Post/Author/DateTime	Post
baalzamon999 06-15-05, 06:30 PM	*pant* WOW! Okay, I'm calm now, and I can now explain my pent-up frustration. Now, this may come as a shock to you all, but I have discovered something while reading through my new Heroes of Battle book. Dungeons & Dragons is boring. Yup, that's right. Now, don't get me wrong, I LOVE this game. Completely and absolutely! So much that I've dedicated hundreds of dollars into purchasing these wonderul little packages of murdered trees smothered in ink. With that in mind, let me rephrase that: Non-core Dungeons & Dragons is boring. Prestige classes, feats, and spells, oh my! OH. MY. GOD!!! TOO MANY! The amount is staggering. My stomach churns! Where are the archetypes thatgive the game structure and root it in medieval fantasy? I just want to let out a terrible barbarian rage. But wait, why don't I pick up a few levels of Frenzied Berserker and frenzy instead? As an added bonus, I can't die! Wait, at the same time, I'll multiclass into Sorceror, and cast a fireball at you. No, I'll be a Warmage instead. I just want to throw a rock at someone, but I guess I'll be a hulking hurler and deal massive amounts of damage as a bonus. WHY? It is no longer the ultimate fantasy role-playing game EWER! It is now a bland mish-mash of everything from every book ever produced! But, wait... I know what's coming up next: "The DM decides what goes in." Well, WotC isn't exactly helping, are they? With every prestige class coming out having weaker character concepts, more power creep, and no tie into the game setting, tthey are encouraging extreme plug-and-play, which is pretty much the opposite of what PrCs are supposed to do! Mishymashyblandyblechletsallgobacktocore SCREAM! (Sorry)
Roreck 06-15-05, 06:55 PM	lol I am blissful ignorant of all non core material so I have no knowledge of the evil of which you speak. Although I find it anoying while surfing the boards I hear about a Half-Celestial Half-Fiend, Lycanthrop Vampire that is a Wizard/Hexablade(don't know what that is)/Warforged(again wtc)/Favored Soul (again wtc)/Cleric/you get the idea I personally like my Human Wizard, and plan to make a Elvan Monk for my next character as needed, than perhaps a Human Rouge, but I digress. To me the core has enough options for my taste but I only recently started wtc= What the crap (fyi)
Molitor 06-15-05, 07:36 PM	Do you fell better?
Transit 06-15-05, 07:54 PM	Although I find it anoying while surfing the boards I hear about a Half-Celestial Half-Fiend, Lycanthrop Vampire that is a Wizard/Hexablade(don't know what that is)/Warforged(again wtc)/Favored Soul (again wtc)/Cleric/you get the idea I personally like my Human Wizard, and plan to make a Elvan Monk for my next character as needed, than perhaps a Human Rouge, but I digress. Those posts bug me too, because what they always say is: "Hi! I'm new to D&D and I just rolled up my very first character. It's a 16th level Half-Celestial Half-Fiend, Lycanthrope Vampire that is a Wizard/Hexablade/Warforged/Favored Soul/Cleric. Now I'm having trouble understanding how to play' cuz all I've got is the SRD. Can you guys explain to me what AC and stuff means?" :D
Flushmaster 06-15-05, 07:57 PM	Supplementary books add options. Believe it or not, it is quite possible for somebody to come up with a character concept, independent of such books, that would work well chucking giant rocks (hulking hurler), fighting while intoxicated (deunken master), mixing magic and melee (spellsword, eldritch knight, daggerspell mage/shaper), being an inquisition-like "enforcer" of their beliefs (church inquisitos, shadowbane inquisitor), or so forth. When the actual effort is put into the character then the right PrC (note that I use the singular form) and a feat or two and/or a couple of spells from splat books can bring the mechanics of the character much closer to the concept that the player wants. The problem is powergaming munchkins. They'll abuse anything and if there's more material to manipulate then they'll be capable of more abuse. If you take a look at many of the uber builds on the CO boards here, most DMs would specifically disallow them not because of their abilities but because they break "common sense" rules such as using material from Oriental Adventures, Eberron, and Forgotten Realms material (each being setting specific) that was never intended to be used together. People complain that the wu jen, shugenja, and samurai classes in the Complete books aren't the same as the original ones in OA, but the originals are setting specific and I know by firsthand experience that tossing them into a standard D&D game can easily make them unbalanced. Eberron feats were never meant to be applied to a kender OA samurai using FR regional abilitites and PrCs; no I haven't seen such a ridiculous example yet, though some have come close, and if anybody brings such a "character" to me as a DM I will smack them immediately. With one notable exception, the players I've gamed with over the past few years are decidedly not powergamers. The reasons vary from being enthusiastic specifically about roleplaying and mechanics being considered purely secondary (not that they still don't enjoy a good fight), or in one case the player is more energetic about combat than roleplaying but is simply too lazy to put the effort into munchkinizing his PC (as long as the concept is sufficiently badass and he deals a respectable amount of damage when the time comes then he's happy). The one exception is a major munchkin who would be perfectly at home on the CO boards, but I eventually figured out ways to minimize his impact while still keeping things fair for the others. Heck, half of the folks I game with don't even have a PHB because they never care to read it unless they're playing and then they can borrow somebody else's (usually mine). If I get a new splat book (I have about 8 so far) then I'll tell them about it and they might flip through it and have something catch their eye. This happened recently when I showed the somewhat lazy player my Complete Adventurer; he decided that he wanted a ninja PC before reading past the second level abilities (he loves the whole sneaky killer thing in games, regardless of setting) and is currently playing a tiefling ninja that fits in quite well with the game. Half of the characters in my games only took the PrCs because I told the player about it because I thought it might go well with their character and they agreed (usually to the effect of "Cool! That's almost exactly what I wanted!"). Occasionally a player might specifically ask me if there's a PrC that goes along with their concept, so they can make any small mechanical tweaks to qualify if they like it, but if there is none close enough to their satisfaction (at least half of my suggestions of such are not used) or if there is a mechanically compatible class that the player doesn't like the "feel" of, they'll stick to the base class (or the two base classes they planed on mixing in the first place, like a druid/bard one player is still working on the concept for). Next time it comes up, I plan to suggest the Fochlucan lyrist PrC class for Kyt's druid/bard dwarf idea (complex backstory, though very creative), but I don't think she'll like it. Players make the game creative and players make the game nothing but stats and dice. It's al up to the players, and to the DM to inform the jackasses when they're being jackasses.
Flushmaster 06-15-05, 08:00 PM	Incidentally, to the confused ones, warforged is a race, not a class. They're sentient constructs (magical androids, pretty much) from the Eberron campaign setting in which they were originally created as soldiers but "accidentally" began to become self aware. I'm not sure on the details myself, as I don't play Eberron.
thasis 06-15-05, 08:39 PM	As much as I'm angry at you Flushmaster for your completly offensive post to my friend (PreppyHater666), even if he deserved it, I completly have to agree with you. Of course on the other hand I used to be a magor muchkin and I'd do anything to get power. Of course I changed. I love to gain power but I like to do it logically.
baalzamon999 06-15-05, 08:41 PM	Do you fell better? Why, thank you. Yes, yes I do.
Roreck 06-15-05, 09:01 PM	Those posts bug me too, because what they always say is: "Hi! I'm new to D&D and I just rolled up my very first character. It's a 16th level Half-Celestial Half-Fiend, Lycanthrope Vampire that is a Wizard/Hexablade/Warforged/Favored Soul/Cleric. Now I'm having trouble understanding how to play' cuz all I've got is the SRD. Can you guys explain to me what AC and stuff means?" thank Pelor I am not the only one and to flushmaster I have only two problems with non-core material itself non-core material seems more likely to be abused by powergamers/munchkins/min-maxers and the fact I do not know non-core stuff. And before people flame me for saying non-core is broken realise I did not say that just that it seems to me that non-core is more abused by powergamers than non-core is all.
Flushmaster 06-15-05, 09:05 PM	There's two reasons, IMO, that "non-core" stuff tends to be abused more. One is that there is simply more of it; your average munchkin, regardless of their tastes or specialty, can probably find more "inspiration" in ten splat books than in three core books (simple math). The second point is related: the DM might not have the books being used or otherwise aren't as familiar with the material therein, allowing a sneaky munchkin to slip something by them and into the game. The only "broken" thing I've seen so far from any splat book is the Favored Soul class from Complete Divine. Weapon Specialization, multiple energy resistances, wings, and a few others, all in exchange for a little bit of flexibility compared to the cleric. Doesn't make much sense to me. Everything else I've seen in splat books seems pretty balanced. Complete Divine is the only book in the Complete series I haven't purchased. And I've still got a copy of PH666's last post that was deleted before that thread was locked; if you read it I dare you to tell me I wasn't correct on all counts.
weasel fierce 06-15-05, 09:09 PM	A friend of mine once said that 95% of all supplements for RPG's will either suck, or consist of 10% stuff you may use, and 90% stuff that you will never use. Im inclined to agree with him, with a few notable exceptions.
Skeane 06-15-05, 10:02 PM	Back in the pre-3.0 days, I used to be a supplemental *****. I picked up everything I could and tried to incorporate it into every game I ran. I thought it was the best thing ever. Then one day I had to DM a game to two newbies. I tried using my typical DM style, but it got too confusing for them. Halfway through the game, we rerolled characters and played with core classes, core races, core monsters core everything... just for simplicity. From that point on, I stuck with the core stuff... In my opinion, the core stuff leaves plenty of room for pcs to play out a massive range of characters. I've heard that 3.5 supplementals are a little bit more reasonable and balanced than previous editions, and i've been a player in some games that have included them... they're not as out of control, but I still think (nothing against those who cant do without their supplementals) core is a more rewarding experience.
Molitor 06-15-05, 10:24 PM	Why, thank you. Yes, yes I do. It's bad for society to have an angry "beholder" running around. I feel your angst to a degree. I DM with only the 3 core books, that's my entire game, 3 books! I create all my own prestige classes, I know my players better than WOTC. I take as a challenge to come up with those prestige classes. I personally believe they like mine better.
darkness ninja of light 06-15-05, 10:44 PM	Is it possible to make interesting characters and have fun playing D&D using only core rules? Of course! Is it possible to make interesting characters and have fun playing D&D using non-core rules? Yes to that also! Is it possible to switch between the two for a nice balance? Yep yep! Is it reasonable to complain about WotC giving us new prestige classes and skills and feats and other somesuch that are entirely optional? Only slightly...only slightly...
bleedoachikaltir 06-15-05, 11:28 PM	Prestiges Classes were not really meant to be what they are now, they were suppose to represent a sort of organisation in your world. For example, take the "Assassin" PRC, you can put a guild of assassin in a big city that are known to be the best assassin you can find, but to BE an assassin, that's another thing, you need to enter contact with them, take the challenge, etc. You don't get a level in a prestige class after sleeping (and leveling) in the middle of a dungeon.
Dathlue Mistwinter 06-15-05, 11:31 PM	I am with you. The only non-core things I'm okay with is Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance - but I never play with FR feats or spells, only core. Exclusively. I find absolutely everything else stupid. My most hated purchase: the FR Monster Compendium. If they couldn't get every monster into the PHB (which was possible, too, considering how much art there is), then I don't need to know about it because I'll probably make it up if I need it anyway. Which I WONT. Just PWNed WotC, hope nobody minds. So core only, if that. 4E will suck because they can't make it better, only simpler like stupid 8th Edition Magic Cards. CLASSIC, C'MON CHICKEN.
IceFractal 06-15-05, 11:46 PM	You know, I always hear people complaining about how the role of PrCs has changed - but does anyone ever stop to think it may not be a bad change but an evolution? I think there's a role for both prestige classes in the traditional sense and advanced classes, which I basically define as the more generic PrCs which are based on the character's innate abilities rather than an organization. For instance, Arcane Trickster is, IMO, an advanced class, because while there may be AT organizations, the concept of mixing magic with stealth is not a unique one. Furthermore, many ATs are rather chaotic and wouldn't fit into a single organization. There basically seem to be 4 categories of PrCs: * Organization based (such as the Purple Dragon Knight). * Technique/Training based (such as the Unseen Hand). * Specialization based (such as the Frenzied Berserker). * Combination based (such as the Eldritch Knight). And each of those categories serves a purpose.
woozygremlin 06-16-05, 01:21 AM	I had a GM-breakdown for similar reasons just before 3.5 came out and had to quit playing for more than a year (not a total loss though, I learned a few other RPGs). I now run only "minimalist" campaigns (ie. low-level, low-magic, core rules only) and find that he game is much less stressful and much more fun now. On a related note, I think a big part of the problem is that WotC seems to have build 3rd ed. by converting 2nd edition AD&D to the d20 system, rather than constructing a concrete, well thought-out system. This is the only way I can account for the half-*** being a core race instead of a template, or Rogues having a sneak attack it fit fine with "Thief", but seems out of place for a Rogue. Another problem is that the classes have too many darned abilities! Not only does this annoy DMs (well me at least) but it serves to narrow the applicability of the classes to very specific concepts thus necessitating PrCs to fill in the gaps. I personally would have preferred having 3 or 4 very generic broad-based classes that could be applied to a wide range of concepts.
Yak of Darkness 06-16-05, 02:13 AM	There basically seem to be 4 categories of PrCs: * Organization based (such as the Purple Dragon Knight). * Technique/Training based (such as the Unseen Hand). * Specialization based (such as the Frenzied Berserker). * Combination based (such as the Eldritch Knight). And each of those categories serves a purpose.Agreed, although I might add to the list: * Transformational (Greenstar Adept, Dragon Disciple, etc.) But yes, I agree that PrCs are fine covering multiple uses, and in fact, find little use for the organization/worldbuilding PrCs that are printed, as if I want that, I'm going to make my own. I get much more use, as a DM, out of the other types. ;)
Ranger REG 06-16-05, 04:31 AM	Do you fell better? I'm hoping he fell hard ... on his arse. :P If you don't like the supplements, don't buy it. Cliche, I know, but gamers keep doing it, anyway. As for PrCs, it's a DM's tool. He can add to his game or not, and even then, he can modify them, making them available through certain guilds or organizations. *crowd gasps in surprise* Yes! Shocking, isn't it? Behold the powers of the Dungeon Master. Sighs. :bored: :nonono:
Flushmaster 06-16-05, 05:49 AM	There basically seem to be 4 categories of PrCs: * Organization based (such as the Purple Dragon Knight). * Technique/Training based (such as the Unseen Hand). * Specialization based (such as the Frenzied Berserker). * Combination based (such as the Eldritch Knight). And each of those categories serves a purpose. * Transformational (Greenstar Adept, Dragon Disciple, etc.) Boo-yah. I agree. The important part is the DM. Some or even all PrCs in a particular game may require acceptance to an organization. That's up to the DM. A good DM to player relationship is necessary. It's a social game and that includes the DM.
DuskyFruit 06-16-05, 05:58 AM	Originally posted by: Ranger REG As for PrCs, it's a DM's tool. He can add to his game or not, and even then, he can modify them, making them available through certain guilds or organizations. *crowd gasps in surprise* Yes! Shocking, isn't it? Behold the powers of the Dungeon Master. Ah thank you ranger REG now I know that I'm not the only one in this world that know how to use optional stuff as a DM
Kevtar 06-16-05, 08:26 AM	There are some Prc's and non-core classes I'll allow, but there are some I won't. I don't mind some of them simply because it at least gives the appearance of more options for a player. I say appearance because, in my experience, most of my players play the way they want to play and not with many of the options their PCs have. For instance, a player with a druid PC rarely wild-shapes, instead he prefers melee. Another player with a barbarian PC rarely rages. These are personal preferences that I doubt would change with different classes. Although I understand that this might not be the case for everyone. Personally, the addition of war mages to my campaign has been great. War mages are the "Stormtroopers" of this campaign, and they are just as effective as the SW troopers. They look menacing but can't hit the broad side of a barn.
The Man from Uncle 06-16-05, 09:25 AM	I have recently found that some extra material to core can be good. I recently came up with a character idea that mechanically was best suited to the Bard core class. (See link below:) http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=436226 However after looking at Arcane Trickster, I can see that this PrC suits him even better. Had it not existed I would not be able to realise my character as accurately as I would have liked. (I thank the people who advised me to look at this PrC) I think as long as you are choosing the character before the build, extra material is almost always beneficial.
Andrew_980 06-16-05, 07:39 PM	Any one else here play Rifts? this is where we are headed, each book offering more options and cool powers untill you have hundreds or races and classes, and it all gets very confusing with cross-referances and mistakes coming from trying to churn out books at a rabid pace. Options are basicly good. then again options are what has stopped any atempt for me to have a Rifts campeign that said limited use of splats can be good, just watch the players carefully, and execute at first sign of munchkinism, it is infectious and often incurable And I've still got a copy of PH666's last post that was deleted before that thread was locked; if you read it I dare you to tell me I wasn't correct on all counts I would personnaly love to see it. even if i don't always agree with you you are insightfull and make a good point more often than many others
Ranger REG 06-17-05, 04:32 AM	Ah thank you ranger REG now I know that I'm not the only one in this world that know how to use optional stuff as a DM That's why we need to educate DMs or they will scar players for life, possibly turning them anti-D&D. :smirk:
Iron Cobra 06-17-05, 06:36 AM	It depends on if you're german or not
Iron Cobra 06-17-05, 06:39 AM	Ah, sorry for this, but also, consider: When you go to a library are you sickened at all the options? No, you enjoy the variety and pick and choose what you want. With D&D, adopt a similar mindset, take what you need, and don't be pressured to buy it purely on popular opinion.
Andrew_980 06-17-05, 01:13 PM	When you go to a library are you sickened at all the options? No, you enjoy the variety and pick and choose what you want. With D&D, adopt a similar mindset, take what you need, and don't be pressured to buy it purely on popular opinion. If you are in school and told to do a book report on Charlimain, you may get sick of the variety if your partner keeps grabbing books on samurai, and trying to add them in because they are cooler
Sulaco 06-17-05, 01:23 PM	If you are in school and told to do a book report on Charlimain, you may get sick of the variety if your partner keeps grabbing books on samurai, and trying to add them in because they are cooler Which points out the real fundamental problem. It is not the library that is at fault for having options but rather the partner for being a tosser. Likewise when a game gets out of hand it is not the fault of the game itself but rather the players (and DM). There is nothing wrong with D&D, there is something wrong with a lot of D&D players.
Flushmaster 06-17-05, 05:04 PM	Which points out the real fundamental problem. It is not the library that is at fault for having options but rather the partner for being a tosser. Likewise when a game gets out of hand it is not the fault of the game itself but rather the players (and DM). There is nothing wrong with D&D, there is something wrong with a lot of D&D players. Extremely well said. I agree fully.
Darien_CR 06-17-05, 06:30 PM	While it's true you can play only with the Core. It will eventually happen something similar to what happened with MTG, people won't like to play with a DM that tells them "No dude...only the core rule books". So that would be the "standard" type of D&D gaming. Old-style "type 1" core gaming would be less popular and hard-to-find players.
Caterane 06-17-05, 07:36 PM	I too prefer Core only. The conjurer in our group (with evocation and transmutation as prohibited schools) is the best evoker ever with his "Orbs of Acid/Cold/Etc", Lightning Arcs, and whatnot (there's an evocation substitute spell everywhere in non-core), the frenzy berserker deals more than 100 damage a round :bored: and can't really die by wounds, and a lot of other things. But when our lvl 7 cleric erradicated a big orc tribe (which I had DM'd and planned that the PCs have to infiltrate it) with some "sudden" earth reavers, we decided not to use non-core anymore, or severly restrict it. IMO, non-core allows you to create characters that are completely unrealistic and not really part of the world anymore. I still like some of the things that are printed in there but it must be used to add flavor and not for firepower's sake only. PS: Still, the Gate spell needs to be banned :P
SinisterSeraph 06-17-05, 08:38 PM	Prestige Classes are to third waht Kits were to second. They can be an excellent tool for GOOD DM's. You can't rely on WotC to run a game for you, you need to look at each offering and take what works. If you see something that you think is broken, then drop it from your game. I swear, the first thing printed in any role-playing product should always be Rule 0. That rule can't be reiterated enough, "Everything is optional. EVERYTHING"
Ranger REG 06-19-05, 05:18 AM	There is nothing wrong with D&D, there is something wrong with a lot of D&D players. Now that's a good sig. :cool:
Nomad4life 06-19-05, 08:15 AM	Due to repeated bad experiences with pretty much all non-core material (or maybe just players who were into non-core material) we’ve pretty much limited ourselves to only using the core books to game with. “Limit” doesn’t seem like a good word choice here- it’s more like we simply just don’t “need” anything else to come up with top-notch characters and stories. This all changed when U.A. came out- there were just too many good ideas in there to pass up. This is the only non-core book we ever bought. Of course, now that True20 has been released as a separate system of mechanics, we’ll probably be giving our D&D game a complete hybrid overhaul (since True20 single-handedly fixes 100% of the problems we’ve had with D&D over the years.) It will be interesting to see how or if this change will affect our “purist” ways in regards to outside material; As potentially deadly as combat is within a HP-less system, even the worst twinkmunched class/race would have to think hard about putting themselves in danger at ANY level- and thus our “distrust” of them may be lessened considerably.
Kursk 06-19-05, 01:12 PM	*pant* WOW! Okay, I'm calm now, and I can now explain my pent-up frustration. Now, this may come as a shock to you all, but I have discovered something while reading through my new Heroes of Battle book. Dungeons & Dragons is boring. Yup, that's right. Now, don't get me wrong, I LOVE this game. Completely and absolutely! So much that I've dedicated hundreds of dollars into purchasing these wonderul little packages of murdered trees smothered in ink. With that in mind, let me rephrase that: Non-core Dungeons & Dragons is boring. Prestige classes, feats, and spells, oh my! OH. MY. GOD!!! TOO MANY! The amount is staggering. My stomach churns! Where are the archetypes thatgive the game structure and root it in medieval fantasy? I just want to let out a terrible barbarian rage. But wait, why don't I pick up a few levels of Frenzied Berserker and frenzy instead? As an added bonus, I can't die! Wait, at the same time, I'll multiclass into Sorceror, and cast a fireball at you. No, I'll be a Warmage instead. I just want to throw a rock at someone, but I guess I'll be a hulking hurler and deal massive amounts of damage as a bonus. WHY? It is no longer the ultimate fantasy role-playing game EWER! It is now a bland mish-mash of everything from every book ever produced! But, wait... I know what's coming up next: "The DM decides what goes in." Well, WotC isn't exactly helping, are they? With every prestige class coming out having weaker character concepts, more power creep, and no tie into the game setting, tthey are encouraging extreme plug-and-play, which is pretty much the opposite of what PrCs are supposed to do! Mishymashyblandyblechletsallgobacktocore SCREAM! (Sorry) Stick to Core. Most of the other stuff published isn't worth it. If players can't use imagination then they get thrown out so they can play video/computer games. (which what they really want anyway)
necrosnoop110 06-19-05, 01:22 PM	*pant* Dungeons & Dragons is boring. Yup, that's right. Now, don't get me wrong, I LOVE this game. that: Non-core Dungeons & Dragons is boring. Prestige classes, feats, and spells, oh my! OH. MY. GOD!!! TOO MANY! The amount is staggering. My stomach churns! Where are the archetypes thatgive the game structure and root it in medieval fantasy? WHY? It is no longer the ultimate fantasy role-playing game EWER! It is now a bland mish-mash of everything from every book ever produced! You say: D&D is boring AND you say you LOVE the game. D&D is boring BECAUSE it has too many options. D&D is not the ULTIMATE game anymore because it is inclusive and adaptable. I say: None of that makes any sense to me. Why would flexibility, inclusion, adaptability, and options bring the game down, least of all make it a boring system? No insult my man but your claims don’t match the evidence as far as I can tell. Care to try again? Peace, Necro