The Arguments for Character Respec

[Steiner-Davion]

Have you even ever played D&D before? Because comments like that, says to me you have no idea what you are saying. One of the main rules above all states that: The GM has final say on ANYTHING.

Honestly what sane or GOOD DM whorth the title would sacrifice player enjoyment for the sake of having his way. I mean come on, what do you think wold happen to a PnP group, if the DM insisted on being right 100percent ofthe time and the players were not having fun?

The PHB2 says respecs? Respecs is a term used for MMO's, there is no such word as respec in any D&D book that I am aware of.

No you are just being stubborn. Obviously "respec" is an MMO term while "retrain" or whatever the term is in the PBH2 is the PnP equivelant. FOr arguements sake, lets "presume that they are synonyms.

[Borror0]

And alignment is a very rare request, but is not out of question, as there were serious issues with "mysterious" alignment changes at one point.

Alignment is a really common request but it is far less controversial as there are very little arguments against.

It's flavorful, has little game changing effects and does not seem too complicate.

[Aspenor]

Have you even ever played D&D before? Because comments like that, says to me you have no idea what you are saying. One of the main rules above all states that: The GM has final say on ANYTHING.

The PHB2 says respecs? Respecs is a term used for MMO's, there is no such word as respec in any D&D book that I am aware of.

What else about D&D are you going to attempt to bastardize?

Not sure what kind of a crappy game you're playing in, but the DMG is pretty clear that DnD is a game, and it's about having fun.

If somebody is not having fun, let them do whatever they have to do to have fun. It doesn't get any more clear cut than that.

I challenge you to find any excerpt from any DnD literature that states players should not be allowed to essentially rebuild from the ground up.

[Steiner-Davion]

"Though character revision does allow you to "rewrite" certain elements of your character, the rules presented here ensure that the changes remain within reason and do not upset the story that has been created by each characters' deeds in the campaign"

Yes thats the line I wanted to see. Please explain how this line indicates that we should be allowed "full respecs" I see it saying very limited resepcs and in no way a full respec.

Fluffy, now I understand exactly where yo uare coming form, and I completely agree with you... to ap oint. In PnP a characters actions have actual consequences on the story itself. But in DDO, this is simply not true. There is simply no reward or penalty, or any type of consequence for doing anything in game in terms of the story beging told. If there was, than if you killed Velah before me and looted her treasure trove, there would be no reason for me to enter the raid. If I kill all the "heretics" in the Church and the Cult quest, there is no alignment penalty or any other kind of social consequence for killing "innocent" people.

While I do can favor with one group for completing a quest, I do not lose favor with any other group, who may be diametrically apposed to them. IE, even if groups A and B are sworn enemies in the "story" helping A does not hurt me with B.

In short, a character's deeds in DDO simply do not "truly" matter and there is no real need to balance this rule and the paragraph you are refering to against the needs of the story being told.

[Quanefel]

Honestly what sane or GOOD DM whorth the title would sacrifice player enjoyment for the sake of having his way. I mean come on, what do you think wold happen to a PnP group, if the DM insisted on being right 100percent ofthe time and the players were not having fun?




No you are just being stubborn. Obviously "respec" is an MMO term while "retrain" or whatever the term is in the PBH2 is the PnP equivelant. FOr arguements sake, lets "presume that they are synonyms.

What sane or good GM would give into a player wanting to change his character because that player wanted more "enjoyment"? Is it the player or the GM in charge at that point? Why even have rules or a GM if it is the players deciding what they can change about their character whenever they wanted? Who is talking about the GM being 100% right? That is the extreme, not the rule. Stick to the reality of the situatution.

Replace rules with....fun? Let fun decide everything here? And who's idea of fun is the standard now for all of us to follow or do we each get to have anything we want simply because we decided it was fun? Rules be damned?

[Steiner-Davion]

You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Inconceivable!

[Quanefel]

Not sure what kind of a crappy game you're playing in, but the DMG is pretty clear that DnD is a game, and it's about having fun.

If somebody is not having fun, let them do whatever they have to do to have fun. It doesn't get any more clear cut than that.

I challenge you to find any excerpt from any DnD literature that states players should not be allowed to essentially rebuild from the ground up.

A players fun trumps rules? Is the GM running the game or the player's with their own individual ideas on what rules they wish to follow for the "fun" of it?

[Mhykke]

A players fun trumps rules?

Well, in some ways, yes. If the rules don't provide a way for players to have fun, they're going to stop playing. So what's more important? That you rigidly stick to the rules as a DM, or that you have players playing your campaign?

As that quote from the 3.5 PHB2 states:

"But a DM who forces someone to play a character he doesn't find enjoyable isn't making the game fun for that player or the others at the table. In such a situation, the player usually either throws away the character and rolls up a new one, or quits the game. If your campaign values character continuity, neither of those outcomes is especially attractive. Why force Mike to throw away the elf fighter he's been playing for three months just because he made a couple of bad feat choices? If Mialee has been an integral part of the campaign since day 1 but has regretted being an elf since day 2, wouldn't it be better to let her become the halfling she'd prefer to be by undergoind a dramatic transformation at the Necrotic Cradle than by abruptly replacing her with Liamee the halfling wizard?"

[Tanka]

A players fun trumps rules? Is the GM running the game or the player's with their own individual ideas on what rules they wish to follow for the "fun" of it?

You're the kind of GM I would walk out on after the first session.

[Aspenor]

A players fun trumps rules?

That's not what I said. Try reading it closer next time. Any DM that thinks he or she can dictate what characters their players will play will quickly find themselves with no players. Their rules are irrelevant. When you have no players, your rules don't matter for squat. You cannot simply force a player to just suck it up and play along.

Is the GM running the game or the player's with their own individual ideas on what rules they wish to follow for the "fun" of it?

He better be, or he will, again, find himself with no players to play with. If a DM thinks he or she can just dictate to the players, they are wrong. Sure, they can try, but the players have an "I win" button.

They just don't show up anymore.

[Ryss]

1) They have already said it is not simple or easy to do
2) What makes you happy can anger others
3) While partial respec might be reasonable full respec at no serious cost is not reasonable to many and would anger many

1) They have only said that for some kinds of respec methods. A skill respec for example. A full respec is the easiest one to program.
2) True.
3) Not true because if turbine changes the rules in the middle of the game, that is not the player's responsibility. A free respec token each mod should be acceptable.

[Cinwulf]

For me it is rather simple. I knew nothing about D&D prior to starting this game. I played with a friend from work joined a small guild and had a wonderful time. Then the level cap increased from 10. Then new prestige stuff, etc etc. I've got a few characters of different class some pure, some multi, and a ton of bound items across all of them.

I don't have time to re-roll characters to this level. I made mistakes in creation (I'm sure I'm not alone here) and knowing what I do now I would luv to have a way (premium or otherwise) to go back and fix things (ie skill points distro or ability point distro) and keep my current character and all her bound items.

The "why" seems really ridiculous to discuss. The "What" and the "How" are important to me. I "play" this game. I can't go back in real life and fix mistakes (or cast spells for that matter) so having that ability to do that in this game is very appealing to me.

I hope turbine will allow some method of respec. It would keep me and others I know more involved in the game and possibly bring people back that I know left for this very reason.

Krellin
Drow RG
blindfaith
Sarlona

I can relate to alot of what you are saying here. Here you are learning how to play the game, made a few mistakes, or made a few choices you regret. I'm sure you are not the only casual player who doesn't have the time or will to re-roll. I'm sure you'd appreciate the chance to correct those things so you could get more enjoyment from your characters. As would lots of casual or new to DnD players.

But also there were choices people made based on things the developers said were working as intended at the time, that were later changed; And choices people made in the dark, since they had no idea what was next (including the developers). So now through no fault of their own, their character who was once "working as intended" doesn't work the same or has no opportunity to experience the latest in character development from the developers and it detracts from some peoples enjoyment.

Really, a full respec function would be a great tool for the developers to continue to improve the game without creating as much resentment in their subscription base. So I'm in total agreement.

[Mhykke]

I can relate to alot of what you are saying here. Here you are learning how to play the game, made a few mistakes, or made a few choices you regret. I'm sure you are not the only casual player who doesn't have the time or will to re-roll. I'm sure you'd appreciate the chance to correct those things so you could get more enjoyment from your characters. As would lots of casual or new to DnD players.

But also there were choices people made based on things the developers said were working as intended at the time, that were later changed; And choices people made in the dark, since they had no idea what was next (including the developers). So now through no fault of their own, their character who was once "working as intended" doesn't work the same or has no opportunity to experience the latest in character development from the developers and it detracts from some peoples enjoyment.

Really, a full respec function would be a great tool for the developers to continue to improve the game without creating as much resentment in their subscription base. So I'm in total agreement.

Good post.

[Quanefel]

That's not what I said. Try reading it closer next time. Any DM that thinks he or she can dictate what characters their players will play will quickly find themselves with no players. Their rules are irrelevant. When you have no players, your rules don't matter for squat. You cannot simply force a player to just suck it up and play along.

He better be, or he will, again, find himself with no players to play with. If a DM thinks he or she can just dictate to the players, they are wrong. Sure, they can try, but the players have an "I win" button.

They just don't show up anymore.

Very good, it is not what you said. It was my words, a question I asked. Maybe you need to read closer next time to tell the difference between you stating something and me asking a question on my own?

Dictate? You all are using the most EXTREME words and examples to describe something that is very simple. A GM decides on a list of books, rules and his campaign he runs. Players agree to them, maybe ask for something more if they can and when decided on they begin to play. Rules are not irrelevant. Rules are only irrelevant to a player who is not a team player, someone who just came into the group to mess around. Not actually play.

Force to suck it up? Another extreme. No one is forcing anyone to terms that you agreed to prior to joining a group to play. If a player flat out refuses to follow the rules then they know where the door is. If a player wants to ask nicely, politely...that is not unreasonable. You seem to make it that a GM is "forcing" players to play a certian way.

The fact is, no good GM is just going to look the other way or have no say in how you "rework" your character. A DM will want to keep balance where he can. Where is the balance if a player just out of the blue for whatever reasons he wants....completely changes his character into something it was not? Why is the fun of the rest of the players trumped by that one player wanting his character changed out because he decided for himself to do it?

[Ryss]

If you want to go to the moon....
Maybe you should start building a rocket?

Regardless of what a respec would add or subtract from the game... or who it would benefit.. or whether its a good or bad idea....

Maybe you should start arguing for something that might be FEASIBLE like a skill point respec.

In respose to a question about pickpocket skills:

That quote of Codog is only about skill respec. It is in fact a very hard (or even impossible because int tomes don't get logged).

A full respec is infinitely easier.

[Ryss]

Agreed. Yet the problem is not that people are for something small like a skill respec, it is that unless it is a Full Respec.....it generally gets pushed to the side as not good enough.

Well, because skill respec alone is not enough.

[Monkey_Archer]

That quote of Codog is only about skill respec. It is in fact a very hard (or even impossible because int tomes don't get logged).

A full respec is infinitely easier.

Ok, maybe im missing something here....
How do you do a full respec without redoing your skills?

[Quanefel]

Well, because skill respec alone is not enough.

For you.

[Tanka]

The fact is, no good GM is just going to look the other way or have no say in how you "rework" your character. A DM will want to keep balance where he can. Where is the balance if a player just out of the blue for whatever reasons he wants....completely changes his character into something it was not? Why is the fun of the rest of the players trumped by that one player wanting his character changed out because he decided for himself to do it?

None of us have ever said that character retraining in PnP should be done without any input from the DM. You're putting words in our mouths, yet again.

[Ryss]

What sane or good GM would give into a player wanting to change his character because that player wanted more "enjoyment"? Is it the player or the GM in charge at that point? Why even have rules or a GM if it is the players deciding what they can change about their character whenever they wanted? Who is talking about the GM being 100% right? That is the extreme, not the rule. Stick to the reality of the situatution.

Replace rules with....fun? Let fun decide everything here? And who's idea of fun is the standard now for all of us to follow or do we each get to have anything we want simply because we decided it was fun? Rules be damned?

I did that. The DMs I know did that too. So we are not sane?

Having said that, we didn't allow respecs to become the norm. If someone got bored and wanted more enjoyment, let him have it. If said player wants to respec too frequently, he'd get smacked.

You are presenting an absolute argument. All respecs are free, anyone can respec any time and any number of times. That is simply not the case.