A little too much tweeking of the classes. [Archive] - Wizards Community

A little too much tweeking of the classes. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek
09-26-06, 01:58 AM Is it me, or are there a little too many ways to tweek your character? I mean it now takes maybe a minimum of 6 books just to create a character. And if the DM doesn't have access to all these side books that the players use, then they could get screwed. They are also pulling away from base classes and focusing on PrC's. They should just make it a rule that you have to take a PrC sometime. I think all these varients and different things can slow the game down dramatically. What do you think?
KurenaiYami
09-26-06, 02:10 AM Nah. It just lets you make your character more unique. I have 52 books, and my players love the fact that they have so many options.

I also have no trouble keeping up with them, and it doesn't slow down my game any.
Moon-Lancer
09-26-06, 02:15 AM im glad to hear that. many dms cannot do what you do, or they are looking at the game in a diffrent way. I think more options is better and makes the game fun. It adds a new layer to the game that i enjoy. I really do lothe core only games.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek
09-26-06, 02:20 AM having many options are fine, but when you are having so many that you have to start flipping through 5 books during combat to make sure you can do this or do that then it takes time away from the game.
Yak of Darkness
09-26-06, 02:32 AM having many options are fine, but when you are having so many that you have to start flipping through 5 books during combat to make sure you can do this or do that then it takes time away from the game.If it slows down the game, then don't do it.

Why is it a problem for you if new options and PrCs come out? You don't have to use any of them. You don't have to buy the books they're in, and if you do buy the books, you don't have to use whatever parts you don't like.

If you're DMing a game and you don't want too many references at the table, then ban extraneous books from your game, or (if you think that's harsh) make sure your players have a notecard, photocopy, or laptop file of any supplemental material (PrC abilities, splatbook feats, new magic items, etc.) at the table when you game--much less mess that way. If you're playing a game and you don't want too many references at the table, then either don't use too many references, or keep the aforementioned notecards, photocopies, or laptop with you when you game.

I will never understand the "too much extra stuff in splatbooks" complaint people have with D&D (and other RPGs). "Too much stuff in the core," I can understand--things get too complicated from the get-go, the game becomes unplayable.

But extra material is just that, extra. You don't need it for your game. Not only that, but in order for it to be in your game, someone actually had to go out of their way to a bookstore/online merchant, procure the extra, unnecessary-for-play book, and bring it to the table.

There is no way this happened without your consent. "Too many options in too many books" is a 100% self-inflicted problem. Dump the books, find a way to organize, or suck it up and deal with the fact that you made your game too complex. You are the only one who can help you.
KurenaiYami
09-26-06, 02:35 AM having many options are fine, but when you are having so many that you have to start flipping through 5 books during combat to make sure you can do this or do that then it takes time away from the game.
That sounds like more of a lack of competence than anything. Most feats aren't that complicated, and if you read it thoroughly a few times when you first get your hands on it, you should have an okay grasp of what you can and cannot do with it.
CzarGarrett
09-26-06, 08:52 AM You do not have to use all those additional books.

Me, I generally use a max of 3 books: PHB, appropriate Complete, and then a CS (if applicable).

Anything beyond that is when I start to break my brain and my back.
PoorHobo
09-26-06, 09:58 AM And if the DM doesn't have access to all these side books that the players use, then they could get screwed.

DM's fault really. He should either demand (yes demand, not ask) to see the book and feat/PRC/ability and then consider it. If not flat out deny it. Most DM's that get screwed its becasue of theyr'e own laziness to look at a players character or cowardice to say no.
RobbyPants
09-26-06, 10:35 AM DM's fault really. He should either demand (yes demand, not ask) to see the book and feat/PRC/ability and then consider it. If not flat out deny it. Most DM's that get screwed its becasue of theyr'e own laziness to look at a players character or cowardice to say no.
100% right there! I've had that same type of thing in the past. I hate having a player come with a PC that they rolled up with their old DM. My rule is, if I don't have the book, I'm not using that class/feat/spell. As it is, with my current campaign setting, I took the time to pour through all of my books, and type out a list of all the PrCs I'm allowing in my game. There have been a couple disapointments from my descision, but if I spell it out right at the beginning, at least it's fair.
StruckingFuggle
09-26-06, 11:10 AM having many options are fine, but when you are having so many that you have to start flipping through 5 books during combat to make sure you can do this or do that then it takes time away from the game.

That's not the fault of all the material that went into the character, but rather the fault of insufficient preperation on the part of the character's player.

A well prepared player shouldn't have to crack a book to use a character ability at all.

Really. The problem isn't there being options for people who like options (or even power for people who like power), but you using the books improperly (for example, not saying they can't be used). As long as you can deny using new books, they should mean nothing to you.

So why complain when they don't have to exist for you at all, and some of us like them?
Tony Vargas
09-26-06, 12:42 PM Is it me, or are there a little too many ways to tweek your character? I mean it now takes maybe a minimum of 6 books just to create a character.Yeah, but I guess WotC needs to keep selling books. D&D, by the basic nature of it's mechanics, becomes more complex and harder to keep balanced the more you add to it.

And if the DM doesn't have access to all these side books that the players use, then they could get screwed.Clearly, a DM should only introduce suplements into his campaign if he's reviewed them and found them apropriate - both in terms of game balance and in terms of fitting the flavor of the campaign.

They are also pulling away from base classes and focusing on PrC's. They should just make it a rule that you have to take a PrC sometime. PrCs are a convenient page-filler for suplements. They can be very specific, so each can be unique without taking too much away from other classes. The theory, though, I'd think, is that many PrCs are presented so that DMs can pick and choose those few that best fit thier campaign.

I think all these varients and different things can slow the game down dramatically. What do you think?For once I agree with you. The more spells you add, the more time players are going to take to pick spells, and the more different sources they'll be paging through to check mechanical details of those spells. The same goes for class abilities, feats, magic items, etc...
Echodork
09-26-06, 01:02 PM Core is acceptable, non-core by request only.

Words to live by. If your players are showing up to the game with feats from six different books that you don't own, it's your responsibility to ensure that the characters are acceptable to your campaign. If in doubt, rule it out. Any time my players are considering a feat or PrC from a non-core book, I ask to approve it first. Most of Wizards' material is good out of the box, but you need to know what's going on BEFORE a situation arises in combat.
Solik
09-26-06, 01:16 PM I spend more time digging through Core to find out how to rule something rare or obscure more often than I have to flip through splats. And we use dozens of them.

You and your players just need to be more organized. Learn the abilities you need for a session, bookmark important sections, and get on with it.
Sinner6
09-26-06, 01:25 PM I mean it now takes maybe a minimum of 6 books just to create a character. ... What do you think?

My current DM has rules about how many books you can use to make your character.
Core + any 3 books of the players choice + a page or two xerox

Core since everyone has that, then one book for race, one book for class, and one book for feats/spells. The xeroxed pages are for the one must have feat or spell or template in some little used book.

It still allows lots of good stuff, like one or two PrCs, non-core base class, a good number of template and race options, plus key feats.
Darth Sephiroth
09-26-06, 01:40 PM I'll allow anything they show me before playing with, it means that the different characters are very unique and I reserve the right to say no if it won't work.
Bob Loblaw
09-26-06, 02:14 PM We always write the page number and book next to whatever new ability we have written on our sheet. There isn't much time spent looking things up. We also do a lot of our looking up on someone else's turn.

I tend to go one step more and actually add every feat, flaw, trait, spell, magic item, and ability description (verbatim) to the end of my sheet. This gets to be rather lengthy for spellcasters so I usually just use the PHB and Spell Compendium page numbers. If the character is designed to use a particular action, I will sometimes write out the description of that action and keep it with the character as well. I do this more with other people's characters I help develop. I have almost all the books for the group, so it's easier for them no matter where we may decide to play.
CryoSilver
09-26-06, 02:26 PM I find it convinient to write down feats and spells that aren't core in a little memo book or index cards for quick reference during a game.

More than that however, I try to memorize what my character has verbatim.
razorboy
09-26-06, 02:28 PM On average, I only allow the core books, and certain classes and PrCs from Complete Books. If I'm running an established setting (FR or Eberron or Ravenloft) game, I may allow material from campaign books. A simple rule that can save a DM from a gluttony of character options available to players is: limit players to maximum two base classes and one prestige class that a character can take.

As a player, I try to limit myself to Core books, and campaign setting books, and occasionally a feat or spell from Complete series or Spell Compendium.
CryoSilver
09-26-06, 03:48 PM I allow anything in campaigns I DM, subject to my review and approval; players must provide me with scans of the relevant pages they want to use.

When creating a character, I ask what's allowed if I plan to go non-core, but generally I use: PHB, Complete Adventurer, Complete Warrior and any CS book needed.
Archangel62
09-26-06, 03:50 PM I allow the use of any books that I own for use in the campaign. As I own a rather large amount of books this proves to be most useful for the group as a whole.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 09-26-06, 01:58 AM	Is it me, or are there a little too many ways to tweek your character? I mean it now takes maybe a minimum of 6 books just to create a character. And if the DM doesn't have access to all these side books that the players use, then they could get screwed. They are also pulling away from base classes and focusing on PrC's. They should just make it a rule that you have to take a PrC sometime. I think all these varients and different things can slow the game down dramatically. What do you think?
KurenaiYami 09-26-06, 02:10 AM	Nah. It just lets you make your character more unique. I have 52 books, and my players love the fact that they have so many options. I also have no trouble keeping up with them, and it doesn't slow down my game any.
Moon-Lancer 09-26-06, 02:15 AM	im glad to hear that. many dms cannot do what you do, or they are looking at the game in a diffrent way. I think more options is better and makes the game fun. It adds a new layer to the game that i enjoy. I really do lothe core only games.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 09-26-06, 02:20 AM	having many options are fine, but when you are having so many that you have to start flipping through 5 books during combat to make sure you can do this or do that then it takes time away from the game.
Yak of Darkness 09-26-06, 02:32 AM	having many options are fine, but when you are having so many that you have to start flipping through 5 books during combat to make sure you can do this or do that then it takes time away from the game.If it slows down the game, then don't do it. Why is it a problem for you if new options and PrCs come out? You don't have to use any of them. You don't have to buy the books they're in, and if you do buy the books, you don't have to use whatever parts you don't like. If you're DMing a game and you don't want too many references at the table, then ban extraneous books from your game, or (if you think that's harsh) make sure your players have a notecard, photocopy, or laptop file of any supplemental material (PrC abilities, splatbook feats, new magic items, etc.) at the table when you game--much less mess that way. If you're playing a game and you don't want too many references at the table, then either don't use too many references, or keep the aforementioned notecards, photocopies, or laptop with you when you game. I will never understand the "too much extra stuff in splatbooks" complaint people have with D&D (and other RPGs). "Too much stuff in the core," I can understand--things get too complicated from the get-go, the game becomes unplayable. But extra material is just that, extra. You don't need it for your game. Not only that, but in order for it to be in your game, someone actually had to go out of their way to a bookstore/online merchant, procure the extra, unnecessary-for-play book, and bring it to the table. There is no way this happened without your consent. "Too many options in too many books" is a 100% self-inflicted problem. Dump the books, find a way to organize, or suck it up and deal with the fact that you made your game too complex. You are the only one who can help you.
KurenaiYami 09-26-06, 02:35 AM	having many options are fine, but when you are having so many that you have to start flipping through 5 books during combat to make sure you can do this or do that then it takes time away from the game. That sounds like more of a lack of competence than anything. Most feats aren't that complicated, and if you read it thoroughly a few times when you first get your hands on it, you should have an okay grasp of what you can and cannot do with it.
CzarGarrett 09-26-06, 08:52 AM	You do not have to use all those additional books. Me, I generally use a max of 3 books: PHB, appropriate Complete, and then a CS (if applicable). Anything beyond that is when I start to break my brain and my back.
PoorHobo 09-26-06, 09:58 AM	And if the DM doesn't have access to all these side books that the players use, then they could get screwed. DM's fault really. He should either demand (yes demand, not ask) to see the book and feat/PRC/ability and then consider it. If not flat out deny it. Most DM's that get screwed its becasue of theyr'e own laziness to look at a players character or cowardice to say no.
RobbyPants 09-26-06, 10:35 AM	DM's fault really. He should either demand (yes demand, not ask) to see the book and feat/PRC/ability and then consider it. If not flat out deny it. Most DM's that get screwed its becasue of theyr'e own laziness to look at a players character or cowardice to say no. 100% right there! I've had that same type of thing in the past. I hate having a player come with a PC that they rolled up with their old DM. My rule is, if I don't have the book, I'm not using that class/feat/spell. As it is, with my current campaign setting, I took the time to pour through all of my books, and type out a list of all the PrCs I'm allowing in my game. There have been a couple disapointments from my descision, but if I spell it out right at the beginning, at least it's fair.
StruckingFuggle 09-26-06, 11:10 AM	having many options are fine, but when you are having so many that you have to start flipping through 5 books during combat to make sure you can do this or do that then it takes time away from the game. That's not the fault of all the material that went into the character, but rather the fault of insufficient preperation on the part of the character's player. A well prepared player shouldn't have to crack a book to use a character ability at all. Really. The problem isn't there being options for people who like options (or even power for people who like power), but you using the books improperly (for example, not saying they can't be used). As long as you can deny using new books, they should mean nothing to you. So why complain when they don't have to exist for you at all, and some of us like them?
Tony Vargas 09-26-06, 12:42 PM	Is it me, or are there a little too many ways to tweek your character? I mean it now takes maybe a minimum of 6 books just to create a character.Yeah, but I guess WotC needs to keep selling books. D&D, by the basic nature of it's mechanics, becomes more complex and harder to keep balanced the more you add to it. And if the DM doesn't have access to all these side books that the players use, then they could get screwed.Clearly, a DM should only introduce suplements into his campaign if he's reviewed them and found them apropriate - both in terms of game balance and in terms of fitting the flavor of the campaign. They are also pulling away from base classes and focusing on PrC's. They should just make it a rule that you have to take a PrC sometime. PrCs are a convenient page-filler for suplements. They can be very specific, so each can be unique without taking too much away from other classes. The theory, though, I'd think, is that many PrCs are presented so that DMs can pick and choose those few that best fit thier campaign. I think all these varients and different things can slow the game down dramatically. What do you think?For once I agree with you. The more spells you add, the more time players are going to take to pick spells, and the more different sources they'll be paging through to check mechanical details of those spells. The same goes for class abilities, feats, magic items, etc...
Echodork 09-26-06, 01:02 PM	Core is acceptable, non-core by request only. Words to live by. If your players are showing up to the game with feats from six different books that you don't own, it's your responsibility to ensure that the characters are acceptable to your campaign. If in doubt, rule it out. Any time my players are considering a feat or PrC from a non-core book, I ask to approve it first. Most of Wizards' material is good out of the box, but you need to know what's going on BEFORE a situation arises in combat.
Solik 09-26-06, 01:16 PM	I spend more time digging through Core to find out how to rule something rare or obscure more often than I have to flip through splats. And we use dozens of them. You and your players just need to be more organized. Learn the abilities you need for a session, bookmark important sections, and get on with it.
Sinner6 09-26-06, 01:25 PM	I mean it now takes maybe a minimum of 6 books just to create a character. ... What do you think? My current DM has rules about how many books you can use to make your character. Core + any 3 books of the players choice + a page or two xerox Core since everyone has that, then one book for race, one book for class, and one book for feats/spells. The xeroxed pages are for the one must have feat or spell or template in some little used book. It still allows lots of good stuff, like one or two PrCs, non-core base class, a good number of template and race options, plus key feats.
Darth Sephiroth 09-26-06, 01:40 PM	I'll allow anything they show me before playing with, it means that the different characters are very unique and I reserve the right to say no if it won't work.
Bob Loblaw 09-26-06, 02:14 PM	We always write the page number and book next to whatever new ability we have written on our sheet. There isn't much time spent looking things up. We also do a lot of our looking up on someone else's turn. I tend to go one step more and actually add every feat, flaw, trait, spell, magic item, and ability description (verbatim) to the end of my sheet. This gets to be rather lengthy for spellcasters so I usually just use the PHB and Spell Compendium page numbers. If the character is designed to use a particular action, I will sometimes write out the description of that action and keep it with the character as well. I do this more with other people's characters I help develop. I have almost all the books for the group, so it's easier for them no matter where we may decide to play.
CryoSilver 09-26-06, 02:26 PM	I find it convinient to write down feats and spells that aren't core in a little memo book or index cards for quick reference during a game. More than that however, I try to memorize what my character has verbatim.
razorboy 09-26-06, 02:28 PM	On average, I only allow the core books, and certain classes and PrCs from Complete Books. If I'm running an established setting (FR or Eberron or Ravenloft) game, I may allow material from campaign books. A simple rule that can save a DM from a gluttony of character options available to players is: limit players to maximum two base classes and one prestige class that a character can take. As a player, I try to limit myself to Core books, and campaign setting books, and occasionally a feat or spell from Complete series or Spell Compendium.
CryoSilver 09-26-06, 03:48 PM	I allow anything in campaigns I DM, subject to my review and approval; players must provide me with scans of the relevant pages they want to use. When creating a character, I ask what's allowed if I plan to go non-core, but generally I use: PHB, Complete Adventurer, Complete Warrior and any CS book needed.
Archangel62 09-26-06, 03:50 PM	I allow the use of any books that I own for use in the campaign. As I own a rather large amount of books this proves to be most useful for the group as a whole.