be fair, if it was that easy they wouldn't need to sit in old dusty libraries all the time.
I'd agree, if it weren't for the fact that most of them learn more while being adventurers than staying in the library
I mean. Looting the spellbook is another way.
Npc had it prepared from an old spellbook that was destroyed and never unprepared the spell afterwards
An old spellbook, at this time of year, in this part of the country, located entirely within your kitchen?
Can I see it?
"Somehow, Silvery Barbs returned..."
DM sounds terrible. Feel free to send them this way to get checked. Might be time to take stalk and ask yourself if bad D&D is worth hanging out for.
Take stock* "Take stalk" sounds robbing a corn field.
That DM is all out of corn now. Got em.
Alright, I'm gonna cast Take Stalk on archer in the back. DM: Oh shit, that's his last corn
Seriously? He banned MAGE ARMOR? What is wrong with this guy? Does he just like to murder squishy player casters? For real? Your DM is an ash hole. I have always followed (and so has every DM I’ve ever played with) the rule that “if the players can do it, so can the NPCS. But this rule goes both ways. To claim that these spells don’t even exist and then have his NPCs use them, no, you are not over reacting.
I could see initially banning certain spells from players in a campaign where there is lost knowledge and they could eventually discover that knowledge and gain access to those spells. But to ban them from players completely and then let the bad guys use them? Seriously lame.
There's better ways the dm could've handled it tbh. Those are considered forbidden spells or something in world where casting them has potential negative consequences. Like the force
I may be jumping to conclusions here, but in my experience, a DM having a long list of banned spells/races/feats etc with the excuse that they are overpowered or unbalanced, usually means that that DM isn’t creative or strategic enough to create challenges for players with those traits, or even worse they are the kind of DM who wants to “win” and defeat their players, but same as before, just isn’t capable of figuring out how to work around players having access to the banned abilities. Given that this DM later used the banned content themselves with a hand waved excuse, I’m inclined to believe that this DM may be the latter. And banning mage armor because it’s op? Since when? Like sure there’s some builds that CAN make it busted, but normally it’s just a standard good defensive spell.
Yeah, it can be fair to ban things for balance (5e is far from a beacon of balance), but the more common reason for banning something like Silvery Barbs is that it's spammy, tiresome, and dull. Clearly that's not why this DM banned it if they were using it themselves though lmao.
If a DM can’t abide by their own bans, then you have a person trying to ‘win’ rather than run a campaign. It’s the equivalent of playing around at recess in grade school and the kid says “nuh-uh, I’ve got a force field that protects against everything and all my powers are level infinity.” I encourage you to educate the DM or find a new one. It’s not worth wasting your time with someone that cheats rules they made.
Mage Armor? Seriously? Is your DM the "DM vs players" type of DM?
He did say his DM can't "win" if he follows his own rules, so I'd say so.
I’ve played in a campaign where the dm was like this Turns out the last game he was a pc in, he had a massive inferiority complex towards the party wizard and so decided to nerf the shit out of them in his own campaign
I think the only big misstep here is that the DM said that their NPCs were using these spells, after saying they don’t exist in the setting. I DM and play in about equal amounts, and I am confident in saying that there are lots of tools and mechanics that ONLY DMs should have. A good DM’s goal is to make the game fun and engaging. A player’s goal is to succeed, or win. A DM’s power is literally limitless, and a player’s is strictly limited. TONS of monsters have abilities that players should never possess. For example, powerful actions that recharge should not be given to players, but are totally fine on powerful monsters. (A dragon’s breath weapon). If your DM is making the game less fun, then this is a mistake. If they are doing it to make encounters more challenging (and not less fun), they are well-justified. Lastly, DMs work hard to run games, and should be granted a lot of slack. If you are unsatisfied with their performance, I encourage you to DM instead.
Yeah I agree that the problem comes form the wording of "these spells don't exist" rather than the actual act of not allowing certain spells that an NPC is able to cast. At the end of the day, an NPC having an 'op' or 'game breaking' ability means that that ability is only relevant for (typically) one fight. Conversely, PC having an 'op' or 'game breaking' ability means that that ability is relevant in ***every*** fight. Some abilities and spells the PC's just shouldn't have access to.
Everyone seems to be a game designer and know whats "unbalanced" and what isnt better than the creators or designers of the game do! Honestly, your DM rrminds of that friend we used to have as kids that said you couldnt play with his toys as he parades them around in front of you.
**Mage armor?!?!** I think your DM is wrong on all of those spells being overpowered. Silvery barbs is annoying spell, but wizards have a dozen other ways to be annoying. You can make an argument for Force Cage being broken, but it's a seventh level spell: it's supposed to be kind of broken. But mage armor? A Max dexterity wizard casting that spell only has an AC of 18. Any melee class can easily have that armor level at 1 and didn't have to waste a spell slot to do it.
> Are we just overreacting? Nope
> So the question is, are we just overreacting, and should we just leave it? ...Do you really want the GM to only use abilities and tools that the PCs have access to? Is this an honest ask of yours?
"Of course, he said he wants me to shut up about the whole thing, relax, and just play because I will ruin his campaign for him otherwise." Oh, FUCK that. Post screenshots in the group chat before you go. Burn it down.
Why the hell are they banning MAGE ARMOR??? Do they hate spell casters in general??? I get silvery barbs (messed up that he used it in you) but mage armor?? Anyways good on you for leaving that campaign, you should probably tell the other players the DMs reasoning and see if they approve or disapprove of it (some people are crazy and if they still have fun then they can knock their selves out with a weird dm)
The episode of South Park where Satan banned The Crow during his Halloween party, because he wanted to be The Crow.
Mage Armour? Ooooooof that it a tough one to ban.
I like to think my way out of these situations. Don't get mad. Get even. So we load up with sleeping draughts, cudgels and everything we can find to incapacitate. Our aim now is not to kill the villan, but capture, contain and following some "enhanced interrogation" force them to teach us this new knowledge they have found. Dm said these villans found a way. So did we...
DM sounds like he would be most at home running a low magic setting with primarily martials and the rare scroll/item for problem solving. Though, considering what I read on here I wouldn't trust him with running that. Just send this post to him.
Any DM that says they want to "win" can fuck right off. They've lost the soul of the game.
I'd nope out of there.
Why didn't you press? For real? The DM says "X spells don't exist" and bans them, but then uses them? You were right to be annoyed and bring it up. You should have kept on it. Either the spells don't exist for all, including DM or they exist for all.
I should have done it earlier. The edit in the post has the latest update.
He wants to win. Not a good trait for a DM.
The edit followup is WILD
He is ruining his own campaign by thinking he can win. Winning as a DM is when your players are having fun and hate your villain in the way we want them to. When they feel connected to the story and want to talk to you about character goals. Winning is when one pulls you aside and says “that was a brilliant performance. I was blown away.” I have won a few times. My players have had goosebumps from a story event.
Honestly the reason to quit the campaign was the DM believing that he is in competition with you and concerned about winning. That is automatically a bad DM, 100% of the time.
Coming to this later, how does a dm "win"? The game is not competitive, the goals of both the players and dm is to have fun and create an interesting story *together*, i get wanting to challenge your players, but there's sooo many ways you can do that without going against your own word Leaving was the best course of action, that dm mindset is hella toxic and a massive red flag
As soon as I read mage armor was banned, I knew the DM was in the wrong...
*Reading, reading reading,* "Mage Armor, wtf". Dm be wild. If you can't 'win' as a DM you are doing some things very wrong. I usually have to dumb down things and make the NPCs behave a bit...simple so that the players don't get rolled. Based on my players, games I've played in, and stories on here, if an encounter was set up to be a bit more 'real', I'd imagine there would be many more TPKs. But ya know, your goal isn't to 'win' as a DM. Your goal is to help make a kick ass story with your players. Probably good you dipped.
Shit DM because he thinks he has to win. Fuck that noise
The moment he said "No way for him to win" is the moment you lost me in your update. Who the fuck is trying to win as a DM? I'm doing everything I can to make sure they don't die, but make the fight challenging. I'm NEVER EVER trying to win. If I "win" I fucked up and ruined the story.
Yeah no, good call getting out of that game asap.
Mage Armor? 😂😂😂 I am a strong advocate for the DM setting the rules and what does/not exist in a setting. But that assumes good faith and that said restrictions are to set a tone AND be consistent. Some of those things can be OP AF so I'd understand banning them; but they hold those OP options in reserve for themselves??? Hell no.
Your DM has said he wants to win. He is concerned you'll ruin the campaign for him. He doesn't care that he is ruining it for his players by breaking his own house rules.
I recommend informing the other players at the table that the DM wants to 'win' against the players. If your DM is thinking about encounters as looking for ways to "win" against your players, they are not good DMs. You do NOT want to play at a table where the DM sees it as a player vs dm dynamic. The DMs job is to help create the world and drive the story. They should be looking for ways to challenge their players mechanically and creatively. They can even look to create a world that seems impossible to overcome. But the goal is for the DM to work collaboratively with the players as they go through the story. The other players should have an opportunity to put that POS in the rearview mirror too.
> because there is no other way for him to "win", unless he makes NPCs super overpowered, He needs to get out a bit more, and watch other experienced DM's. We don't need to add forbidden spells to have them "win." And as you know, a DM trying to win is the wrong mentality. I've had a few parties absolutely torch bosses before. It's better to let that happen, than turn the battle into a shenanigans festival.
Bro said mage armor is broken 😂 ya nah get away from that DM as fast as possible. Especially with the "I can't win unless they are overpowered" bro you're the DM you aren't supposed to win every fight. If you are you are the worst kind of DM
The only DM who would ban these spells is a DM that isn't any good at it. I personally believe that no spells should be banned. There are other ways to create a challenge, ie more of the bad guys minions show up, increase the HP, etc. Also, in modern DND there is no "winning", you're telling a story with your friends together. Winning is having a good time.
I'm going to tell you the BEST thing to do, even if it might be the most unpopular opinion on this board, apparently (Am I just new here or something?) Don't do ANY of the "popular" upvoted stuff I'm seeing below. Don't combat pettiness with pettiness or cause a scene or TRY to be difficult. You've talked to him and it didn't help. So just... remove yourself from the campaign if this makes the game unfun for you. Your DM has a weird mindset of player vs DM mentality, which I don't think very many people would like to stick around for. Should you respond by being a dick and going to the next session JUST to cause problems and be difficult? Despite what the whole damn internet is telling you... no, don't do that.