This post
I’m not arguing about it rn because I’m not in the mood to
I was talking about how I choose to DM, and am only now aware that that’s a thing you do so not sure how that was meant to be construed that way.
Fair enough if you want to take the angle that as the DM you have the right to bar player options if you feel they aren’t a fit for your game, that’s just not how I do things (at least in terms of mechanics). I wasn’t meaning to come off as smug/superior for it.
1 Like
Also whatever your DM style is, you are always promoting some things and not allowing others. If you value 1000IQ strategies on battles, you will have more meaningful combats which may forbid your players from making far-from-optimzed-yet-not-made-to-be-stupid builds. If you thing a homebrew thing is broken, you are already not allowing it to come as your table and etc.
I got this point, I just told you not to do the approach (the indirect provocation). I remember it being done before and it really gets on my nerves.
Beyond the boundaries of official published content only, I don’t explicitly disallow anything. If you want to play a yuan-ti pureblood hexblade 2 / shadow sorcerer X, go ahead, but it may not work out as well as you expect.
I don’t really get what you mean though. I wasn’t addressing you or talking about you or anything you do as a DM (nor was I even aware of it at that point), so if you’re saying I shouldn’t talk about d&d tactics and habits at all I don’t really know what to tell you 
I just don’t understand how a random snippet of conversation can somehow be seen as provoking you.
1 Like
It was an impessoal “you”, not to you yourself.
It was nothing discussed earlier that provoked me.
It was that specifically you made fun of when in dialogue with another person knowing I would see it, as teenagers do in social media to indirectly adress their exes or whatever in order to creat an one-person circlejerk (the whole phrase should be a term on english, but I don’t know so I’m describing it) instead of just discussing their disagreements directly. This is particularly childish behavior (even if common enough to be seen as normal), and one that really gets on my nerves.
Sure, I’m aware that messaging in a thread means anyone can see it, but how was I to know it was something you’d take (personal, apparently?) offence to?
And to call me childish for having an opinion is a bit high and mighty.
1 Like
It is not for having opinions. as I have already said in (It was nothing discussed earlier that provoked me).
Sure, I’m aware that messaging in a thread means anyone can see it, but how was I to know it was something you’d take (personal, apparently?) offence to?
What-I’m-Talking-About-That-I’m-Screwed-Because-It-Shouldn’t-Even-Have-A-Translation-To-English is commonly acknowledged as offensive.
Well without a word or phrase to indicate what you mean I’m afraid I can’t really follow along.
1 Like
Why can’t we be friends, why can’t we be friends 
I don’t think she was trying to be rude at all, she was just responding to me asking her not to rework wild magic
2 Likes
But as I’ve said, I didn’t know that was a thing with you? I was stating my intention to Marl for decision choice.
1 Like