Are books slowly injecting more power? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Are books slowly injecting more power? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Romtos
01-13-07, 05:39 PM This is a reaction on a post from another topic.

Is it true that every book WotC releases is slightly more powerful than the last? Of course, this'll not be as constant as suggested, but more the general line. (A book at beginning 2007 is more powerful than one at the beginning of 2006, e.G.) Important: I'm talking about the books 'an sich', not the possibly combinations with earlier published material. (One book is not powerful because it was the final piece to Pun-Pun. It can be powerful though because it enhances the options for Psionics.) I'm really pointing at the power of the book itself, is this rising with every book WotC releases?
Kadasbrass
01-13-07, 05:55 PM Well for one thing, what was considered balanced in the past has changed. With each book increasing the opitions for spellcasters, books have increased in power for 2 reasons. First) Spellcasters are becoming more powerful with more opitions to choose from. Second) non-spellcasters need to increase in power in order to not fall too far behind.

So yes, books have increased in power over time.
Board_Rider
01-13-07, 06:16 PM I do not think the actual power has been grown...the players just have more options.
Olskool
01-13-07, 06:57 PM I'm really pointing at the power of the book itself, is this rising with every book WotC releases?

If you're a player, the answer is no.
If you're a DM, the answer is yes.
TheRealOrion
01-13-07, 10:03 PM I think the power level of the various editions has almost undoubtedly go up. I've heard people refer to "dead levels" where a class doesn't get anything other than HPs and Save Enhancements. That's what we used to call "levelling up." The very idea of granted class features for every class is entirely new to 3rd Ed. I'm not saying it's bad, but it's definitely more powerful than 2nd and 1st.

For example, it's been made an official rule that you get full HPs at first level. Why? Because otherwise your starting HPs are really low, totally out of proportion with how much damage a character of that level can cause. The second you can do more damage than you have, winning fights is just a matter of waiting for the first strike.

3rd Ed. was a huge power upgrade from 2nd, and it followed the general model of WotC's publishing of Magic cards, which veritably required that you buy the new, slightly more powerful packs in order to hold your own against other players. I do think, though, that v3.5 addressed a lot of these problems. Though it's still a lot more powerful, the focus is on balance, on keeping classes from being "front loaded" (e.g., the Ranger), etc. Disparities between fighting and magic-based characters aside, the balance has been done well, and I'll accept a creeping power-level if that's maintained.

Aside from that little rant, the point has already been made that expansion books create unhealthy power upgrades only if your DM fails to maintain some control over what's allowed and what isn't. The mentality that "it's published therefore I can use it" is very destructive. Anything not in the PHB requires special permission, and any player who whines should just grow the heck up.
High Octane
01-13-07, 10:12 PM I do not think the actual power has been grown...the players just have more options.

By definition, that is more power.
Seeker95
01-13-07, 10:29 PM If power is the sum total of what you can accomplish, then yes. Each supplement brings more options. Further, the supplements are balanced against Core only. So the options any given supplement brings are not developed in relation to the options other supplements have brought. This allows for unforeseen power advancement as well.
Vestigial_Thumb
01-13-07, 10:32 PM By definition, that is more power.
Not really, because to gain that power you have to give something up. You can just give away something else to gain something else now.

It's power in a different direction.
Board_Rider
01-13-07, 10:44 PM Not really, because to gain that power you have to give something up. You can just give away something else to gain something else now.

It's power in a different direction.
Thats what I was going to reply. With every supplement there are more things for players to get their hands on. For everything they get, they leave behind something else.

The core rules, as Seeker noted, are the baseline. The players create the the so called power...not the books themselves.
ZombieDragon
01-13-07, 10:45 PM The way I see it, the books are injecting more spelling errors, typos, and disregard for previous rulings. It's just hastily produced, non play tested dribble. That said my dad will still buy the crap to add to his vast library.
IrishRover
01-14-07, 12:05 AM Some newer feats add significantly more power, as do some class combo's.
For example, Steadfast Determination lets you use your con bunus instead of wisdom bonus for will saves. For many martial characters, this is a huge bonus--and even better, it lets you use wisdom as a massive dump stat.
Witch
01-14-07, 07:37 AM The subject isn't about combinations. It's about individual power - so not about options.

I say: it depends book per book. Tome of Magic did not increase power. Likely, neither did Incarnum. On the other hand, Tome of Battle did.
Escef
01-14-07, 08:37 AM 3rd Ed. was a huge power upgrade from 2nd, and it followed the general model of WotC's publishing of Magic cards, which veritably required that you buy the new, slightly more powerful packs in order to hold your own against other players.

Actually, many of Magic's older, most powerful cards are restricted (one per deck) or banned in even the most forgiving of sanctioned play envirements. So, it isn't the newer cards that are more powerful, it's often the older ones (printed before they had a better grasp of what was balanced and what isn't). Further, overall powerlevels fluctuate (sometimes wildly) from set to set (compare Mirrodin to Kamigawa). In casual play, old cards are just as viable as new cards; there is no requirement to buy anything new.

In D&D, there is never a requirement to buy new supplements. If you want it, fine; but if you don't there is no need to. Although there is some power-creep in 3.5 supplements, try comparing this to 2e splatbooks. Which reminds me, I prefer PrC to 2e kits, because you work your way up to a PrC, whereas most kits were hideously frontloaded.
Derren S.
01-14-07, 08:39 AM Is it true that every book WotC releases is slightly more powerful than the last?

Yes it is. Even when you leave out the mandatory 1-2 spells/feats in each book which are obviously broken and slipped past any proof reading (We all know WotC does not test) the material does get more powerfull, partially intentional to restore "balance" by upping some classes, partially because each supplement stands for itself and partially out of mistakes.
Issabella
01-14-07, 09:13 AM each book has more options, options that have not been completly play tested out with other existing material or even stuff that is not that well though out (planar sheperd any one?) or that no one thought the math through completly (hulking hurler). These new options mingle with old. Attentive players create combinations that multiply the effects, stacking them up into the over powered category.

Short answer not really, long answer over all yes. But growth is good, change is good, a DM just need a firm hand going. "No sorry, yes its by RAW, but I am not allowing your caimpaign breaker combo from the CO boards in this game regardless of how well you role play it to justify". Playing on god mode is not fun in video games, and less fun in D&D
draco1119
01-14-07, 09:29 AM Although there is some power-creep in 3.5 supplements, try comparing this to 2e splatbooks. Which reminds me, I prefer PrC to 2e kits, because you work your way up to a PrC, whereas most kits were hideously frontloaded.
QFT.

I managed to kill a basilisk with a 1st level Bladesinger.
Bob Loblaw
01-14-07, 10:21 AM There are some things that are obviously more powerful. Arcane Heirophant is more powerful than Mystic Theurge. There are many new feats that allow multiclassing to be a more viable option. They allow you to continue progessing in some class abilities by adding both class levels to the determine the appropriate progression.

However, I am not convinced that these are bad increases in power. In some of those cases, it allows multiclass characters to be viable. This is at the cost of one or more feats.

I am reluctant to say that these are good additions. While I enjoy the combinations, there is nothing to enhance some classes. The fighter is left out in the cold. He only has feats as his class feature so he has very little to benefit from these. Every combination that is allowed only pushes him further back.

Basically, I do feel that there is a little power creep. In some cases it's good and restores balance to weak classes. In other cases, it may cause problems and makes you wonder.
Demarest
01-14-07, 10:29 AM You know how some people say that wealth is power? Well, with the the wealth of options now available to players and DMs alike, the game is more powerful in general. At least, that's my take on it.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Romtos 01-13-07, 05:39 PM	This is a reaction on a post from another topic. Is it true that every book WotC releases is slightly more powerful than the last? Of course, this'll not be as constant as suggested, but more the general line. (A book at beginning 2007 is more powerful than one at the beginning of 2006, e.G.) Important: I'm talking about the books 'an sich', not the possibly combinations with earlier published material. (One book is not powerful because it was the final piece to Pun-Pun. It can be powerful though because it enhances the options for Psionics.) I'm really pointing at the power of the book itself, is this rising with every book WotC releases?
Kadasbrass 01-13-07, 05:55 PM	Well for one thing, what was considered balanced in the past has changed. With each book increasing the opitions for spellcasters, books have increased in power for 2 reasons. First) Spellcasters are becoming more powerful with more opitions to choose from. Second) non-spellcasters need to increase in power in order to not fall too far behind. So yes, books have increased in power over time.
Board_Rider 01-13-07, 06:16 PM	I do not think the actual power has been grown...the players just have more options.
Olskool 01-13-07, 06:57 PM	I'm really pointing at the power of the book itself, is this rising with every book WotC releases? If you're a player, the answer is no. If you're a DM, the answer is yes.
TheRealOrion 01-13-07, 10:03 PM	I think the power level of the various editions has almost undoubtedly go up. I've heard people refer to "dead levels" where a class doesn't get anything other than HPs and Save Enhancements. That's what we used to call "levelling up." The very idea of granted class features for every class is entirely new to 3rd Ed. I'm not saying it's bad, but it's definitely more powerful than 2nd and 1st. For example, it's been made an official rule that you get full HPs at first level. Why? Because otherwise your starting HPs are really low, totally out of proportion with how much damage a character of that level can cause. The second you can do more damage than you have, winning fights is just a matter of waiting for the first strike. 3rd Ed. was a huge power upgrade from 2nd, and it followed the general model of WotC's publishing of Magic cards, which veritably required that you buy the new, slightly more powerful packs in order to hold your own against other players. I do think, though, that v3.5 addressed a lot of these problems. Though it's still a lot more powerful, the focus is on balance, on keeping classes from being "front loaded" (e.g., the Ranger), etc. Disparities between fighting and magic-based characters aside, the balance has been done well, and I'll accept a creeping power-level if that's maintained. Aside from that little rant, the point has already been made that expansion books create unhealthy power upgrades only if your DM fails to maintain some control over what's allowed and what isn't. The mentality that "it's published therefore I can use it" is very destructive. Anything not in the PHB requires special permission, and any player who whines should just grow the heck up.
High Octane 01-13-07, 10:12 PM	I do not think the actual power has been grown...the players just have more options. By definition, that is more power.
Seeker95 01-13-07, 10:29 PM	If power is the sum total of what you can accomplish, then yes. Each supplement brings more options. Further, the supplements are balanced against Core only. So the options any given supplement brings are not developed in relation to the options other supplements have brought. This allows for unforeseen power advancement as well.
Vestigial_Thumb 01-13-07, 10:32 PM	By definition, that is more power. Not really, because to gain that power you have to give something up. You can just give away something else to gain something else now. It's power in a different direction.
Board_Rider 01-13-07, 10:44 PM	Not really, because to gain that power you have to give something up. You can just give away something else to gain something else now. It's power in a different direction. Thats what I was going to reply. With every supplement there are more things for players to get their hands on. For everything they get, they leave behind something else. The core rules, as Seeker noted, are the baseline. The players create the the so called power...not the books themselves.
ZombieDragon 01-13-07, 10:45 PM	The way I see it, the books are injecting more spelling errors, typos, and disregard for previous rulings. It's just hastily produced, non play tested dribble. That said my dad will still buy the crap to add to his vast library.
IrishRover 01-14-07, 12:05 AM	Some newer feats add significantly more power, as do some class combo's. For example, Steadfast Determination lets you use your con bunus instead of wisdom bonus for will saves. For many martial characters, this is a huge bonus--and even better, it lets you use wisdom as a massive dump stat.
Witch 01-14-07, 07:37 AM	The subject isn't about combinations. It's about individual power - so not about options. I say: it depends book per book. Tome of Magic did not increase power. Likely, neither did Incarnum. On the other hand, Tome of Battle did.
Escef 01-14-07, 08:37 AM	3rd Ed. was a huge power upgrade from 2nd, and it followed the general model of WotC's publishing of Magic cards, which veritably required that you buy the new, slightly more powerful packs in order to hold your own against other players. Actually, many of Magic's older, most powerful cards are restricted (one per deck) or banned in even the most forgiving of sanctioned play envirements. So, it isn't the newer cards that are more powerful, it's often the older ones (printed before they had a better grasp of what was balanced and what isn't). Further, overall powerlevels fluctuate (sometimes wildly) from set to set (compare Mirrodin to Kamigawa). In casual play, old cards are just as viable as new cards; there is no requirement to buy anything new. In D&D, there is never a requirement to buy new supplements. If you want it, fine; but if you don't there is no need to. Although there is some power-creep in 3.5 supplements, try comparing this to 2e splatbooks. Which reminds me, I prefer PrC to 2e kits, because you work your way up to a PrC, whereas most kits were hideously frontloaded.
Derren S. 01-14-07, 08:39 AM	Is it true that every book WotC releases is slightly more powerful than the last? Yes it is. Even when you leave out the mandatory 1-2 spells/feats in each book which are obviously broken and slipped past any proof reading (We all know WotC does not test) the material does get more powerfull, partially intentional to restore "balance" by upping some classes, partially because each supplement stands for itself and partially out of mistakes.
Issabella 01-14-07, 09:13 AM	each book has more options, options that have not been completly play tested out with other existing material or even stuff that is not that well though out (planar sheperd any one?) or that no one thought the math through completly (hulking hurler). These new options mingle with old. Attentive players create combinations that multiply the effects, stacking them up into the over powered category. Short answer not really, long answer over all yes. But growth is good, change is good, a DM just need a firm hand going. "No sorry, yes its by RAW, but I am not allowing your caimpaign breaker combo from the CO boards in this game regardless of how well you role play it to justify". Playing on god mode is not fun in video games, and less fun in D&D
draco1119 01-14-07, 09:29 AM	Although there is some power-creep in 3.5 supplements, try comparing this to 2e splatbooks. Which reminds me, I prefer PrC to 2e kits, because you work your way up to a PrC, whereas most kits were hideously frontloaded. QFT. I managed to kill a basilisk with a 1st level Bladesinger.
Bob Loblaw 01-14-07, 10:21 AM	There are some things that are obviously more powerful. Arcane Heirophant is more powerful than Mystic Theurge. There are many new feats that allow multiclassing to be a more viable option. They allow you to continue progessing in some class abilities by adding both class levels to the determine the appropriate progression. However, I am not convinced that these are bad increases in power. In some of those cases, it allows multiclass characters to be viable. This is at the cost of one or more feats. I am reluctant to say that these are good additions. While I enjoy the combinations, there is nothing to enhance some classes. The fighter is left out in the cold. He only has feats as his class feature so he has very little to benefit from these. Every combination that is allowed only pushes him further back. Basically, I do feel that there is a little power creep. In some cases it's good and restores balance to weak classes. In other cases, it may cause problems and makes you wonder.
Demarest 01-14-07, 10:29 AM	You know how some people say that wealth is power? Well, with the the wealth of options now available to players and DMs alike, the game is more powerful in general. At least, that's my take on it.