Post/Author/DateTime	Post
zalgarde 10-04-07, 01:09 PM	We have a pretty big and fairly consistant gaming group with occaisional new comers, and long time players leaving. Things run pretty comfortably, but theres been a fair amount of behind the scene's friction around materials. Basically some of our members buy a lot of dnd books, some of them do not.. and one guy buys EVERY one. In theory this shouldn't be a problem, dm's can use the books they own for their campaigns and familiarize themselves with whatever classes and feats players want to take. But in practice it just doesn't seem to be going that well these days. It started out fine, a new campaign would start, the question of allowed books was raised, and the DM went with the obvious solution "You can use any wizards book, and a few 3rd party books I like and that we've seen in previous campaigns, but all subject to approval" Stuff slips past here and there, but by and large not a problem... things went downhill around the time we migrated to 3.5.. partly because some people adapted to and understood the new rules faster than others, and partly because there were a whole slew new books that were suddenly allowed once dm's stopped saying "3.0 only" anyway a couple campaigns spiraled into disaster, as more exploits slipped past dm's simply because they weren't familiar enough with 3.5 to see them as such... so we switched off to d20 modern for a while, and we messed around a little with 3.5 on the side. So then we pick DnD back up, and I run something, and I hunker way down on whats allowed just to save myself the trouble of sorting through all the new stuff, and letting people get used to the basics. Its a good time and goes well, but obviously the people that'd spent a few hundred dollars on books were excited to use them. So another campaign started when I took a break, and went back to the "wizards + approval" style that we usually run. And thats when things just didn't go as well. Basically, as near as I can tell, theres stuff in a lot of the new books thats just plain better than what you get in a core book, not more versatile, or more focused, or tailored to a style of play, just number crunching damage dealing better. And the problem is, I guess for obvious reasons, thats what the players want to use. Why play a half orc when you can play those big guys out of races of stone, who wants to take superior weapon focus when they can take weapon mastery .. I mean it even sounds cooler; there were new combat spells, and plenty of magic items like that too. We switched locations to play almost exlusively at the friends house with all the books, so at least then the players could copy spells and take feats, and not have to fight with someone for a book, but even so, the dm had to start disallowing stuff, because it was just too cool compaired to phb characters. And if it was something that really annoyed him he'd just drop the whole book; *POOF* no more "Book of 9 Swords". This had an effect on the players that weren't just using core books. and then to keep things in balance the dm started disallowing stuff that might've been ok, except it was going to characters that were already "too cool". anyway, its a smaller group now, and we're looking at starting another campaign. So what I'm looking for is a resource out there that rates stuff in books as to whats a neat addition, vs a direct upgrade over core rulebook materials, or a spell/feat/race/weapon/skilltrick that every player takes if its available and for their class? We all want players to be on a fairly level playing field, but at the same time the side books can add a lot of options without overpowering characters, and players shouldn't have to buy books only to let them collect dust. Some unified and relatively accepted source would mean it wasn't different standards for every dm too.. nothings worse than imagining the character you're going to play, and then discovering that the next dm running is in a ban books mood, because of previous troubles. I don't really want to hear the, "buy more books solution" or the "pirate your friends books" solutions either... I'd rather find a situation that lets us all have fun and use/buy the books we feel like.
Board_Rider 10-04-07, 09:11 PM	The short answer is that there is no resource that effectively gauges power creep of each supplement. It's all subjective. Typically I allow everything. Why? Because I think game balance is a joke, my players like using the stuff they buy and everything they can do I can do better. What you need to do is simply talk it out. Find out what works for the DM and the players. Have a pure character generation session so that PC generation can be discussed and noone feels left behind. Oh...your post was well written.
AAB 10-05-07, 03:21 AM	A lot of the recent stuff that was put out by WotC really is better than core stuff. And that is because they've been using the last year or so of splats to do a little "background revision". If warrior-types were underpowered (they still are), they put out newer, better feats for them. New classes, too, in the Bo9S, to get away from "I charge and attack" and "I full-attack" being the only phrases a fighter is allowed to use. I really disliked some of the stuff that came out, thinking it would break the game. I found out, however, that as long as all players have the same options (if it matters; the wizards isn't going to care if the fighter gets to use Complete Warrior) it won't destabilize balance. I say to let your players use any books they'd like, but also agree with the "character creation session" idea posted above. Bring all the books that everyone has, put them in a pile, and say "build your character".
Redclock_the_Untimely 10-05-07, 03:41 AM	Board Rider is right, its entirely subjective and you need to talk it out with your group. My recommendations for limiting book selection would be to only allow one variant rules system into the campaign (Tome of Battle, Magic of Incarnum, Psionics, etc.), restrict PC races to PHB + campaign setting + variant system and only use the Wizards books. As has been said many times on the boards, a PHB only Druid is more powerful than almost any splatbook selection. Power creep in my experience only tends to become exaggerated when players have different play styles or vast differences in experience. Good luck with the new campaign.
ryandfisher 10-05-07, 08:17 AM	If you're dealing with casters using spells out of other books, I would check it against the Spell Compendium and use that version. I know in one of my games, I was using a spell out of Complete Divine that severely limited our combatants in fighting (also dazed a couple of my teammates, but oh well, whatever gets the job done). When we looked the same spell up in the Compendium, it was moved to a higher level and some of the effects were removed.
Kamin_Majere 10-05-07, 08:38 AM	Typically I allow everything. Why? Because I think game balance is a joke, my players like using the stuff they buy and everything they can do I can do better. And theres the simple truth. I allow everything simply because no matter what the players can come up with I, as DM, have infinite resources to come up with something better. There are always things that have to be spoken about between players and DM's thats just the way the rules work. SOmetimes you have to allow things because players are creative and want to do something, but sometimes you put your foot down and tell them no. No you cant use pun pun, i dont care if you actually played as a druid until 14th level and "then" started to rule the univers. or No you can use snowcasting and locate city (with a few more metamagics) to destroy everything with in 160 miles of you. But for the most part as long as the players are having fun and your able* to keep up with the power curve then its all perfectly fine. *I understand some people arent as good as others with optimizing and it becomes actual work to run adventures, at that point talk to your players and have them tone down for you. Its a cooprative game and if both sides arent playing to help each other than whats the point.
Habronicus 10-05-07, 12:58 PM	So what I'm looking for is a resource out there that rates stuff in books <SNIP> It sounds like you're looking for a sort of "reviews" site? Well, having been a Videogame reviewer myself (close enough, I suppose), I feel entitled to what I'm about to say. Most reviewers (regardless of what they're reviewing) are usually people who love the subject they review, but lack the talent (and/or the will) to make it in that business - so, they tend to analyse and criticize other people's work, in relation to what they think that work should be. That said, I personally don't care about reviews, regardless of the subject - all I want is a proper description of what's in the product, and I'll then make up my mind about wether that's for me or not. Some quality reviewers take this into consideration, but that's a huge minority. You'll see a lot of elitistic bastards, especially in the movie and book industry - videogaming too, although these are more of the "ignorant bastard trying to look hardcore" kind. Bottom-line is, IMO, it's best if the GM sets the boundaries of what's acceptable in the game he's about to master, be clear about that before the campaign/adventure starts, and let everyone decide if they're ok with that. If not, that's too bad, but it's best if people agree to disagree and, the fact is, the GM will always do a better job if he's playing with the tools he's confortable with, hence, everyone else benefits from that. If you do it the other way, catering to the players, but being unconfortable in what you got to handle, some may get some pleasure out of it, but I pretty much doubt they'll be all happy. I know it's not the answer you were looking for, but my past experiences make me feel uneasy when it comes to third-party reviews, even if they are made by so-called "professionals" :)
Puca 10-05-07, 02:56 PM	So what I'm looking for is a resource out there that rates stuff in books as to whats a neat addition, vs a direct upgrade over core rulebook materials, or a spell/feat/race/weapon/skilltrick that every player takes if its available and for their class? We all want players to be on a fairly level playing field, but at the same time the side books can add a lot of options without overpowering characters, and players shouldn't have to buy books only to let them collect dust. Some unified and relatively accepted source would mean it wasn't different standards for every dm too.. nothings worse than imagining the character you're going to play, and then discovering that the next dm running is in a ban books mood, because of previous troubles.Dude, your situation totally sucks. It even seems like most people are being mature about it all, and it still isnt working. In my experience, immaturity/being a dick is the most common cause of some of these problems. But that just doesnt seem to be the case with you guys. As for a compiled ratings-list, I dont think there is one. Even if there was, like others have said, it would be worthless unless you happened to all have the exact same perspective and views as the guy who made it. Ill tell you what I would do. I wouldnt look at “sources” per se. I would look at rules. Like the feat Concussion Attack from Complete Scoundrel. It takes me access to the book and about ten seconds to understand the way this works. Ill forget in 20 seconds, but little note on the character sheet or DM notes (e.g. trade 2d6 for –2 to wis&Int ck 10 rnds.) and Ill know exactly what it does. Because I know what feats are, how they work, and have experience with similar feats that trade SA for cool effects. But whole new rules, like skill tricks, not only am I not going to understand how they work as quickly, I wont remember as well. I certainly am not going to be able to teach everyone at the table the rules for skill tricks. So, I allow Complete Scoundrel for feats, everyone playing knows feats and how they work. But dont add any optional new rules like skill tricks because the only ones who will really use them are the guys who own CS. Did that make any sense?
zalgarde 10-07-07, 03:19 AM	Thanks for the responses. It really is true that a lot of imbalance springs from unexpected loopholes or some weird synergy between a couple of books, so I guess its not surprising there isn't really a resource out there that can describe the effects of any given book, or even parts of any given book on a campaign. Heck I suppose rolling methods even matter, we've noticed some classes/feats work better or worse depending on what kind of stats players have to work with anyway. one player who'd been sitting out a lot, got back into it this week, because a few of us would skim around for cool stuff for his character during the chance to level, building on that "get together and make a character" idea so he "caught up" in terms of what his character was contributing, vs the other one with a similar role... it incidentally helped him flesh out what he was about RPwise a little more too. The "allow everything" has been real hit or miss with our group... it tends to make for some heavy handed DMing, which for some reason our group can't stand. Its not like they mind if rolls are fudged by the DM, its just they can't have the slightest clue about it in the session it happens. Asking the players involved and only allowing a couple of optional rulesets or corebooks sounded like a good idea, and should allow people to play what they want to, so I'm definitely going to suggest that, or maybe just volunteer to run it on my own. Edit: the spell compendium tip helped a lot.. people found a couple fun new spells tonight looking through it, and there are definitely versions of spells we'd thought we'd seen before, but with more reasonable rules. definitely seems like it could be a decent mainstay for casters, but I don't own it so I can't look it over thoroughly till next week.
Naderion 10-07-07, 06:36 AM	We play a game very heavy in social interaction and only one of the five players owns any books, so it's not a problem at all to have the policy of "only the PHB is allowed" in our campaign. I gave the player, who plays a wizard, my Spell Compendium and told him if there is any spell he likes, we could look at it and see if it is appropiate for the setting and if we nead to adjust it in power to be compareable with PHB spells. Same goes for feats. Everything can be implemented as long as it is in a way that fits into our game. For example we don't use a grid, so some combat feats would be problematic.