Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Whisper_Swiftblade 08-02-06, 11:02 AM	I will start with the clearest one (to me at least) 1) Pun-pun!!
TeediousPrime 08-02-06, 11:44 AM	2) Portable holes 3) Any familiar larger than it's master's head 4) Sex in any way, shape, or form
sanities_eclipse 08-02-06, 11:52 AM	I am going to get yelled at this I am sure (especially since I get yelled at often everywhere else for it) but I absolutely refuse to allow 5) psionics into my games because they are a pain, another magic type to factor in, and they always seem alot more powerful then the other classes. I've had many people (sometimes full groups) of metagamers wanting to play psionics in my campaigns, but I refuse and they whine about it. The fact that it is always the power hungry players who want to play psionics only hardens my resolve.
GingerbreadMan 08-02-06, 11:54 AM	6.) Pokemon
crowclub 08-02-06, 11:54 AM	7) Greenbound Summoning 8) VoP
Cthulhu-LQ 08-02-06, 11:56 AM	4) Sex in any way, shape, or form Do you mean at the table or in game?
Moniker 08-02-06, 12:02 PM	9) Double-bladed axes, swordschucks and the slew of other stupid race-themed weapons
silvergamgee 08-02-06, 12:02 PM	Do you mean at the table or in game? I would presume both. A barbarian who played at my table got an STD once. It was hilarious watching him try to get the paladin to cast remove disease on him after a wild night at a brothel. 10. Templates when you start at level 1.
ZenZ 08-02-06, 12:04 PM	Vorpal Swords. Hey I like them it just can flush a nice encounter. The evil dark lord starts his speech and the Power Gamer smacks off his head with Vorpal and a lucky role before he lets the PCs in on a new story line thread.
Majick 08-02-06, 12:04 PM	I hope to god he means in the game, otherwise i might just lose faith in humanity :(
metamind 08-02-06, 12:05 PM	10: "True/Tolkienesque" elves
On_the_wings_of_TPK 08-02-06, 12:12 PM	11) Grafts of any kind. They are complete cheese, especially the druidic ebberon ones. 12) Templates...(NPC only) 13) Other campaign specific stuff, EX: Incantatrix in an ebberon game.
Nived 08-02-06, 12:32 PM	Ok I think the correct numbering would be 14) Drow PCs. Just wont, won't do it Chuck. 15) Book of Erotic Fantasy... I really REALLY don't want to know about my friend's deviences. 16) Ninja Class. Because a rogue wearing black SHOULD have been enough.
Mystyc 08-02-06, 12:35 PM	17: Divine Metamagic. 18: Ignorant fools.
Kimokeo 08-02-06, 12:36 PM	19. 40th level Wizard/Maids This joke is going to continue for a long while, I think.
thaylok 08-02-06, 12:55 PM	> No more than 1 Warlock per campaign (or most other non PHB classes) > Flaws, Not gonna happen in my hack-n-slash-loving group > No LA races. (Please note the PERIOD) > Requests by Players to substitute Class abilities/features (usually requests are by the Lollipop Guildmaster) > Dragon Cohorts/familiars/companions/pets/PC's or henchmen
Moniker 08-02-06, 01:13 PM	20 Katanas 21 Asian martial arts 22 Ninjas 23 Elven PCs
necrom99 08-02-06, 01:21 PM	5) psionics into my games because they are a pain, another magic type to factor in, and they always seem alot more powerful then the other classes. I've had many people (sometimes full groups) of metagamers wanting to play psionics in my campaigns, but I refuse and they whine about it. The fact that it is always the power hungry players who want to play psionics only hardens my resolve. 24) Psionics....for same reasons 25) more than one non-PHB race/template per party 26) unexplained class transitions......fighter to barbarian for example
ressurrector 08-02-06, 02:53 PM	27) Anything that a given player understands much better than I do (Unless I trust that player to tone it down as necessary) 28) Any PrC with a stupid theme that does not fit the campaign (regardless of how Uber it is) (Ithillid slayer is one, various Dragon based PrCs, etc...) 29) (for more than a few sessions) Any player who refuses to roleplay, at all.
metamind 08-02-06, 02:58 PM	30: Players who can't make thier own characters. 31: Veteran players who play like its thier first time.
GDarius 08-02-06, 03:13 PM	32. Runecasters. If I read the class correctly, once it hits level 8 there is no way to balance it other than "Let's start a new game. This time, no Runecasters." 33. 3rd party material. I have a hard enough time just keeping up with Wizards stuff. I am not tripling that by allowing things not officially sanctioned. 34. Metamagic Item infusion. I did it once. I'm not doing it again *shudder*. As a note, I always allow XPH in my games, and have yet to suffer for it. I have trouble believeing that it's unbalanced as long as the DM knows how to use it. Complete Psionic may or may not change that, but I don't allow most of it anyway. Amen on the "Players who can't make their own characters" clause.
Nived 08-02-06, 03:22 PM	The problem with psionics is simple, players bringing it on DMs who know nothing about the system, and might be loaned the book for a week. 35: Mecurial anything. If there's ever been a stupid idea it's this idiotic weapon. 36: Negotiation of feat or PrC prereqs. (No you can't play a giant renegade master maker)
A_Wizard_for_Breakfast 08-02-06, 04:13 PM	36. Applications of modern physics as such. (radiation, antimatter, etc.)
trapspringer 08-02-06, 04:25 PM	37: "I close my eyes and attempt to body slam the ground. 49% on my miss chance! This halfling is airborn, baby!"
smp4life 08-02-06, 04:41 PM	Uranium swords.
thaylok 08-02-06, 05:04 PM	Uranium swords. But what if it's Depleated Uranium? :D > Non slotted magic items (even if they may be allowed in the books, you don't know my players)
Hospitaller 08-02-06, 05:14 PM	38. Rules Rapists
metamind 08-02-06, 05:18 PM	39: Rapists is general. Even if you're "just kidding".
greatamericanfolkhero 08-02-06, 06:06 PM	40. The Chameleon PrC. 41. Oriental Adventures material in a non-oriental adventures game.
olshanski_home 08-02-06, 06:09 PM	42 frenzied berzerker 43 master thrower 44 wizards-published rules for hurled objects 45 fumbles/critical fumbles 46 Deck of Many Things
UltimateReality 08-02-06, 07:26 PM	Grafts of any kind.*puts the Magic of Eberron book down and backs away slowly, inconspicuously* :shifty: As for myself.... 47. Stupid names for characters. Silly ones are okay for silly campaigns, but just plain RUDE or OFFENSIVE ones are not, regardless of the campaign's theme. 48. PvP for OOC reasons. 49. Stupid or immature players in general. This includes munchkins, emo whiners, and people who can't handle a girl playing or even running the game. 50. Cheetos, for they have a texture and taste like cardboard, and make a big mess on the paper and maps and figs. 51. Also critical fumbles. 52. Auto-fails and auto-successes. I always use the +/-10 variant. 53. Mixing systems. We can try and make something LIKE a lightsaber and a jedi in D&D, but it will be done using existing D&D rules, and no I will not invent new ones or just let you port over some Star Wars system. (Bad experience with DM mixing Warhammer, Diablo, 2nd and 3rd and 3.5 D&D, and gods know what else...) And it probably won't even look like a jedi with a lightsaber either. 54. Collegiate Wizard. And, oh yeah: 55. kender. Not even under the guise of a halfling with the flavour.
tsuyoshikentsu 08-02-06, 07:41 PM	Other campaign specific stuff, EX: Incantatrix in an ebberon game.If you can tell me how Incantatrix is tied to the Realms in ANY WAY outside of having the misfortune of being published in the FR books, I will buy a webcam and eat my hat on it. I disallow: nothing. At least, nothing that isn't on a case-by-case. Blanket bannings are stupid. And what did poor Collegiate Wizard ever do? :(
hollow_ghost 08-02-06, 09:11 PM	Its #62 now. Some havent numbered, others haven't counted and more posted at the same time. So... #62 Allowing books you have never heard about to be used. Like Dragon mags if you don't get them.
UltimateReality 08-02-06, 09:12 PM	And what did poor Collegiate Wizard ever do? :(We have fun breaking wizards in our group.
revnk 08-02-06, 09:15 PM	#63 A drow PC modelled after the hero in a series of mysteriously best-selling books... ah, Hell, there's no point in taking chances: no drow PCs, period. #64 Oh, and while I'm thinking about it: no characters with retractable metal claws. Jeez, I used to know a guy who wanted to play Wolverine in every freaking game--superhero, fantasy sci-fi, whatever; he probably would have wanted retractable claws in Call Of Cthulhu. This was, like, fifteen years ago. If he's reading this now: Hey, your characters--or character--all sucked. :) Good gaming, everyone.
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-02-06, 09:31 PM	65. Paladins 66. Any race with spell like abilities 67. Any race from a book with 'races of' in the title. 68. BoED 69. BoVD 70. Any player that doesn't understand that yes, I am banning things. 71. Persistent Spell 72. Wraithstrike 73. Natural spell.
TRCEttin 08-02-06, 09:31 PM	#63 A drow PC modelled after the hero in a series of mysteriously best-selling books... ah, Hell, there's no point in taking chances: no drow PCs, period. I once did an awesome drow paladin. ;) Anyway, some ones I've learned after playing extensively with several players: #74: No half-golems. In fact, no LA -- races. Even if you think you can work it out. #75: No liches. #76: Especially ones with only two character levels. #77: No backstories such as ones that explain a level 2 lich with "When a mommy lich and a daddy lich love each other..." #78: No "ruling" that your familiar speaks fluent Auran because it's a bird. (In fact, no acting like players can rule things.) #79: No cameos of your uber character from another campaign that became a saint/deity. #80: NO KENDER. It's a good enough rule to be worth mentioning again, imo. #81: No crossover campaigns. #82: No giant anime swords. #83: No fishing for OOC help: For example indicating that you are standing in friendly territory and being alert, you know, just in case an enemy NPC who knows the answers to your questions is nearby to capture and interrogate. You know. Just in case. #84: No calling a friend of yours who DMs and expecting him to overrule me. #85: No using campaign to "playtest" homebrew/variant classes/PrCs. #86: No Kings of Smack with uranium claws and a maid outfit, advanced to level 40 and in love with your PC. #87: No affiliating your character with the emperor of a continent.
Moon-Lancer 08-02-06, 09:42 PM	20 Katanas 21 Asian martial arts 22 Ninjas 23 Elven PCs what? no Elven PC's? how big is that stick thats up your butt? 88: No cool PC's.... how else is that dmpc going to wow the party... 89: No humans... makes the game too dull... :evillaugh
trapspringer 08-02-06, 09:48 PM	Because there is an elf for everything. I wanna' be the best fighter I can be, so I'll play a wood elf. I wanna' be the best caster, I'll play a grey elf. I wanna' be the best rogue, I'll play a wild elf (also great for archers and clerics). And they only have to sleep for four hours, can't be insta-gibbed through the first four levels by the uber-spell sleep, and get bonus to three of about six skills that you use, regardless of your class role, for your entire adventuring career. But hey, I don't want to hijack this thread, I just hate to see someone's valid opinion get trashed without responding with some kind of positive feedback.
TRCEttin 08-02-06, 09:51 PM	I wanna be an elf elf! It's like an elf, only elfier. And by elf elf I mean leshay.
thaylok 08-02-06, 10:01 PM	1234567890) Rules lawyers (besides me) ;) :) :) Now that the joking portion is done, on to the next post, which is not numbered because I don't care what number, as long as it is in the list :cool: > Rules Lawyers (besides me!... the DM is the final rules lawyer/judge/jury and hangman in my case) > Spouses who don't play, yet break up good parties during a climatic battle > Thief-Rogues, or any Evil tainted PC for that reason, we are HEROS, not crooks!!!! Hero's save the day, not steal it. (although Special Forces-rogues are encourraged) > Awesome FR material in a Greyhawk campaign > Allowing players to use any of the MM's, FF or any other book of bad guys during play. > Allowing players access to the DMG during play
Tillie_the_Pirate 08-02-06, 11:24 PM	97. NO ELHB ON LEVEL 1 CHARACTERS. It is not too much to ask.
KurenaiYami 08-02-06, 11:36 PM	Uranium swords. Curses, beat me to it.
sneak_Blast 08-03-06, 12:41 AM	66. Any race with spell like abilities Dude... no GNOMES?!?!?!? What an idiot.
wizkid 08-03-06, 12:54 AM	98. Accses to Charecter optimization boards.
Always-Late 08-03-06, 01:04 AM	99. Any homebrewed and home-balanced magic weapons. 100. Grossly overfunded PC's. 101. Anything that can destroy a Great Red Wyrm before going epic. 102. Anything with more prestige classes than half the number of character levels.
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-03-06, 01:08 AM	Dude... no GNOMES?!?!?!? What an idiot. Dude, no reading the CoC?
rjjr71 08-03-06, 02:03 AM	# next... No monks. They're an Asian-based with no basis in a Euro-based, Medieval-type setting (yes, I know it is a fantasy world). Plus no one goes out to fight the evils of the world unarmed and unarmored. The whole idea of the class is the devotion and purity that a Paladin or Cleric has, or any other character for that matter. Skulking? Leave that to the rogues. Tank? Fighters, thank you. This 'focus and discipline' of a monk can be rp'd in any character. Just doesn't fit.
FeceMan 08-03-06, 02:11 AM	I will start with the clearest one (to me at least) 1) NO Pun-pun You will never allow no Pun-Pun in your game?
Moon-Lancer 08-03-06, 02:40 AM	Because there is an elf for everything. I wanna' be the best fighter I can be, so I'll play a wood elf. I wanna' be the best caster, I'll play a grey elf. I wanna' be the best rogue, I'll play a wild elf (also great for archers and clerics). And they only have to sleep for four hours, can't be insta-gibbed through the first four levels by the uber-spell sleep, and get bonus to three of about six skills that you use, regardless of your class role, for your entire adventuring career. But hey, I don't want to hijack this thread, I just hate to see someone's valid opinion get trashed without responding with some kind of positive feedback. That’s fair I guess, problem is most power players play humans or dwarves, so really its a dm limiting fun then anything else. I dono... alot of the things listed on this thread seem silly. we are talking about things a dm should never let in a campaign. is are elves, gnomes, monks really a big bother? This thread seems to be more about, things I’m pi$$ed at and don’t know how to handle because I am an inexperienced dm who don’t like creative players. HaHA fulfill the prophesy! Ok their I said it. Now for something constructive to say…. Um oh…. No psycho ninja cats on the table because they like rolling the dice more then you do!... I should post pictures. No stinky fat people that haven’t washed in days so the mounds of flesh become pockets of stagnant salt water. Overweight people that take showers are ok though…. No old dms that come on as players who love 2e that spend more time talking about how awesome the older additions were, rather then playing your 3.5 game and trying to have fun. War forged artificers that didn’t read the errata on how wands and metamagic work. Uh…. Pc’s without backstory? Characters that use a full blade, then try to figure out how to increase weapon sizes from there. The goddess Mystera?(sp), no matter how cool she is. Evil characters that are created to ruin the fun of the other players. Unoriginal knock off characters from lord of the rings… ect… Paladins that are created for the sole purpose of being conduits of evil and revenge, while simultaneously having a player that does not understand the concept of good. Druids who are users and abusers of nature and then says it’s the natural order. Characters that steel from the rest of the party (kinder don’t count because they don’t steel and they give it back sooner or later. Players who abuse kinder characters and role play them as thieves rather then curious fun little guys. … more to come
LordHawkeye 08-03-06, 03:43 AM	-Evil characters, sorry, last time I allowed this, my workload got doubled on me because I wound up having to make a totally different plotline for him after he broke off from the group. It was inevitable from the start. Because all but the most unusual of campaigns center around doing good things, evil chars just don't have a place. So no go there. Ironically enough, I DO allow chaotic neutral. But I reserve the right to have him thrown into the local asylum if he acts like a retard. -Any and all attempts at twinking. Don't insult my intelligence. I can sense a twinker from a mile away. Don't even try it. The goal here is not to make an unstoppable character because believe me, if this was a contest to "beat" me, you would always lose as there's always something I could throw at you that you can't beat. Savy? I'm pretty open. I allow near anything as long as it is handed to me to look over first. Once had a campaign of nearly everyone playing monster races. It was a blast. Avoral dive bombing the red dragon really came out looking like a total stud. So with me, no evils, no twinking and I'll handle everything else. And whoever banned paladins, do explain won't you?
pmurray@bigpond.com 08-03-06, 04:38 AM	4) Sex in any way, shape, or form Ever come across the Book of Erotic Fantasy? Hilarious, mainly for it's written-by-a-female-sex-counsellor tone. I love the discussion of alignment and sex, where the dom characters are female for all nine alignments. And the section on taboos ("rape is taboo in all human cultures") is thigh-slappingly false - there are plenty of rape cultures out there. (PS: the double entendre was unintentional, but serendipitous)
LordHawkeye 08-03-06, 05:32 AM	Ever come across the Book of Erotic Fantasy? Hilarious, mainly for it's written-by-a-female-sex-counsellor tone. I love the discussion of alignment and sex, where the dom characters are female for all nine alignments. And the section on taboos ("rape is taboo in all human cultures") is thigh-slappingly false - there are plenty of rape cultures out there. (PS: the double entendre was unintentional, but serendipitous) Friend send that to me just cause I was curious. Yes, it is pretty amusing. I don't know, I could never keep a straight face if someone actually tried role sex in a campaign. I'm the type who's looked at hentai and could only laugh at how absurd it was. Though a note to any who write role playing books: We're not interested in reading a huge backstory for every example you give for every prestige class, template and whatever else! sheesh!
TheDragonmaster 08-03-06, 05:58 AM	Last numbered post: 102. Last person trying to make a point about numbered posts should be 103... So... let's change the path of this thread... 104 (I hope): Any PC of a PHB race and class, not gestalt, not multiclassing hideously, not taking a PRC at level 6, or not taking a load of unbalanced feats in an unbalanced combination. Now, let's see if anyone understands what I really meant to say: No ordinary PC's. I just hate it when people disallow a character the fun of creating a good as well as interesting character. If you want severely low-powered characters, then get yourself a computergame and start playing for yourself. The players should be rewarded by getting to shine, and they hardly can shine when their characters are only allowed to be humans single classing in NPC classes, with the adept not being able to cast spells, because spells are unbalanced. That said, the players should be able to motivate why just their character feels such a hatred for everything and can only find enjoyment in combat (Frenzied Berserker), is obsessed with self-improvement at any cost (Grafts + Taint + BoVD Stuff), or why the character shuns any earthly posessions (VoP). The characters may like the challenge of explaining such a character's backstory. The party should still be kept at an equal level, though, so that everyone can shine if they want to, but if 5 of your 6 players play high-powered characters, and the last one in feeling bad because his/her character is lagging behind the average party power level (but stil has the same ECL/Wealth), help that player to "power-up" his/her character, instead of restricting the fun of your 5 other players. CoC or not CoC, I do not intend to flame any specific person, but I do want to show my deepest disrespect for all the DM's in this thread who use D&D as a way of implementing their control-obsession on his/her friends (or people who at least were friends). D&D is about having fun, and if your players think it is fun to play something you deem "unbalanced" then let them, as long as the party is playing on an equal level. Now, back to the thread...
Renvale999 08-03-06, 08:41 AM	105. Psionics, the most un-balanced of all D&D things 106. Stupid Players 107. PC's Killing PC's 108. Grappling (I hate all the rolling and it does little damage and wastes way too much time)
Tormsskull 08-03-06, 09:10 AM	109. Psionics (yeah, its been mentioned, just throwing my support behind the no-psionics rule). 110. Players who don't role-play.
Whisper_Swiftblade 08-03-06, 09:21 AM	You will never allow no Pun-Pun in your game? whoops I made a double negitive, thanks for catching that
Meyverya 08-03-06, 09:30 AM	Heh, a lot of the afformentioned things here I allow lol. Sex, psionics,grappling, elves, ninjas, but what I won't allow is... 111.) Another Raistlin clone. Because the Raistlin thing works in a party like it would everywhere that wasn't the original books he was in. EVERYONE hates him. 112.) Necrocation and Transnecromancy. Party wizard trying to get around banned schools by making spells that are exactly like existing spells of banned school, except with negative energy. 113.) One player hogging the story. 114.) The flinty, Clint Eastwood, nuthin' scares me attitude from a level 1 character. 115.) Alignment errors. 116.)Characters from a region that's hated, feared, mistrusted or tolerated at best, going out and trying to get other countries to sell them their secret ways of spellcasting, passed down for generations. ( A Thayan who wants to learn place magic, wychlaran abilities and how to be a shi-eir (sp?) ). 117.) Called shots.
DarknessEternal 08-03-06, 09:43 AM	118 Psions 119 Classes whose class features are more of a burden on the rest of the party than they are on that character, eg Paladin, Blackguard, Frenzied Berserker. 120 Synchronicity 121 Autohypnosis 122 Any means of restoring life to the dead. 123 Persistant Spell 124 Suppression of psionic displays 125 Miracle without an XP cost.
razorboy 08-03-06, 09:57 AM	126) No Psionics but for a different reason. I got no problem with psionics, I just can't be bothered to buy XPH, then read through it a few times, then feel comfortable with the terms, then adapt it to be used alongside normal magic. DMing is enough work as it is. 127) No material that I haven't not read through at least twice and understood. 128) No more dragons. I have a player who played three dragon characters and would love to play them again. She does a great job with the background and optimizing them, such a great job in fact that it breaks the game. 129) No spiked chain, no double-sword, no dire flails, double-axe, or any other weapon that is completely implausible, could not be realistically used, and is broken to boot. 130) No monkey grip or any other ways to wield an oversized weapon. Especially if it happens to be a spiked chain. It's hard enough to imagine someone carrying a greatsword on his back all the time, let alone a Large greatsword. No, you cannot recreate your favorite Reloading-Hand-Crossbow Large-Adamantine-Greatsword Scar-on-the-face anime character. Ever. 131) No Orb of Force. No Evard's Black Tentacles. Period Full Stop. 132) No warmages. Especially ones that cast the two spells from #123. 133) No Mordekainen's Disjunction. If the player uses it, so shall I. I can always create another NPC with a million GP worth of equipment. The PC only has one. It's better off for the players not to use it in the long run. 134) No evil characters, unless the rest of the party are evil, and I specifically state that the game is evil.
Evandar_TAybara 08-03-06, 10:28 AM	135. Cyborg monkey ninja pirates. 136. 11 foot poles. 137. Cake.
shadow_kras 08-03-06, 10:29 AM	what? no Elven PC's? how big is that stick thats up your butt? 88: No cool PC's.... how else is that dmpc going to wow the party... 89: No humans... makes the game too dull... :evillaugh Who has a stick where again? You complain about elvens and forbid humans? Thats a little weird, dont you think? Anyway, keeping with the thread: 138# You are allowed to have anything that you want from the 3 main books, but anything else i can strictly forbid/disallow. 139# Psionics, but not because i hate them, only because they dont suit my kind of campaign. A modified and restricted psionic would be ok, if me and the player negotiated what powers he would have access to. 140# I allow monsters, but give me a really good background or else your character wont last to see the next town. I rather then create new sub-races, like a half-nymph or half-demonkindhere (ie: half-succubus). 141# No sorcerers that got any spell they want just because they are sorcerers and the book says so. A sorcerer has to have a way to learn a spell, no matter if their list got increased and they didnt have any time to train new spells. 142# No domains from scenarios that arent from the current campaign`s deities. (FR domains in a greyhawk campaign) 143# No races with Spell Resistance (Yes, they break the gameplay, you want a drow? Fine, +1 LA and byebye SpellResistance).
the_great_mighty_nerd 08-03-06, 11:06 AM	144. flying pcs 145. elves: i hate elves
the_great_mighty_nerd 08-03-06, 11:25 AM	Because there is an elf for everything. I wanna' be the best fighter I can be, so I'll play a wood elf. I wanna' be the best caster, I'll play a grey elf. I wanna' be the best rogue, I'll play a wild elf (also great for archers and clerics). And they only have to sleep for four hours, can't be insta-gibbed through the first four levels by the uber-spell sleep, and get bonus to three of about six skills that you use, regardless of your class role, for your entire adventuring career. But hey, I don't want to hijack this thread, I just hate to see someone's valid opinion get trashed without responding with some kind of positive feedback.why couldnt there be a few rational people like you on my elf-bashing thread instead of just me and sometimes metamind.
TheDragonmaster 08-03-06, 11:43 AM	Because there is an elf for everything. I wanna' be the best fighter I can be, so I'll play a wood elf. I wanna' be the best caster, I'll play a grey elf. I wanna' be the best rogue, I'll play a wild elf (also great for archers and clerics). And they only have to sleep for four hours, can't be insta-gibbed through the first four levels by the uber-spell sleep, and get bonus to three of about six skills that you use, regardless of your class role, for your entire adventuring career. But hey, I don't want to hijack this thread, I just hate to see someone's valid opinion get trashed without responding with some kind of positive feedback. ...w...w...Why? If you have to be such a control-freak, then why don't say this: Player: I want to play a Venerable Grey Elf Wizard named Bob. DM: Ok, I allow that, as long as it's an Adult High Elf Wizard named Bob. It's as easy as that...
UltimateReality 08-03-06, 11:45 AM	112.) Necrocation and Transnecromancy. Party wizard trying to get around banned schools by making spells that are exactly like existing spells of banned school, except with negative energy.That...is just funny.
Identitystolen 08-03-06, 11:49 AM	Some may be repeats, sorry. 146) No frickin' computers... Even for reference purposes. People always get side tracked when using them. Either they surf the 'net (if it has a connection) or play solitare. This is usually a DM problem (hehehe, guilty :D ) but I've had one instance of a player using a laptop and seemingly suffering fom ADD. 147) No detailed sex... We'll just say you went to bed and had a good night... Maybe roll a dex and con check, nothing beyond that. 148) If I don't own the book, it ain't going in. I need at least a week to absorb details from it and need it for off hand refference. 149) If you can't conviencingly explain how and why your character is multiclassing, I'm not allowing it. This is to cut back on taking one or two levels of some class just to get an ability for some nasty multiclass combo. 150) No really a disallow but, I reserve the right to modify any race and/or class as I see fit. Edit: I forgot about this, you can't have 'Pimp' as a profession and it certianly isn't a class skill with the Thrall Herder class.
Abulafia 08-03-06, 11:58 AM	146(?) -- Halflings. 146a -- People who like to play halflings. 147 -- Anything I haven't approved (seems obvious, but somehow this one keeps slipping by players). 148 -- Anything from Tome of Magic (and, from the previews, probably Tome of Battle as well) 149 -- Psionics; or, alternatively, regular magic. Not both. 150 -- Drama queens/spotlight hoggers. Let everyone play. 151 -- Generally inappropriate behavior (IC/OOC) -- harassing other players, making inappropriate comments, sabotaging the campaign, etc. (again, this one seems obvious, but I've had problems in the past) 152 -- Soap-phobes. 153 -- Monsters as players ("monsters" meaning anything with a level adjustment and/or racial HD greater than 5). 154 -- Obvious rip-off characters -- no Drizzt, no Goku, no Wolverine, no Batman, no Indiana Jones. I'll make an exception for a truly inspired ripoff, like when my brother made a character based on Ivan Drago from "Rocky IV." 155 -- WotC rule changes I dislike; the new Polymorph rules come to mind. 156 -- Powergaming disguised as backstory ("my father was a dragon, therefore I should get some dragon abilities, even though I have not taken the half-dragon template"). 157 -- Reverse powergaming: making a character purposely underpowered, and then expecting me or other players to carry your butt through the game. Sorry for the long list. I guess I had some venting to do. ;)
wonlee76 08-03-06, 12:06 PM	Ditto as the guy before me, some of these may be repeats since I didn't read the whole thread. 158: No Frenzied Berserkers. For the love of god... no please... just bad. 159: No Wraithstrike 160: No racial sub-races. You got the PHB elf, dwarf, gnome, and halfling. That's it.. No drow, grey, blue, star, sun, gold, blue, purple or whatever elf. No ghost whisper halflings, tinker gnomes, kender, grey dwarves, purple dwarves or whatever. Nice and simple. 161: No vampires (or half-vampires or 1/4 vamps or 1/8 vamps or whatever). I have a partial disdain for any kind of race or template that has a huge weakness in it and rather then letting players pick up such a race/template and try to find a magical solution to get around the weakness, just don't allow it. Life's easier that way. 162: No more then 1 template. 163: No BOED/BOVD 164: No evil in a good aligned campaign. No good in an evil aligned campaign. 165: No King of Smack, Cheater of Mystra, Pun Pun or any of the other uber build that the CO boards have cooked up. I don't mind most of what the CO board has but every once in a while they come up with a rules legal build that just is broken in a campaign and those are the builds I want to avoid. EDIT: Changed numbering to match up with prior poster.
metamind 08-03-06, 12:08 PM	why couldnt there be a few rational people like you on my elf-bashing thread instead of just me and sometimes metamind. :cool: 158: inexperienced players playing paladins. DM: As you detect evil, you notice a very small trace coming from an infant. Paladin: I STAB THE BABY! 159: CN Party: Quick! Help us save the town from the raiders! We need you to- PC: I don't care! I go to the bar. DM: The town is being attacked. PC: Oh. I rob the paladin! 160: Bad paladin and CN character in the same group. This one needs no explaination. 161: No none-PHB races. Period.
TeediousPrime 08-03-06, 01:08 PM	Sex in any way, shape, or form. Do you mean at the table or in game? Yes.
TeediousPrime 08-03-06, 01:33 PM	Ever come across the Book of Erotic Fantasy? Hilarious, mainly for it's written-by-a-female-sex-counsellor tone. I love the discussion of alignment and sex, where the dom characters are female for all nine alignments. And the section on taboos ("rape is taboo in all human cultures") is thigh-slappingly false - there are plenty of rape cultures out there. The whole book seemed to me to be written by either a 40 year old virgin guy living with his mother and a slew of cats, or by a sex-obsessed-but-frigid college feminist with a social agenda to promote. I'd never actually buy it because if any of my players had access to it I would constantly be hearing "OOOOOOHHH CAN I HAVE THAT?!?!?!" and then I'd have to murder them. I get enough of that from players looking through the Book of Vile Darkness.
Count Arioch the 28th 08-03-06, 02:02 PM	162. No non-evil drow. You want to be a non evil drow? Okay, you're a normal PHB elf with a dark past. All drow are evil, if they aren't evil anymore they are not drow, they are elves.
shadow_kras 08-03-06, 02:23 PM	The whole book seemed to me to be written by either a 40 year old virgin guy living with his mother and a slew of cats, or by a sex-obsessed-but-frigid college feminist with a social agenda to promote. I'd never actually buy it because if any of my players had access to it I would constantly be hearing "OOOOOOHHH CAN I HAVE THAT?!?!?!" and then I'd have to murder them. I get enough of that from players looking through the Book of Vile Darkness. I know the book wasnt actually print, these photoshoped images are really nasty...The book is terrible...Seriously...It only can be worst than the Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge. If you want a comedy sex style book, id go for nymphology, their spells are less combat effective and more embarassing to their targets, and the book has almost 0 rules about ~how-to-do-sex~...
Moon-Lancer 08-03-06, 04:46 PM	shadow_kras knotice the :evillaugh. Its a evil laugh. It says more then words. I was showing how saying no elves is like saying no humans. Its Satirical. The multitude of elves are easly explained through elfquest. um... 159: no players, we dms larp with ourselves, and thats the way we like it.
Moniker 08-03-06, 04:58 PM	what? no Elven PC's? how big is that stick thats up your butt? 88: No cool PC's.... how else is that dmpc going to wow the party... 89: No humans... makes the game too dull... :evillaugh I only run humans using various homebrewed ethnicities in my game that grant Regional feats and attribute-based bonuses by country of origin; 'nuff said. :)
GM_TerraFire 08-03-06, 05:17 PM	Wow, next time a player complains that I'm being too restrictive I'll direct them to this thread... ;) Lots here that I do, some I don't. That being said, here's five that spring to mind: #163: Characters without some form of a backstory. Any backstory. This is key IMC, especially when a character has an "unusual" race/ability/alignment/quirk/etc. #164: Players with no intention of roleplaying. However, if you try even a little, even badly, you are more than welcome at my table. #165: OOC violence of any kind. This should be obvious, but sometimes people just can't seem to keep their personal issues to themselves, and allow themselves to lose it at inopportune moments. #166: New characters with powers/items/abilities/whatever that haven't been cleared with the GM ahead of time. I don't care how "cool" or "leet" it is, I hate surprises that ruin a game in progress. #167: Multi-session dungeon crawls. They're fine for a part of the adventure, but let's face it: ten-foot wide stone halls stretching on indefinately are boring. Been there done that, and escaped from Undermountain back in junior high school. And here's one that irks me as a player: #168: Bannings for no reason whatsoever, or out of ignorance. Hey, I'm fine with "psionics doesn't fit the flavor of what's going on in our campaign," but "ARRG NO PSI-CHEESE!!! :headexplo:" is just plain stupid. Oh, and in my last campaign, I didn't allow psionics.
Abulafia 08-03-06, 05:27 PM	159: no players, we dms larp with ourselves, and thats the way we like it.You'll go blind doing that. ;)
guesswhat12321 08-03-06, 06:09 PM	not saying this about all the dms here but for a lot of you if I was playing in your campaign I would just leave... the no elves, no humans, junk like that is just saying the DM needs to get a life more then I do or learn how to deal with the things.
Moniker 08-03-06, 06:20 PM	not saying this about all the dms here but for a lot of you if I was playing in your campaign I would just leave... the no elves, no humans, junk like that is just saying the DM needs to get a life more then I do or learn how to deal with the things. Or, perhaps it is creative preference. It is the same reason that an author who is writing a medieval fantasy novel may not want gunpowder in his book. While it may be fitting, perhaps it is not the sort of feel he is wishing to convey in his world. On the same token, I lean away from the standard DnD model for a more realistic world where magic, elves and fireballs are seen as mystical, instead of mundane. My players seem to agree that it lends more credit to the suspension of disbelief, thus making it easier to become more engrossed in the world and truly mystified by magic, elves and the like when they encounter it in the game.
Gottwick 08-03-06, 07:07 PM	3rd party material Psionics Beguilers Fumbles/critical fumbles Sarcastic comical characters Evil characters Sex ... this needs mentioning? Um, no. Flying PCs Polymorph in combat Guns
psionichamster 08-03-06, 07:44 PM	* cheating (nuff said) *bad optimizing (sure, make your bad mojo mammajamma...but do it right. and expect me to check your math like its a MDMC) *pun-pun. (or pretty much anything from the CO boards) *hulking hurler *frenzied berserker *warhulk *thrallherd (been there, done that, no you do NOT get to have 1/2 the actions in a given combat, thank you very much) *mindbender (this is MY baby...no PC's need apply) *drow. (unless playing all drow or all underdark) *NOT using psionics. expect them, know them, do NOT whine when you get hit with a mindblast from an advanced illithid psion. he'll eat your brain first) *arguing against DM decisions. (because that's WHY i'm running the game, to make the decisions...don't like it, fine, you run the game and I'LL play in it) namaste' the hamster
Always-Late 08-03-06, 08:07 PM	137. Cake.Your game must be horrible.
turalisj 08-03-06, 08:24 PM	- Asses who think psionics is broken, unbalanced, etc. (note the PERIOD) I'm tired of seeing people who hate psionics. Chances are, they have done one on one 'battles' with a sorcer or wizard against a psion. Spellcasters have atleast 10x the amount of material to use, etc, etc.
Blazinghand 08-03-06, 08:42 PM	191) Dwarves (It's the only race not yet banned, so, :D ) Okay, but really, 191) Deck of Many things
Moon-Lancer 08-03-06, 08:45 PM	192: fun... thats right this thread has gone CRAZZY!!!!! so i say this... NO FUN at the table. oh creativity... your gone aswell. ohhh oh food too... thats it, gone. food, your sooo gone. :D relaxe... its all in jest. thats what we bards do best. :angelhide :rimshot:
BeefotronX 08-03-06, 08:52 PM	193: Players who can't eat pizza neatly. 194: Anything from books I don't own or am unable to borrow. 195: Adventures that feature neither dungeons nor dragons. D&D ceases to be D&D without these, period, full stop.
Crimson_Concerto 08-03-06, 09:37 PM	196 - Players who want to play an evil character in a good campaign. Why don't some players get that playing an evil character is just simply NOT appropriate for some games? 197 - Players who make characters which are overpowered compared to the rest of the party. I really have very little against powergaming, so long as everybody's doing it equally, in a way where everybody is still balanced with each other. If that happens, I can just increase some CRs if I have to, and everything will be fine. However, when we get to a point where what's a challenge for the party is a pushover for the powergamer, and what's a challenge for the powergamer demolishes the party, we have a serious problem. 198 - Players who won't give me backstory. It doesn't have to be long, but giving me one will help me to better integrate your character personally into the game's story. How can I help your character hope to accomplish his goals in the game if I dont' know about them?
Count Arioch the 28th 08-03-06, 09:53 PM	199. No Pc is allowed to wear clothing. My reasoning is that if everyone wants something, then it must be overpowered. Therefore, clothing is banned in my games.
Always-Late 08-03-06, 10:37 PM	199. No Pc is allowed to wear clothing. My reasoning is that if everyone wants something, then it must be overpowered. Therefore, clothing is banned in my games.Do you ban non-commoner 20 builds, too? Because I think that would be an awesome campaign.
Secrets Untold 08-03-06, 10:50 PM	200: People who can't realize that this is a SERIOUS thread. If you actually ban clothing, then post it, but, honestly, the no creativity, no PCs, etc. crap is just that, it's crap.................................... ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ .............(notice the PERIODS!!!)
ressurrector 08-03-06, 11:30 PM	200) People who play characters that are actively anti-party. I really don't want to Make someone join the party, and I won't stop other players Killing them when they steal from the party/cast charm person on the other players/act like everyone else is a moron IC. (yes someone got killed in my game for attempting to charm a fellow party member)
sneak_Blast 08-03-06, 11:57 PM	Wow. {WizO_Cat: Ok, let's watch the baiting ...} Seriously people, its a GAME. Its about having FUN. See my sig for any proof you might need.
tsuyoshikentsu 08-04-06, 12:58 AM	Y'know, a lot of what comes out of the CharOp boards isn't actually that game-breaking, or even good. It's just that the few you do hear about are pretty freaking amazing. I should know, considering how much time I spend over there.
Crimson_Concerto 08-04-06, 01:14 AM	Wow. Can you say CONTROL FREAKS!?!?!?!?!?!?Excuse me? I don't do blanket bans on anything. PERIOD. Its case by case. I can't believe that people are banning so much freaking stuff. O, wait, I can believe it. Its the WOTC forum. You get all kinds of arrogant morons here.Again, excuse me? I'd be willing to bet anyone here that at least half of the people who ban things never actually discuss the problem(s) with their players and/or playtest the things they are banning.Actually, most of the time something is banned in any game it's because it's been a mutual problem for the group in the past. DMs on a power trip usually dont' get very far... Seriously people, its a GAME. Its about having FUN. See my sig for any proof you might need.Sometimes, extra rules need to be set in place to make sure everybody continues to have fun. If a group has had major problems with something in the past, it becomes more enjoyable for everybody to get rid of the problem, don't you think? It's one thing to express your opinion but another thing entirely to be rude about it...
tharivol266 08-04-06, 01:29 AM	firearms. all i need to say. pallys and bards are npc only because no one near me can play them right but one always wants to be a bard and just is a drain on the party. now the only thing i have done a blanket ban on is books that i dont own. otherwise i think that blanket bans are *insert cruel word* however i must say that i will never buy the XPH
Grayson7 08-04-06, 02:15 AM	I am currently working on a campaign that starts August 12th. This is only my second D&D 3.5 campaign so I am being rather conservative. 201) Anything that is not in the Player's Handbook, the Dungeon Master's Guide, the Monster Manual, the Complete Series, and the Spell Compendium because these are the books being used in the campaign. 202) None of the Oriental Style base classes in the Complete Series because they don't suit the campaign. 203) No psionics. I don't really have a problem with them. In fact, I like them. I just don't want another form of magic to keep up with and they don't suit my campaign. I know they aren't in any of the books that I mentioned but since they are in the SRD, I thought that I would mention them. 204) No prestige classes. However, I am really considering letting them into the game with the exception of the ones that are campaign or organization specific. I just don't know yet. If I do, no one will be allowed to have more than one of them. It irks me to see builds with five or six different classes in them and less than 20 levels. 205) No arbitrary multi-classing for the hell of it. You can't just up and decide after being a rogue for six levels that you are just going to slap on a level in wizard just because you accumulated the requisite experience in the middle of an adventure. You have to have training to become a wizard (or whatever). 206) No evil characters. 207) No races with a level adjustment greater than +0, unless you have one hell of a story!
Bandolar Goldcrest 08-04-06, 02:47 AM	not saying this about all the dms here but for a lot of you if I was playing in your campaign I would just leave... the no elves, no humans, junk like that is just saying the DM needs to get a life more then I do or learn how to deal with the things. Or maybe, just maybe, this could be an example of that sarcasm thing I keep hearing about. I hear there have been instances of someone saying something that is so extremely beyond the limits in an effort to make a point about the absurdity of a given situation.
ElIsRa 08-04-06, 03:26 AM	200: People who can't realize that this is a SERIOUS thread. If you actually ban clothing, then post it, but, honestly, the no creativity, no PCs, etc. crap is just that, it's crap.................................... ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ .............(notice the PERIODS!!!) If there was any truth to the idea of this thread being serious, it is now dead and gone, any attempt to re-instate seriousness is just being over baring. 209: Psionic Fanboys. That's right, you who think that psionics are 1337 and by default scorn the tradition of wizards and MAGIC. (you know who you are) 210: Anything that over powers a wizard at high/epic levels. The fact that wizards suck for the first 5 levels and have to sack exp to make your weapons and armor should be more than enough to justify them being ubber in latter levels. 211: Meta-Gaming 212: Characters that are not balanced with the rest of the party because of having a really ubber item, like an artifact. This is more of a peeve I have as a player than as a DM. 213: inter-party alliances. This includes secret pacts, siblings who can't put that aside (in or out of game) and blood bonds. 214: anything that requires a stupid interpretation of both the rules of the game and the laws of physics to accomplish. Such as the multi-metaconcert and the commoner railgun. 215: Lawful characters that willfully break the law. 216: Good characters that willfully commit evil. 217: Chaotic characters that respect authority. 218: Evil characters that commit good deeds without an ulterior motive. 219: Neutral characters that consistently take moral or ethical stances. This goes double for Law and Good. It also means, no doing evil for the greater good, such as torture. Or breaking a law because you are "above the law" (i.e. you are a cleric that has a different level of conviction than the local authority). Obviously, sometimes a character slips up, but they should always seek penance afterwards, and/or exhibit guilt. 220: Doing obviously stupid things. Like shooting a noble, in plain day light, in the middle of town, near a barracks or sheriff's office, just to test out your new bow. (and yes, I have actually had a PC do this before) 221: Complaining that your character isn't as good as someone else of the same level because you A: don't know how to play your character, or B: didn't take the time to plan your character ahead of time. 222: Free lunches. Congrats!! You found a loophole that allows your the get one billion exp, one trillion gp, and all the healing you could ever want, all for the price of two commoners, a gp worth of diamond dust, and a cat with a piece of toast strapped to it's back. Now you're dead because the space/time continuum was shattered by your stupidity. 223: Magic Item Emporiums. This includes Psi " R " Us and the Potion Pavilion.
TeediousPrime 08-04-06, 07:45 AM	Wow. Can you say CONTROL FREAKS!?!?!?!?!?!? I don't do blanket bans on anything. PERIOD. Its case by case. I can't believe that people are banning so much freaking stuff. O, wait, I can believe it. Its the WOTC forum. You get all kinds of arrogant morons here. I'd be willing to bet anyone here that at least half of the people who ban things never actually discuss the problem(s) with their players and/or playtest the things they are banning. Seriously people, its a GAME. Its about having FUN. See my sig for any proof you might need. You have either a) Never been a DM, or b) If you have, have had excellent players of the kind the rest of us would kill for. A lot of what is brought up here has been either half serious or not at all. The rest of it is things that we as DMs have noticed take away from the fun of our games and have decided to no longer allow. Take psionics for example. As some have pointed out, it is not an inherently broken class, but the fact is that it is outside of the core concentration and, as such, many players and DMs don't entirely understand how to integrate it. Players and DMs can therefore end up in circular, interminable (if even good natured) arguments and debates about what can or cannot be done. Others are things that only fit specific campaign worlds, but which some players always want to use, like "Why can't I be a Drow?" when the party is going to spend most of its time in high elven territory, and when you know that that player always wants to play a Drow no matter what the setting is. If you don't like the topic, then go troll somebody else. And kindly keep your nose out of our games.
TeediousPrime 08-04-06, 07:51 AM	I haven't actually gone and done this, but I'm thinking of banning, after my current campaign is over: 224: Entirely neutral parties Seriously, everyone in my current campaign is either neutral something, something neutral, or neutral neutral. I didn't see it as a problem in the first place, in fact I thought it would be good for them finding creative solutions to their problems, but the fact is that it has led them to simply find creative solutions to do whatever they want. One of my players has actually created a true neutral character and now complains that her character is unmotivated to continue on with the party. :rolleyes: 209: Psionic Fanboys. That's right, you who think that psionics are 1337 and by default scorn the tradition of wizards and MAGIC. (you know who you are) 225: Anything that a character is playing because of an obsessive love with that thing (aka psionics, drow, some extraplanar half-breed, a monster race in an ordered humanoid society, etc.) Oh and any mention of 1337 or anyone uttering the word "woot" at my gaming sessions is is hideously punished.
Calibron 08-04-06, 09:19 AM	First of all, a whole lot of you must either be new to DMing, have players that cannot be trusted to be mature, or just plain suck. 226: Any material that I have not had adequate time to look over. 227: Paladins of Slaughter; beside the fact that they are completely unplayable even in an evil party, I would really like to know how a first level Paladin of Slaughter survives to become level two. Seriously, does anyone have any theories? 227b: Chaotic Evil Soul Borns; see above. 228: Wealth-by-level rules/guidelines. 229: The anadultered RAW(ie. a lack of fun and/or necessary house rules) 230: The Wish, The Word, The War Hulking Hurler(but not a regular Hulking Hurler), The King of Smack, ect., ect.; you get the idea, feel free to optimize as long as you keep it mildly sane. 231: Incompetent characters; you have to be good at something even if it's something as simple as making money or dealing with people, but freakin' contribute. 232: Half-Minotaur, White Dragon Spawn, any other template that warrants one or two more LA than it has listed.(though this is really just an off-shoot of #229) 233: Lack of Roleplaying. If you're just going to sit there and roll dice we might as well be playing Risk. 234: Arguing with the DM. Correcting the DM is fine, but don't argue during the game. It wastes valuable play time and I'm probably right anyway. 235: Taking classes inextricably tied to an organization without dealing with the organization(#229 not-withstanding); if you want to take the class just let me know, I'll work it if I can. I guess that's it for now.
X-Codes 08-04-06, 09:57 AM	236: Vow of Poverty, even if other BoED material is in. 237: Vow of Chastity. You are already forbidden from having sex in-game. 238: People who hate on the party Bard. You know you like that +10 morale bonus to everything. If I wanted to be a mindless spell-***** then I'd play a sorcerer, like you. 239: Epic Spellcasting, just because my Bard can do it so disgustingly well. 240: All female parties, mostly because 99% of the D&D players I personally know are guys, and I've also never actually played a game including a female player. Your uber female rogue that prefers to not wear "armor" is not sexy, and the idea that someone is getting off on a D&D game I'm running is actually quite disturbing.
Kavu Overlord 08-04-06, 10:38 AM	241: Drug addicted PCs (Don't ask...it was ugly) :nonono: 242: Paladins with an intelligence score UNDER 13. 243: Bad spelling in names 244: Lazy players....who are frequently OOC every 2 seconds 245: "Good" characters attacking random stores/bars an killing the owner to steal the deed. (This happened too many times....My druid came into possession of a bar deed because everybody else pretty much had a massacre inside, and so the druid, doing what the thought was good, decided to hold on to the deed for the bartender's family. However, the PCs just got addicted to attacking random civilian places, so I leveled up the civilians to the point where it was no longer a good idea to. Yay Kavu! :dancin: ) 246: Psudodragon characters. I have my reasons (how do you RP a 1 foot dragon?) 247: PC on PC violence. Usually I respond with righteous lasers from "the heavens" (Note: I'm kidding. The lasers are only used in emergencies...) 248: umm...Loaded firearms. I'm OK with using them as Melee weapons. :D
yukarjama 08-04-06, 11:13 AM	249: Player who likes to charm/dominate/kill other characters, including other PCS.
Abulafia 08-04-06, 12:05 PM	249: Player who likes to charm/dominate/kill other characters, including other PCS.I assume by "characters" you mean PCs and helpful NPCs. Charming/Dominating/Killing opposing NPCs and other enemies is a major part of the game. This is more of a pet peeve than a ban, but I will boot a player based on his inability to comply with the campaign's game world. If I create a world where dwarf culture is, say, Germanic (i.e., dwarves speak German, have German names, etc.), DO NOT play your dwarf with a Scottish accent*! That drives me crazy! (where did the whole dwarf=scot thing come from, anyway?) Similarly, if elves in my campaign are feral tricksters or illiterate savages, do not play your elf like he's an effeminate British aristocrat. * if the player happens to be Scottish, I will make an exception. ;)
Ilikan Holyaxe 08-04-06, 01:29 PM	where did the whole dwarf=scott thing come from, anyway? Sean Connery... james bond is directly linked to dwarves. >anything that has a LA greater than +1, as a player's character.
Abulafia 08-04-06, 01:56 PM	Sean Connery... james bond is directly linked to dwarves. :D I am SOOOO going to play a Bond-inspired dwarf now. "What's your drink?" "Ale . . . shaken, not stirred."
Mystyc 08-04-06, 02:21 PM	(where did the whole dwarf=scot thing come from, anyway?) They both enjoy drinking, fighting, and bearded women.
KyussWren 08-04-06, 02:22 PM	Not even going to get into the backstory on this one. PM me if you want it. (whatever number is supposed to be here) NO QUARTER DEMON DEMON SLAYERS!
revnk 08-04-06, 04:04 PM	224: Entirely neutral parties "What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?" -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama Yep, damn neutrals. Hope they got what was comin' to 'em, neutral bastards. :D
CPAtheFat 08-04-06, 04:53 PM	Uh ... 251) Half-Orge Rouges - but Half-Ogre Rogues are ok EDIT: My sarcasm was apparently lost on someone
Abulafia 08-04-06, 05:06 PM	Uh ... 251) Half-Orge Rouges 252 -- People who can't spell "rogue" or "ogre" (sorry CPA)
Khan2000 08-04-06, 05:34 PM	253) No evil alignments. The players kinda got crazy stupid with being evil and such. 254) Nothing above LA +2. My only caveat is that if I decide to have evil characters, I'll designate which players and make the characters. Same goes for LA. So it depends on what I want in the campaign. I'm fairly flexible and willing to work with the players on their characters.
cpn_creepo 08-04-06, 05:54 PM	I don't blanket-ban anything, unless it's not found in a campaign we're in (i.e., in my current campaign ther're no halflings or orcs, so I banned them.)I do discourage somethings like evil pc's. However, with something like an evil pc, I'd allow it, but you better play it damn well.
Kursk 08-04-06, 06:21 PM	255 - spiked armour 256 - spiked shields
Eltharon 08-04-06, 08:33 PM	257-It beard saying again: Big anime swords. Never. Even mentioning them should result in your character dying a horrible death. 258-Really stupid characters. Not low int, but characters like the Elf called Twiggly Vine, the Minotaur afraid of violence, etc (Yes, they've all showed up in adventures) 259-Dungeon crawl adventures. Because they're really boring. Some dungeon crawling is fine, but going through room after room of "bad guys!" (hack, hack, blast, stab) "Ok, loot 'em and lets go to the next room" gets old. 260-Players who won't roleplay.
turalisj 08-04-06, 08:48 PM	-any phb, nonphb, or any other thing (except cake, gotta have cake)
Thessik 08-04-06, 08:59 PM	First, some repeats. 261- Characters with no backstory, or one "borrowed" from a book/movie. 262- Psionics. Don't like psionics in my fantasy. Personal taste, is all. 263- Evil characters in non-evil games. Or really, anyone whose alignment or class is totally off-kilter with the rest of the group. 264- Kender. This really needs no explanation, I think. And some others. 265- Unapproved races. (i.e. anything that has no place in the game world) 266- Prestige classes without a darn good reason. Similar, though softer restrictions on multiclassing. 267- Artifacts that are of any use to the PCs in a fight. I prefer more interesting artifacts than "a magic sword, only better" for my games.
turalisj 08-04-06, 09:02 PM	269(real number I think)- Anime fanboys/girls. I love anime myself, but please, no more cloud wannabe's, or characters modelled after Inuyasha. :rolleyes:
sneak_Blast 08-04-06, 10:06 PM	People. This thread is asking for things you never allow in ANY game. Not just specific stuff. Please remember that when posting. About half or more of the people here don't realize that.
Themis_II 08-04-06, 10:19 PM	- Spelljammer. Not ever, don't even think about it. Amazing to me that it was not listed as #1.
Kresalak 08-04-06, 10:40 PM	270. People.
yukarjama 08-04-06, 11:40 PM	I assume by "characters" you mean PCs and helpful NPCs. Charming/Dominating/Killing opposing NPCs and other enemies is a major part of the game. The only problem here is that the player I got likes to dominate/charm everyone he met, no matter it's the BBEG, helpful NPC, or other players. If he cannot dominate them ,he simply just wanna kill them(or using the minions he already dominate to do the dirty job). Soon the groups will begain killing each other, which I hate most in my campaign. :(
Melpomene 08-05-06, 12:52 AM	Not 271.) (As this is just expanding on other people's statements) No charicters named Fighter. Not 272.) No charicters named Black Mage. 271.) Bags of Holding. Being a DM is enough of a pain without having to keep track of how many pounds of crud each of my PCs is carrying. If they try to walk off with a pillar, I'll stop 'em. Otherwise, I don't care. And, for the record, I allow LA 5 races, Psionics, Firearms (including tactical weaponry), and 3rd party material. I DM needs to treat thier players like favoured children, guiding them, helping them, punishing as needed, but also showing them patience.
Nobunaga Oda 08-05-06, 01:56 AM	105. Psionics, the most un-balanced of all D&D things Right after the regular system, it is :) .
Kyle_the_wizard 08-05-06, 02:27 AM	273. No wizards/sorcerer party, clashes way to much with my groups. Smae goes with any magic/psionics 274. Any magic item over a +5 ability with no draw back before epic. 275. No completely stupid item like the +100 sword of continual truestriking, and many other crazy abilities collosal bastard sword weilded by the halfing with Extreme/Magnificant/Superier/Greater/Monkey Grip.
ElIsRa 08-05-06, 03:14 AM	This is more of a question, but... Where did the whole psionics thing come from? Really? It doesn't really have a place in traditional midevil fantasy, but has yet somehow crept into all the classic campaign settings (Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, ect) and seems to be an after thought in all of them.
turalisj 08-05-06, 04:11 AM	It was made because, when 1st ED was out, the church was giving the creators of dnd crap about the magical aspect of the setting. So they tried to find some other way to have a 'magical' feel in the campaign worlds, and that's how psionics was born. It evolved from there. Or, atleast, that's how I think it happend.... (which might be close to the trust)
speeblefreak 08-05-06, 12:23 PM	Any material from a book the player in question does not have. I don't care how cool a raptoran cleric would be; you can't play one if you don't have RoW!
revnk 08-05-06, 02:23 PM	This is more of a question, but... Where did the whole psionics thing come from? Really? It doesn't really have a place in traditional midevil fantasy, but has yet somehow crept into all the classic campaign settings (Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, ect) and seems to be an after thought in all of them. It was an afterthought. Someone talked Gary Gygax into including them and he did. GameSpy: Then can you look back and say, 'This was a mistake, I shouldn't have done this?' Gygax: Oh yeah. There's a number of things in Advanced Dungeons & Dragons that I never should have done. I shouldn't have put Psionics in there, but somebody talked me into it. Some of the combat, weapons vs. armor, and weapon speeds I just would have dropped. As far as I know (and as far as I can tell from the above-quoted interview), they weren't included as a specific response to anything. (In fact, they were included in an appendix to the 1E PHB.) Given that original Monster Manual critters like the Intellect Devourer and Mind Flayer originally used the psionics rules, once psionics were in the game they pretty much were hooked in and there wasn't much that could be done about it later on. It might also be remembered that the original D&D didn't draw exclusively on swords-and-sorcery fantasy. Major influences on the game also included authors like Zelazny, Lovecraft and Moorcock--writers who were as much science fiction authors as fantasy (or possibly more sci-fi than fantasy). The game also owed a fair bit to Robert E. Howard, a friend of Lovecraft's whose own sword-and-sorcery fantasy also drew in Lovecraftian pulp sci-fi elements (e.g. ancient pre-human races, lost technologies and psychic powers masquerading as magic, lost continents, alien "gods" from other planets and dimensions). The idea of including psionics wasn't really a huge stretch for geeks who liked Star Trek as much as they liked their Tolkien. That said, the rules were often ignored. While Wizards has tried to make psionics a part of the d20 system using the same basic principles as the other rules, the original rules for psionics featured their own saving throw tables, used a percentile system instead of d20, and had other quirks that made them more trouble than they were worth unless a DM wanted to stick in the odd Intellect Devourer or whatever. And now we return you to your previously-scheduled thread....
Aterum 08-05-06, 03:05 PM	Time Travel?
JayDubya 08-05-06, 03:19 PM	242: Paladins with an intelligence score UNDER 13. Either that's a typo, or you're being rather unfair. A Paladin pretty much needs 14+ Str, 12+ Dex, 12+ Con, 14+ Wisdom, 16+ Cha to be effective, and with a 25 point buy, he doesn't even have that. You want him to have a huge Int score too? >_>
Archmage_Vall 08-05-06, 03:22 PM	Time travel can be fun, as long as the players don't get to travel to whatever point in history they want to go, whenever they feel like it. If it happens once or twice during the campaign as a major plot event, it can work. I did it in a one-shot game, in a terminator-style time-travel plot hook. Except in this case, Lolth had sent an elite drow assassin 500,000 years back in time to kill Pelor, before he ascended. Pelor ceases to exist, and the remaining good deities find the best warriors humanity has to offer, and send them back in time to protect Pelor's former, mortal self from the drow assassin. Coincidentally, 500,000 years ago was modern-day Chicago. :D
MistWolf 08-05-06, 03:23 PM	Sonic Screwdrivers. Because my GM looked at me while we were creating characters for a Gamma World campaign and said "..and you will never, ever get a sonic screwdriver- beccause you'd find too many ways to do too many things with it!" I had to agree with him
turalisj 08-05-06, 03:41 PM	-Any 'beat first-ask questions later' type person. They realy tick the whole group off... Dm: Ok, you guys walk into the bar. Paladin: I smite the shady guy in the corner! Party: :confused: Paladin: He was not lg, so he must have been corrupt! Party: He was our contact with the rebellion. Paladin: See? He was with a rebellion, evil!
Abulafia 08-05-06, 03:42 PM	Almost forgot -- #275 (or whatever): whiners.
Pandaemoni 08-05-06, 04:09 PM	215: Lawful characters that willfully break the law. "Lawful" doesn't mean "law-abiding" in the D&D context. You can be a lawful evil criminal, no problem, so long as you respect the rules and the authority of some group greater than your own (like a Lawful evil rogue working for an extensive and well organized criminal syndicate).
Rotipher 08-05-06, 05:00 PM	#276) Players who read this thread in order to give themselves ideas. ;-)
turalisj 08-05-06, 05:22 PM	That's it, I'm going to make a phrenic elf fighter who's nuetral in alignment, wielding a fullblade (looks like a 'big honkin anime sword') who likes to randomly rape people. :D
ElIsRa 08-05-06, 05:38 PM	Gygax: Oh yeah. There's a number of things in Advanced Dungeons & Dragons that I never should have done. I shouldn't have put Psionics in there, but somebody talked me into it. Some of the combat, weapons vs. armor, and weapon speeds I just would have dropped. As long as Gygax understands what a massive mistake he made. Either that's a typo, or you're being rather unfair. A Paladin pretty much needs 14+ Str, 12+ Dex, 12+ Con, 14+ Wisdom, 16+ Cha to be effective, and with a 25 point buy, he doesn't even have that. You want him to have a huge Int score too? >_> I think he was refering to the player, not the character. :) "Lawful" doesn't mean "law-abiding" in the D&D context. You can be a lawful evil criminal, no problem, so long as you respect the rules and the authority of some group greater than your own (like a Lawful evil rogue working for an extensive and well organized criminal syndicate). What I meant was, breaking the 'laws' of whatever organization they belong to (which could be the Mob). Although I do expect lawful characters to respect local authorities as long as there isn't a conflict between the interests of the organization and local government. Also, I don't accept, "but I'm a cleric, that means my 'laws' are more important than their laws" as an excuse to charge into a tavern and smash all of the liquor bottles there in. (and yes, I've actually had a PC do this too.... {same guy too, different character}) #276) Players who read this thread in order to give themselves ideas. ;-) Amen to that, brother!
UndeadMouse 08-05-06, 07:00 PM	277: Middle-Earth-based characters. no lost kings with broken swords, sons of insane domineerring fathers, or hungrey hobbits. 278: no royalty or famous people. if whatever you have in mind fits with what i am doing (like i am making a king whose son is a wizard, and if i know you want to be the son of a king and you are a wizard, i might make you that son) i might agree. Might... Just MIGHT!! 279: non-evil defautly evil races. if it says Evil as it's alighnment, it is generally evil. 280: Paladins and blackguards.
DarkLiChNeaZur 08-05-06, 09:09 PM	OMG YES players who cant make their own character AMEN!!!! (once had a player who couldnt concieve a name for an ogre warrior so he called it shrek, no joke) (im not doing number order these are MY number orders) 1: players who think their half DM and try to add to MY story not suggest ADD. 2: players who argue about the amount of loot/exp they get because thier superly competative and need to be better than the whole party. 3: players who name thier characters out of books/movies 4:players who try to convince me that italian is a race and plumber is a class and that its just a coincidence that his character is named mario. 5:players who think that they get all the sweet gear their miniature has, therefor they try to pick the Aspect of Hextor or like some super-huge and uber mini. 6:players who sing weeble and bob songs during the game for example : had a dwarf fighter start randomly singing "she's takin all your pie, and now your gonna crie" OVER AND OVER AGAIN in the middle of the campeign. 7:gnomes unless thier rouges, sorcerors or bards 8:people who ask me whats going on in the MIDDLE OF A FRIKIN PLOT POINT!!!! 9:really hot girls who come over to play but end up just sitting and watching, wait i dont really hate that, just annoys me that i dont get to hit on them in-game/character :) 10:crackwads who cheat, do things that you really CANT do in D&D,and pick UBERIZED templates at like 3rd level (minimum for templates in my game unless its in your class)
Et Cetera 08-05-06, 10:52 PM	-Evil Characters in Non-Evil Campaigns (I throw in an NPC Paladin once in a while to prevent this.) -Former DMs who think they're still DMing. -People using 3.0 material in 3.5 campaigns. -People who play extremely paradoxical characters (aka "I'm a drow paladin. Deal with it.") -People who think they can buy artifacts just because they think they have enough money to do so. -Good characters using material from the Book of Vile Darkness. -Hypocrites ("I hate psionics, but can I use a class from Tome of Magic? How about Incarnum?") -People who don't act their alignment. At all. -People who use homebrewed classes or prestige classes in an actual game. -People who think saying "friend" in Elven will solve every puzzle. -People who use their own house rules in my campaign. -People who take Gutterspeak as a bonus language to look cool.
cpn_creepo 08-05-06, 11:11 PM	This is kind've the adverse of this thread, but, anyways.... -DMs that throw ridiculously tough adversaries a players way (i.e. chimeras for a 2 PC level 2 party.) Just cause he doesn't wanna let you off easy.* *This stuff happened all the time with a DM I used to play with. He would make all the encounters uber hard to the point that you couldn't win any battle without powergaming to some point. This guy ran off like millions** of potential D&D players using these tactics, including one guy who was the best roleplayer for a brand new player that I've ever met in my life jsut cause he couldn't make a spellcaster friendly adventure to save his rump. Also, he'd get mad when people would gripe about his DMing style and point out things in the DM's guide about "how the player needs to remember that the DM is the final judge of what happenes in a game." Which generally rubbed the few people he got to play with him the wrong way. I countered that one night with an excerpt from the DM's guide that said that a DM's job also says that he has to make the adventure FUN for all players, not a dice chucking endurance test. I don't think he ever DM'ed again after that. :( **By millions, I mean five.
Bulletproof_Condom 08-05-06, 11:17 PM	Serpent Kingdoms.
The Amazing Dancing Bear 08-05-06, 11:19 PM	-People who make large, blanket statements without ever making exceptions ever and without pausing to consider other viewpoints.* For instance: "NO! You canNOT play a %&# DROW!! I don't CARE if you have a backstory 'rife with pathos'! I don't CARE if you bear no similarity to anyone in a popular line of books! GOD! ... munchkin." Or: "NO! You canNOT play a %&# WILDER!! I don't CARE if sorcerer doesn't adequately describe your abilities! I don't CARE if you looked at the wilder and said 'This fits my character perfectly.' I don't CARE if there's a general consensus on the boards that psionics is all right! And you CAN'T use that backstory! I don't care HOW many roleplaying opportunities it will give you! It has SEX** in it! GOD! ... munchkin." * For people, who I've seen on this thread before, who are numb to sarcasm: This entire post is sarcasm. Except for this asterisky bit. ** Note that I'm not in favor of including sex in a D&D game with, say, 8-year-olds. But if you think the group can handle it, you'd be surprised at how much of a psychological motivator it can be.
The Amazing Dancing Bear 08-05-06, 11:32 PM	The fact that wizards suck for the first 5 levels and have to sack exp to make your weapons and armor should be more than enough to justify them being ubber in latter levels. 212: Characters that are not balanced with the rest of the party because of having a really ubber item, like an artifact. "'Well, we could always go to Uberwald', said Maurice. 'Ubberwald?' asked the kid. 'No, Uberwald. There's an umlaut in it,' said Maurice. 'Ooooberwald?' 'That's more like it, kid,' said Maurice." -Terry Pratchett, The Amazing Maurice and his Educated Rodents (It's not verbatim, I don't have the book with me.) And, as someone else put it on these boards, "'I'll be overpowered for a while and then it's your turn' is not a good model of game balance."
ElIsRa 08-06-06, 02:01 AM	-DMs that throw ridiculously tough adversaries a players way (i.e. chimeras for a 2 PC level 2 party.) Just cause he doesn't wanna let you off easy.* Amen to that! -People who make large, blanket statements without ever making exceptions ever and without pausing to consider other viewpoints.* For instance: "NO! You canNOT play a %&# DROW!! I don't CARE if you have a backstory 'rife with pathos'! I don't CARE if you bear no similarity to anyone in a popular line of books! GOD! ... munchkin." Or: "NO! You canNOT play a %&# WILDER!! I don't CARE if sorcerer doesn't adequately describe your abilities! I don't CARE if you looked at the wilder and said 'This fits my character perfectly.' I don't CARE if there's a general consensus on the boards that psionics is all right! And you CAN'T use that backstory! I don't care HOW many roleplaying opportunities it will give you! It has SEX** in it! GOD! ... munchkin." * For people, who I've seen on this thread before, who are numb to sarcasm: This entire post is sarcasm. Except for this asterisky bit. ** Note that I'm not in favor of including sex in a D&D game with, say, 8-year-olds. But if you think the group can handle it, you'd be surprised at how much of a psychological motivator it can be. 305. (by my count) Poeple who think a decision about a campaign(setting) that a DM toiled over for weeks/months/years should be overturned to suit their whim. Honestly people, DMs work ten times harder than the players to get about half the fun. Show some respect. And if you REALLY want to play a freaking Wilder, find another group for Palor's sake! Or maybe, just maybe, why don't YOU try your hand at DMing for once? Also, I'm not sure that there is a consensus on the boards that psionics are "all right". There are definately the psionic fanboys who will fight for psionics to the death's end, and there are those that really have a probelm with them for this reason or that. Not that it should matter what someone says on these boards, after all, the first rule, the golden rule is always, "If the DM says so, it is the law." PERIOD!
MistWolf 08-06-06, 02:28 AM	That's it, I'm going to make a phrenic elf fighter who's nuetral in alignment, wielding a fullblade (looks like a 'big honkin anime sword') who likes to randomly rape people. :D...but you draw the line at the Sonic Screwdriver?? Care for a jelly baby?
Koja_of_Khazari 08-06-06, 03:22 AM	Well, I have a number of things that are not allowed in my current FR campaign (psionics, hexblades, dragon disciples, favored souls, etc.), but since the title of the thread is asking for things I will "never ever" allow, the list is shorter: 306(?): Any race that has racial HD (racial HD are a rules nightmare). Level adjustments are fine, even at 1st-level (they carry a number of negative levels equal to their level adjustment, and work these negative levels off by gaining xp). If you want to play a half-dragon with a +3 level adjustment, then you'll find out what a good idea it was when you get to face 4th-level challenges with 1st-level stats. 307: ANYTHING from Unearthed Arcana, with the exception of certain class variants. This means NO racial paragons, NO bloodline levels, NO weapon groups, NO gehstalt characters, NO variant spellcasting systems, NO variant armor class/hp systems... I disliked some, and hated the rest. 308: Anything from a book I don't OWN a copy of. No, I don't want to borrow it to look it over. If you want to use this option so badly, buy me the book, and hope I allow it then. (nobody has taken me up on this yet. oh well...) 309: Shopping out of the DMG, Arms & Equipment Guide, etc. without consulting me. I do not want to find out your character has a periscope 310: For that matter, much of the stuff in the Arms & Equipment Guide. This book seems like a bunch of designers' notes cobbled together with only a token effort made toward balancing the items, or even pricing them correctly. It's easier to ban the book, then add an item from it as needed, after fixing it (I recently had to fix candelabras before including them in my game, if that gives you an idea how messed up this book is). 311: Arguing against a ruling I make during the game. Any and all appeals must wait until the game session is over (or at least until a dinner break). 312: Swashbucklers. Not overpowered, just a mess. The concept can already be done, and done better, with standard classes and prestige classes. 313: Mercurial weapons. Whose idea was this, anyway? 314: Any "homebrew" creations, whether spells, magic or mundane items, race variants, whatever, that I didn't have a hand in creating. It's not enough for me to look it over and give it the thumbs-up or thumbs-down. If I wasn't involved in the creation process, it's out. That said, my involvement in the creation process can be minimal. All I really need is to be able to see it and polish it up into something we both like, WELL BEFORE game day. But surprise creations are OUT! 315: Off-the-cuff substitutions of one race/class feature for another (like, "can I give up my uncanny dodge ability for a feat instead?"). Even if I like the sound of it. Any such changes are homebrew class variants, and such decisions will not be made on the spot. 316: And of course, roleplaying the play-by-play act of sex. It hasn't come up, and I haven't announced such a ban, it sort of goes without saying, but after skimming this thread, I'll weigh in.
Greg K 08-06-06, 05:03 AM	Here is my immediate list. much of it has been covered. dire flails, double bladed swords, dwarven Urgrosh's, gnome hooked hammer's, elven thinblades, spiked chains, mercurial weapons, etc. spiked armor halfling riding dogs most alchemical equipment anything from a source that I have not reviewed and given approval. acquiring items, especially magic items, out of game. Complete Books: I will only allow a limited selecton of the feats, spells, domains and prcs. As for the new base classes, I have nothing againt new base classes per se. Some of the class concepts do not fit my homebrew setting or the games I like to run (e.g., spell thief). With other classes, I dislike how a particular class was handled and it does not fit my setting (e.g., the Samurai). Finally, there are classes for which I have alternatives that cover similar concepts, but in a way that I prefer. The alternatives might be class variants (e.g., wilderness rogue instead of the scout whose skirmish ability I dislike) or a class from a third party source (e.g., Green Ronin's Shaman instead of the spirit shaman). The "Races of [x]" books: the exception being a few spells and feats Book of Exalted Deeds Frostburn Sandstorm Magic of Incarnum Psionic Handbooks: I just prefer the approach of Green Ronin's Psychic's Handbook and so I use that Savage Species: I'll only allow the half ogre, thri-kreen, the hippocampus, some spells and some templates. The rest of the book I consider to be worthless. From UA: No bloodlines, racial paragons or gestalts. PHB2: Anything other than the spells, the cleric variant, the druid variant for wildshape, some of the feats and possibly the beguiler (I like the concept, but I am unsure of the class as a whole). As for the classes other than the beguiler, I will not use them for the following reasons: Duskblade: I prefer Mike Mearl's Myrmidon class especially that it does not focus on channeling spells through weapons (imo, that ability should be acquired through player choice of feats). Knight: I prefer to allow a knight class from another source that isn't so overly focused into the role of knight protector/bodyguard. Dragon shaman: Dragons in my campaign do not give powers. Second, I find the class to be a lame concept- especially when players on these boards have been requesting certain classes for standard fantasy archetypes and those requests have gone unanswered. Monster Manual, MM2 and Fiend Folio: I will not use more than a handful of the monsters that did not appear in previous editions. WOTC's new monsters generally have no appeal to me. MM3: Again only a handful of the new monsters created by WOTC's staff appeal to me. Therefore most monster will never get used. MM4: I found the monsters in this book to be the waste of a tree. Metagaming Rules lawyers Players that refuse to accept that the DM is free to deviate from the printed rules and introduce limits or make other rule changes to reflect the setting. This includes the DM altering what the PHB says regarding races and classes, refusing to disallow WOTC supplements in part or whole, setting up naming conventions for races/cultures, limiting deity choices to world specific deities with set domains, etc. Players that don't trust DMs. I may play the adversaries for the characters, but I am not the adversary of the players. I do not go out of my way to screw you over (and limiting choices to enforce the setting I created is not screwing over a player). Players that assume they have a right to use anything just because they bought it. Players that are so emotionally tied to their character that they have some sort of emotional breakdown or tantrum should their character die. While I don't intentionally try to kill characters, sometimes characters die. Yes, it is unfortunate, but if you can't handle the death of a character in a mature way, maybe you should try another hobby or seeking out professional help. People that want to play evil characters or try to get away with playing evil characters by putting neutral alignments. People only interested in combat and not roleplaying. People interested in ultimate builds. People that, when leveling their character, do not take into account the direction that the players themselves have taken the campaign. This is especially true of people tied to a preconceived build. Characters that are ripoffs of existing characters
Tusalu 08-06-06, 05:39 AM	349 ANY rule/ability based on a computergame (especially WoW) 350 A gnome that lets his riding dog ride HIM, causes to much trouble about movement. (Yes, my players have tried.) 351 Anyone calling his character Dark_Mega_Killer24 or anything that weird. 352 Chaotic Evil pcs that goes on a mindless killing spree for no reason. 353 Anything from a book neither me or the players own. (theyve told me there´s a great feat in Complete divine but since we cant check it; NO! 354 Someone trying to test if everything really is possible in D&D. For example by attacking the barbarian with a chicken. 355 Players who wants to stop playing their character, but before they leave they offer all their property to the group (with orders to give it to their new character!) And Yes my players have tried all of the above :waits:
Untamed_Soul 08-06-06, 05:48 AM	I am quite flexible when DMing and I admire creative ways to approach characters and challenges along the way. Though I have found a set of rules I tend to be steadfast on not allowing in my game: 1. More than one PC at a time per player - Too many times I've noticed the one character is their prized creation, while the other acts as a mule to serve the "hero" 2. Players bored with their poorly created character switching every week to play a new character - I understand people grow tired playing the same character, but I don't allow constant switching of characters, it takes away from the storyline and just makes you less and less focused on building personality for your characters. 3. Metagaming - Can't say I can't allow it, but I punish it through xp. If your character does not know something and you act out on player knowledge, your taking a xp hit.
The Amazing Dancing Bear 08-06-06, 05:52 PM	Amen to that! 305. (by my count) Poeple who think a decision about a campaign(setting) that a DM toiled over for weeks/months/years should be overturned to suit their whim. Honestly people, DMs work ten times harder than the players to get about half the fun. Show some respect. And if you REALLY want to play a freaking Wilder, find another group for Palor's sake! Or maybe, just maybe, why don't YOU try your hand at DMing for once? Also, I'm not sure that there is a consensus on the boards that psionics are "all right". There are definately the psionic fanboys who will fight for psionics to the death's end, and there are those that really have a probelm with them for this reason or that. Not that it should matter what someone says on these boards, after all, the first rule, the golden rule is always, "If the DM says so, it is the law." PERIOD! I have tried, and failed with spectacular results, to see how one person playing one class - with good reason to do so - is "overturning" the campaign. It's a different class/race/whatever, but I don't see why it violates the basic fabric of the campaign. Also, why not take clues from the players? If the player wants to play a Wilder who's a Wilder because of abuse as a child, why not say that this isn't unique - there are lots of people like this. It could create some extremely interesting fights and roleplay opportunities. Also, it's pretty hard to find another group you like in some areas. I couldn't leave my group if I wanted to because other venues for D&D near me include a few young children and their dad and the general contingent of antisocial jerks in high school. And it's "Pelor". And I do DM. And you appear to be doing something terrible to your metaphors, because I can't make heads or sow's ears of them. And the whole "DM is always right" thing tends to be employed by powertrippers who can't admit their mistakes. And so on.
Fat Man 08-06-06, 06:14 PM	only a few things i never alowe and they are psionics simple cos it's not needed ias it simply causes arguments over wither or not its over powered under powerd etc. (thankfully the rest of the group im in agree). Poeple who dont know the rules Now im not saying everone should know everything but if you want to play a barbarian you should find out how rage works or if you want to turn undead look it up BEFORE we start playing not in the middle of the combat that you decided to use it in
KurenaiYami 08-06-06, 06:21 PM	And the whole "DM is always right" thing tends to be employed by powertrippers who can't admit their mistakes. But, they ARE always right, as the arbiters of the rules. If they are going against a ruling that makes sense to everybody else for no aparent reason, or because they just did not know the rules, then that person should not be DMing, and something should be done about them involving your foot and their backside.
Kursk 08-06-06, 06:40 PM	I have tried, and failed with spectacular results, to see how one person playing one class - with good reason to do so - is "overturning" the campaign. It's a different class/race/whatever, but I don't see why it violates the basic fabric of the campaign. You probably can't see it as it's not your campaign.... :whatsthis
nimrodii 08-06-06, 06:58 PM	I'll allow almost anything, as long as I can see it before hand. Maybe I am DMing for good groups, because I have never seemed to have a problem. The only thing I try to curb is too much arguement at the table. I mean even the DM is human. A disscussion about a rule I missed, fine as long as it is done in a quick and semi-polite manner. Not like the time a session broke down into the arguement from The Dead Ale Wives skit, over the matter of a contigency spell.
Novus_Magnus 08-06-06, 08:27 PM	If you made it thus far and have not missed the multitudes of restating some obvious things, I have to agree with some things. Some of the stuff is just being stubborn and lazy, and other things legit. I myself will allow most anything...why because I have an answer for anything my PCs can come up with. Now there is one thing I absolutely refuse to have in my game...... ROD o WONDER! :banghead: Too many games have been ruined by the time wasted in messing with the consequences of usage of said item.
metamind 08-06-06, 08:56 PM	Anime/manga based characters. *Shudders*
Darkuwa 08-06-06, 09:47 PM	363: Gnomes 364: Over-roleplayers 365: People who can't handle the occasional railrod 366: People who can't make open ended descisions (Your in a city and aren't on any particular quest, what are you going to do? Sit at an inn till I get a quest. No, thats the 10th time, go away) 367: Casters with no damage spells
tsuyoshikentsu 08-06-06, 10:40 PM	Look, I DO have one! 368. A majority of the people on this thread.
Kursk 08-07-06, 01:05 AM	Look, I DO have one! 368. A majority of the people on this thread. I'm sure the feeling is mutual.
ElIsRa 08-07-06, 01:35 AM	I have tried, and failed with spectacular results, to see how one person playing one class - with good reason to do so - is "overturning" the campaign. It's a different class/race/whatever, but I don't see why it violates the basic fabric of the campaign. Also, why not take clues from the players? If the player wants to play a Wilder who's a Wilder because of abuse as a child, why not say that this isn't unique - there are lots of people like this. It could create some extremely interesting fights and roleplay opportunities. Let me put in simple, straight forward words. If a DM makes a ruling that say 'Psionics' don't exist, why should he let you play a psion? Or a wilder? Or, what if elves don't exist? Or gnomes? Or dragons? Or black powder? What if there never was an Oriental Empire? Should the DM allow a Half-Dragon/Elf Monk/Samurai wielding duel gnome-crafted revolvers? NO!!! NEVER!!! Not in a million years!! A DM who spent weeks/months/years hammering out the exacting details of a campaign(setting) should not, could not allow a player, regardless of pleas, to play something that does not mesh. If I make a world where elves are 2 ft tall and have a bonus to Craft(Toys), then by the Heavens, you WILL NOT play a Tolkien-ized elf that stands 6'4" in that game, come hell or high water. Also, it's pretty hard to find another group you like in some areas. I couldn't leave my group if I wanted to because other venues for D&D near me include a few young children and their dad and the general contingent of antisocial jerks in high school. Start your own group. And the whole "DM is always right" thing tends to be employed by powertrippers who can't admit their mistakes. It has nothing to do with 'powertrip'ing. DMs are litterally, and figuritively the symbol, and piler of order at a choatic crossroad of rules and statistics. The DM is the one who breathes life into a world of numbers and tag lines. He is, in fact the weaver of this imaginary collective reality known as a campaign world. Every time he sits down behind his game screen, he recrafts the world, and in doing so, brings life to your character as well. As the sole soverent of reality, the DM is the first, and the last arbitrator of all rules. If the DM thinks a Mindflayer can shoot lightening, Mindflayers shoot lightening. If the DM believes that elves can walk on walls, elves walk up and down walls with ease. It is the DMs world, and if the DM doesn't want Psionics, there shall be no Psionics. If a DM rules that falling 1000ft only causes 1 hp of damage, then only 1 point is inflicted. That said, a power-hungry DM should not be tolerated. Leave if you don't like the way he runs things. Start your own game, or join another person's. Its a free country after all.
Alekzandr 08-07-06, 05:52 AM	369, Anything not Printed by WotC 370, Anything printed by WotC before the 3.5 Player's Handbook was Published 371, The ability "Manipulate Form". It does not exist in any game I adjudicate.
ChaosFire 08-07-06, 11:43 AM	372, The Book of Erotic Fantasies The book on how to have sex in DnD.....just...no.
Toloran 08-07-06, 12:02 PM	Anime/manga based characters. *Shudders* But anime/manga based campaigns are ok. =P ROD o WONDER! Too many games have been ruined by the time wasted in messing with the consequences of usage of said item. Aww... the rod of wonder is awesome. My DM one time gave my bard a new bow (for my instrument) that was actually a rod of wonder. So every time I tried to play my bardic music, it would go off XD. In any case: 373. Dragon Shamans. I don't know why, but for some reason every game I have either DM'ed for or played in that had a PC as a Dragon Shaman has gone horribly horribly wrong...
Ankalagon 08-07-06, 12:09 PM	374) Stirges - ridiculous 375) Anything that resembles a ball of snot i.e slimes, oozes, puddings. I mean puddings for cryin' out loud. 376) Players who sit there with a who'll crack first mentality over making the coffee, Why? Because it's always me and it's damn annoying. 377) Anyone who gets dirt, food and assorted crud on the inside of my books. The cover is for coffee stains (it's required and expected) not right through the middle of the skills section.
Kimokeo 08-07-06, 12:21 PM	378. No classes, skills, feats, or spells from the PHB. Pages 109 & 110 are ok. Things you can buy: food and clothing only. All other items are forbidden. I understand some people may not understand this, but most of the PHB is broken. 379. No with lacking a sense of humor.
vanrulzz 08-07-06, 12:35 PM	378. No classes, skills, feats, or spells from the PHB. Pages 109 & 110 are ok. Things you can buy: food and clothing only. All other items are forbidden. I understand some people may not understand this, but most of the PHB is broken. are you kiddig?
Pandaemoni 08-07-06, 12:56 PM	380. Human sacrifice. I don't care how "method" you are in role playing, I will never allow any player to actually take a human life at my gaming table just for the sake of realism. 381. An all-ooze party, especially if one of the player-oozes wants to be a high-charisma bard. 382. Characters whose swords weigh more than they do.
revnk 08-07-06, 01:30 PM	381. An all-ooze party, especially if one of the player-oozes wants to be a high-charisma bard. You mean like Gelvis Pressley? Or Glob Dylan? Ooze Springsteen? Jelly Corrigan of Squishing Pus-kin? Okay, fine. I'll go back to my room. I didn't wanna play with you guys, anyway.
nimrodii 08-07-06, 01:50 PM	Reading all these has really made me think of my next game, i.e. things I want to see. a Half-Dragon/Elf Monk/Samurai wielding duel gnome-crafted revolvers 381. An all-ooze party, especially if one of the player-oozes wants to be a high-charisma bard. Among others.
tharivol266 08-07-06, 03:53 PM	Honestly people, DMs work ten times harder than the players to get about half the fun. Show some respect. And if you REALLY want to play a freaking Wilder, find another group for Palor's sake! Or maybe, just maybe, why don't YOU try your hand at DMing for once? one day i had a bit of a writers block and my player came to me with an adventure idea and said he wanted to try his hand at setting it up with my assisstance. he drew up the main story and the number of civilians at the place and a basic map of the area and we got together and i made a more detailed map on my laptop and made the bbeg and set up some of the secret stuff while he made the base enemies. i used clones of all lvl 8: sorcerers, monks, clerics, rogues, and barbarians. he got sone with three of them and had to take a break and said "JR. How can you do this all the time?"
Echodork 08-07-06, 04:16 PM	383. Players who try to surprise me by buying items or learning a skill without telling me. One of my players, anticipating that his character might be captured, wrote on his character sheet "Ring of Sustenance hidden on my person at a DC 32 Hide check." Sure enough, when his character was captured, he insisted I let him keep the ring because I didn't Search for it. 384. Evard's Black Tentacles. 385. Characters obviously ripped out of fiction or literature. As with most other DMs, this includes video games, books, or (especially) anime. 386. After my current campaign, attribute scores lower than 8. My stat generation method is very generous, but I now have a player with 5 Charisma who doesn't mind every turning encounter into a fight. 387. Voracious Dispelling. This is the Warlock infusion that grants dispel magic at will.
tharivol266 08-07-06, 04:29 PM	they're invocations not infusions...although....that would be a fun thing to try...."hey cut yourself open so we can infuse you with the power to dispel magic".... im going to bring up the all ooze party to my players tomorrow.
TarlSS 08-07-06, 05:39 PM	388.Cookies 389.Pie 390.And anything Nice.
JayDubya 08-07-06, 06:11 PM	In keeping with the traditions heretofore established by the previous 390, Fake 391: Fun. :rolleyes: (Honestly, some of you guys seem to ban half the Player's Handbook and 99% of everything else. * * * Real 391: Fighting between PCs. A friendly duel, maybe. Not two players trying to kill one another in-game. That's just a big no-no and I will throw down DM fiat after fiat to stop it. Addendum to 391: In the interest of preventing this, no dire conflicts of alignment or social status or what have you such that logically two characters would hate each other. In movies and novels intraparty conflict gives way to close friendship over time - I have yet to see this at the gaming table, and unless I am reasonably assured that two players will quickly put aside drastic background differences, they will not HAVE said drastic background differences.
MistWolf 08-07-06, 06:37 PM	After participating in a spirited exchange on another thread, I can honestly answer the original posters' question: What will I not allow at my table in any campaign, game or game system? I will not allow a player a Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate or Sense Motive roll while dealing with another player. The PCs have been together for awhile and know each other and can tell when someone is running a bluff, scam or simply using fast talk and double speak. But more importantly, it's because I've seen more than once when a good player was running a good bluff have the whole well laid and played plan come crashing down around his ears when the GM asks him to roll. You wanna pull a fast one on the other players? Then earn it
PiedmonSama 08-07-06, 07:03 PM	392. Close-mindedness. Someone who says, "I'll never allow X at my game because it's always abused by powergamers, it's unbalanced and it's just pure cheese," needs to realise that D&D isn't just about them and what they like. 393. In-game Racism. This "oh, they're just Orcs" mentality. It is not the purview of any so-called "goodly race" to think that way. I don't care if they did think that way in the actual Dark Ages, they didn't have alignment-detecting magic back then. In my game worlds, no sentient race is more wont to be "good" or "evil" than another (excluding planars) because they have something called free will. And there is no such thing as a "culture of evil," even Aztecs could be heroic and love and all that jazz. 394. A character who is just stats. I don't play D&D as an exercise in mathematics, I play it because I like fantastical and exciting stories, I like writing them and I like playing in them. If I'm doing a campaign that's to last more than one night, I require all my players to give me at least a half-page long written history.
Darkuwa 08-07-06, 08:25 PM	393. In-game Racism. This "oh, they're just Orcs" mentality. It is not the purview of any so-called "goodly race" to think that way. I don't care if they did think that way in the actual Dark Ages, they didn't have alignment-detecting magic back then. In my game worlds, no sentient race is more wont to be "good" or "evil" than another (excluding planars) because they have something called free will. And there is no such thing as a "culture of evil," even Aztecs could be heroic and love and all that jazz. Ever read a fantasy novel? Orcs, Goblins and Ogres are KoS to civilized races. There are exceptions, but the outsiders of an evil race become very good at pleading while defending.
PiedmonSama 08-07-06, 08:31 PM	Yeah, I read Lord of the Rings. Tolkein's orcs were either Elves who were twisted by Melkor/Sauron's evil, or products Sauruman's genetic manipulation. The derivative fiction following in his stead usually does not have that excuse. Orcs are shallow, evil clones of each other because, well, they just are. So you can kill droves of them and not feel bad. To my mind it's lazy writing, lazy morality, and while I wouldn't deny anyone else the opportunity to play D&D the way they like, it's dull as dishwater to my eyes. Also, why are they always "those ugly orcs?" That's just cheap.
ChaosFire 08-07-06, 08:36 PM	They're ugly because Melkor's dark deception sunk into the pores and fibers of the dissident Elves, even changing their genetic structure. It's a lazy excuse that blames evil, but it's similar to early explorer thinking Africans were dark skinned because the sun literally charred them. And the orcs that were due to Sauruman's genetic engineering were a cross-breed of orcs and goblins called Uruk-Hai, so can that really be counted as an orc?
ressurrector 08-07-06, 11:56 PM	393. In-game Racism. This "oh, they're just Orcs" mentality. It is not the purview of any so-called "goodly race" to think that way. I don't care if they did think that way in the actual Dark Ages, they didn't have alignment-detecting magic back then. In my game worlds, no sentient race is more wont to be "good" or "evil" than another (excluding planars) because they have something called free will. And there is no such thing as a "culture of evil," even Aztecs could be heroic and love and all that jazz. Agreed, I've had too many players who just say: It's a goblin/orc/etc... KILL IT! This is why I now play the Eberron setting, where each race can be evil or good, and the goblins/giants used to have more culture than the humans do now.
turalisj 08-08-06, 01:37 AM	I'm running an indiana jones type eberron game and we have a human and goblin who are like han and chewy.
The Amazing Dancing Bear 08-08-06, 09:24 PM	Let me put in simple, straight forward words. If a DM makes a ruling that say 'Psionics' don't exist, why should he let you play a psion? Or a wilder? Let me put this a bit more bluntly: because it doesn't have to be a psion. Or wilder. Call it magic - use the psionics/magic transparency rules and it works just fine. Why not just keep the mechanics the player thinks fits the concept best and alter the flavor to the liking of your campaign? Or, what if elves don't exist? Or gnomes? Or dragons? Or black powder? What if there never was an Oriental Empire? I'm not saying violate the principles of the campaign - if there are no gnomes, don't randomly say, "I'm a gnome," and make the DM agree with you. You're reading words I didn't type. Should the DM allow a Half-Dragon/Elf Monk/Samurai wielding duel gnome-crafted revolvers? NO!!! NEVER!!! Not in a million years!! I realize I'm going out on a limb here, but try this out: if you're in, to pick a setting at random, Castle Ravenloft, it could be an honor-bound ascetic warrior cursed by a fiend to a horrific appearance and infernal powers (read: can breathe fire and brimstone), who was gifted, because of the traces of pity in the fiend's otherwise black heart, with a pair of fiendish engines of clockwork that he fears may be sucking out his soul with every sulfurous retort. Thus we come upon a hero torn apart, shunned by those he seeks to protect, thought to be his own hated foe, constantly walking the tightrope between putting each bullet to good use or succumbing to the hellish power of the clockwork devices. Or something like that. A DM who spent weeks/months/years hammering out the exacting details of a campaign(setting) should not, could not allow a player, regardless of pleas, to play something that does not mesh. If I make a world where elves are 2 ft tall and have a bonus to Craft(Toys), then by the Heavens, you WILL NOT play a Tolkien-ized elf that stands 6'4" in that game, come hell or high water. Why does the DM have to be set in stone? Why does he have to know all the details of his world? Is there no room for madcap ad-libbery in today's harsh world? This aside, however, you're saying I said things I didn't say again. Don't play something that's not going to mesh with the campaign. But if something comes along that is interesting and enjoyable, don't turn it down because it doesn't fit your rigid preconceptions of "your world". At least try to make it fit, and you may find that the whole idea deserves further incorporation into your world. Start your own group. You misunderstand - the people I ennumerated for you were the people who played D&D at all in my neighborhood. It has nothing to do with 'powertrip'ing. DMs are litterally, and figuritively the symbol, and piler of order at a choatic crossroad of rules and statistics. The DM is the one who breathes life into a world of numbers and tag lines. He is, in fact the weaver of this imaginary collective reality known as a campaign world. Every time he sits down behind his game screen, he recrafts the world, and in doing so, brings life to your character as well. As the sole soverent of reality, the DM is the first, and the last arbitrator of all rules. If the DM thinks a Mindflayer can shoot lightening, Mindflayers shoot lightening. If the DM believes that elves can walk on walls, elves walk up and down walls with ease. It is the DMs world, and if the DM doesn't want Psionics, there shall be no Psionics. If a DM rules that falling 1000ft only causes 1 hp of damage, then only 1 point is inflicted. First of all, the DM is not the symbol and pillar of order at a chaotic crossroad of rules and statistics in any way resembling literal. The term "literally" is tossed about with altogether too wild an abandon. He is only the aforementioned and really rather sycophantic metaphor figuratively. Now that that's out of the way. The DM can do whatever the hell he wants, but if the DM's beloved DMPC falls off a cliff and the DM says, "It only deals one point of damage," why, I ask, isn't someone with two fragments of a superego to rub together DMing? In my admittedly somewhat limited experience, "The DM is always right" tends to be invoked only when the DM is, in fact, wrong. But this is getting remarkably off topic. That said, a power-hungry DM should not be tolerated. Leave if you don't like the way he runs things. Start your own game, or join another person's. Its a free country after all. I'm of the opinion that a power-hungry DM should be talked to a few times before he/she is walked out on. The Bear
LordHawkeye 08-08-06, 09:58 PM	Got a few questions for a few of the posters here. Banning a base race because you don't like it, don't you think it's kinda bad form to let personal bias influence your authority? The "raging berserker" class, a few have mentioned it and I've looked it over myself. Now it's ability to use incite rage, an ability taken from an epic level feat, is dubious but what exactly makes this prestige class so unbalancing anyways? Those who hate players who name their chars based off stories, I'd be wary of that. I've played with a lot of Legolas' in online games and I can tell you, many of them are perfectly good players who just happen to suck at making up names. We all have our problems you know. Those who have issues with munchkins. A wise warrior once said "Nothing is invincible. Absolutely EVERYTHING has a weakness." Munchkins are powerful but often end up leaving glaring weakness as the price for their power. Every tried exploiting this a few times until they clue in that putting all your eggs in one basket isn't a great idea? I'll give you an example. I heard of a player who was just nuts for templates. Werebear, half fiend or something and a bunch of other stuff. Tried to get vampirism while he was at it. One problem: He had a mere 8 HD at lv.20 which resulted in this... Player: I turn into bear and charge the wizard. (with intent to one shot as always) DM: The wizard says a word and you die. Player: Huh? What? DM: Power word: kill. Look it up. And since you're an outsider, you can't be ressurected. :D Savy?
Always-Late 08-08-06, 10:18 PM	Let me put this a bit more bluntly: because it doesn't have to be a psion. Or wilder. Call it magic - use the psionics/magic transparency rules and it works just fine. Why not just keep the mechanics the player thinks fits the concept best and alter the flavor to the liking of your campaign?Cause you hate the psionics system, and you think that binding and gagging a spellcaster should be enough to keep him down. The "raging berserker" class, a few have mentioned it and I've looked it over myself. Now it's ability to use incite rage, an ability taken from an epic level feat, is dubious but what exactly makes this prestige class so unbalancing anyways?Once he rages, he doesn't stop until everyone's far away. Whenever he takes damage, he rages. PC 1: "Hi, berserker Joe!" PC 2: "Hi, wizard Bob!" PC 1: "Lets go to the pub." PC 2: "Okay." DM: "Joe, you step on a nail." PC 1: "FRENZY TIME!!! MUST KILL NEAREST TARGET!" PC 2: "HOLY CRAP! DOMINATE PERSON! DOMINATE PERSON! BESTOW CURSE! AUGH MY SPLEEN! MY PRECIOUS BODY ORGANS! THE UNIMAGINABLE PAIN! FREAKING FRENZIED BERSERKERS! FAIL YOUR SAVES! FAIL YOUR FREAKING - " DM: "You're at -32." PC 1, OOC: "So, no more combatants, right? Can I end my rage now?" DM: "You see a frightened man running away." PC 1: "KILL! KILL! PURSUE WITH BOOTS OF SPEED AND KILL!" DM: "He starts screaming and running away, but you catch up to him. He starts to yell something along the lines of 'No! This can't be AUGH! AUGH! AAA- ' until you rend off his head." PC 1, OOC: "Are we done yet?" DM: "You see a day care center." PC 1, OOC: "You've got to be kidding me." DM: "No, there's nobody." PC 1, OOC: "Sorry, PC 2. Guess you have to make a new character."
Silmon 08-08-06, 10:33 PM	I am going to get yelled at this I am sure (especially since I get yelled at often everywhere else for it) but I absolutely refuse to allow 5) psionics into my games because they are a pain, another magic type to factor in, and they always seem alot more powerful then the other classes. I've had many people (sometimes full groups) of metagamers wanting to play psionics in my campaigns, but I refuse and they whine about it. The fact that it is always the power hungry players who want to play psionics only hardens my resolve. I agree with you 100% :D They were outlawed by me in the earlier editions and they are so banned in this edition.
Silmon 08-08-06, 10:39 PM	:OMG! :OMG! PC 1: "Hi, berserker Joe!" PC 2: "Hi, wizard Bob!" PC 1: "Lets go to the pub." PC 2: "Okay." DM: "Joe, you step on a nail." PC 1: "FRENZY TIME!!! MUST KILL NEAREST TARGET!" PC 2: "HOLY CRAP! DOMINATE PERSON! DOMINATE PERSON! BESTOW CURSE! AUGH MY SPLEEN! MY PRECIOUS BODY ORGANS! THE UNIMAGINABLE PAIN! FREAKING FRENZIED BERSERKERS! FAIL YOUR SAVES! FAIL YOUR FREAKING - " DM: "You're at -32." PC 1, OOC: "So, no more combatants, right? Can I end my rage now?" DM: "You see a frightened man running away." PC 1: "KILL! KILL! PURSUE WITH BOOTS OF SPEED AND KILL!" DM: "He starts screaming and running away, but you catch up to him. He starts to yell something along the lines of 'No! This can't be AUGH! AUGH! AAA- " until you rend off his head." PC 1, OOC: "Are we done yet?" DM: "You see a day care center." PC 1, OOC: "You've got to be kidding me." DM: "No, there's nobody." PC 1, OOC: "Sorry, PC 2. Guess you have to make a new character." omfg is that funny :D To me you have made your point as to why there should not be any frenzied berserkers.....Good thing they dont exist in my homebrewed world.
Darkuwa 08-08-06, 11:07 PM	For those of you who ban monks because there is no oriental nation in your campaign, what about the brazillian martial arts that were around as long as kung fu and the egyptian martial arts that were around long before, or the european martial arts that were created before the europeans met the asians? Just because you don't have an oriental part of your setting doesn't mean theres noone who prefers to fight with bare hands and no armor and reaches an advanced level of combat under those circumstances.
ChaosFire 08-08-06, 11:24 PM	Well, European martial arts were wrestling, boxing, and an off-beat mix of the two, both of which are just generally considered to be in a different league than Asian arts. But you're still correct.
crow04 08-08-06, 11:34 PM	Well, European martial arts were wrestling, boxing, and an off-beat mix of the two, both of which are just generally considered to be in a different league than Asian arts. But you're still correct. iirc, there is also a french martial arts stlye based on ballroom dancing. not sure if it was anything special, but not based on boxing or wrestling
tsuyoshikentsu 08-09-06, 03:32 AM	iirc, there is also a french martial arts stlye based on ballroom dancing. not sure if it was anything special, but not based on boxing or wrestlingAnyone with information on places I can learn this style, PM me.
Ongorth 08-09-06, 04:00 AM	395) My mom. 396) Your mom.
LordHawkeye 08-09-06, 07:43 AM	PC 1: "Hi, berserker Joe!" PC 2: "Hi, wizard Bob!" PC 1: "Lets go to the pub." PC 2: "Okay." DM: "Joe, you step on a nail." PC 1: "FRENZY TIME!!! MUST KILL NEAREST TARGET!" PC 2: "HOLY CRAP! DOMINATE PERSON! DOMINATE PERSON! BESTOW CURSE! AUGH MY SPLEEN! MY PRECIOUS BODY ORGANS! THE UNIMAGINABLE PAIN! FREAKING FRENZIED BERSERKERS! FAIL YOUR SAVES! FAIL YOUR FREAKING - " DM: "You're at -32." PC 1, OOC: "So, no more combatants, right? Can I end my rage now?" DM: "You see a frightened man running away." PC 1: "KILL! KILL! PURSUE WITH BOOTS OF SPEED AND KILL!" DM: "He starts screaming and running away, but you catch up to him. He starts to yell something along the lines of 'No! This can't be AUGH! AUGH! AAA- " until you rend off his head." PC 1, OOC: "Are we done yet?" DM: "You see a day care center." PC 1, OOC: "You've got to be kidding me." DM: "No, there's nobody." PC 1, OOC: "Sorry, PC 2. Guess you have to make a new character." Ah, didn't see the part where it self activates. Yeah, that's a little over the top. Makes a nice cursed item but a really poor prestige class cept for villains possibly.
Chrono Nexus 08-09-06, 08:36 AM	397) A pc-owned Mirror of Opposition
Tormsskull 08-09-06, 08:52 AM	Cause you hate the psionics system, and you think that binding and gagging a spellcaster should be enough to keep him down. Once he rages, he doesn't stop until everyone's far away. Whenever he takes damage, he rages. PC 1: "Hi, berserker Joe!" PC 2: "Hi, wizard Bob!" PC 1: "Lets go to the pub." PC 2: "Okay." DM: "Joe, you step on a nail." PC 1: "FRENZY TIME!!! MUST KILL NEAREST TARGET!" PC 2: "HOLY CRAP! DOMINATE PERSON! DOMINATE PERSON! BESTOW CURSE! AUGH MY SPLEEN! MY PRECIOUS BODY ORGANS! THE UNIMAGINABLE PAIN! FREAKING FRENZIED BERSERKERS! FAIL YOUR SAVES! FAIL YOUR FREAKING - " DM: "You're at -32." PC 1, OOC: "So, no more combatants, right? Can I end my rage now?" DM: "You see a frightened man running away." PC 1: "KILL! KILL! PURSUE WITH BOOTS OF SPEED AND KILL!" DM: "He starts screaming and running away, but you catch up to him. He starts to yell something along the lines of 'No! This can't be AUGH! AUGH! AAA- ' until you rend off his head." PC 1, OOC: "Are we done yet?" DM: "You see a day care center." PC 1, OOC: "You've got to be kidding me." DM: "No, there's nobody." PC 1, OOC: "Sorry, PC 2. Guess you have to make a new character." WTG dude, I now have to clean off my keyboard cause I spit coffee when I read this and started dieing laughing. I honestly believe that Frenzied Berserker was a class the designers said "Let's put this in as a joke and see how many people use it." In fact, I think the designers have been doing that a lot recently.
babysamurai 08-09-06, 09:01 AM	398. Gestalt (even in a solo campaign) 399. 3rd party material 400. Beards 401. Flaws/Traits 402. Rolling for ability scores
babysamurai 08-09-06, 09:05 AM	iirc, there is also a french martial arts stlye based on ballroom dancing. not sure if it was anything special, but not based on boxing or wrestling Savate. It was a style French traders developed after trading with China. It combines Ballet and Kung Fu, I believe.
AkumaDaimyo 08-09-06, 09:13 AM	Savate. It was a style French traders developed after trading with China. It combines Ballet and Kung Fu, I believe. Bah, I'd rather have a breakdancing ninjitsu style. :-p Or maybe fight like Mugen from Samurai Champloo.
babysamurai 08-09-06, 09:18 AM	Bah, I'd rather have a breakdancing ninjitsu style. :-p Or maybe fight like Mugen from Samurai Champloo. Breakjitsu, or would that be Nindancing?
FeceMan 08-09-06, 10:07 AM	PC 1: "Hi, berserker Joe!" PC 2: "Hi, wizard Bob!" PC 1: "Lets go to the pub." PC 2: "Okay." DM: "Joe, you step on a nail." PC 1: "FRENZY TIME!!! MUST KILL NEAREST TARGET!" PC 2: "HOLY CRAP! DOMINATE PERSON! DOMINATE PERSON! BESTOW CURSE! AUGH MY SPLEEN! MY PRECIOUS BODY ORGANS! THE UNIMAGINABLE PAIN! FREAKING FRENZIED BERSERKERS! FAIL YOUR SAVES! FAIL YOUR FREAKING - " DM: "You're at -32." PC 1, OOC: "So, no more combatants, right? Can I end my rage now?" DM: "You see a frightened man running away." PC 1: "KILL! KILL! PURSUE WITH BOOTS OF SPEED AND KILL!" DM: "He starts screaming and running away, but you catch up to him. He starts to yell something along the lines of 'No! This can't be AUGH! AUGH! AAA- ' until you rend off his head." PC 1, OOC: "Are we done yet?" DM: "You see a day care center." PC 1, OOC: "You've got to be kidding me." DM: "No, there's nobody." PC 1, OOC: "Sorry, PC 2. Guess you have to make a new character." Why does the berserker say "Hi, berserker Joe!"? Why does the wizard say "Hi, wizard Bob!"?
the_saracen 08-09-06, 11:10 AM	No, Colin, you may not play a half-illithid uvuudaum. :rolleyes:
revnk 08-09-06, 11:17 AM	Why does the berserker say "Hi, berserker Joe!"? Why does the wizard say "Hi, wizard Bob!"? Because those are their names.
ElIsRa 08-09-06, 02:10 PM	Let me put this a bit more bluntly: because it doesn't have to be a psion. Or wilder. Call it magic - use the psionics/magic transparency rules and it works just fine. Why not just keep the mechanics the player thinks fits the concept best and alter the flavor to the liking of your campaign? Also, why not take clues from the players? If the player wants to play a Wilder who's a Wilder because of abuse as a child, why not say that this isn't unique - there are lots of people like this. It could create some extremely interesting fights and roleplay opportunities.I think you were blunt enough the first time.I'm not saying violate the principles of the campaign - if there are no gnomes, don't randomly say, "I'm a gnome," and make the DM agree with you. You're reading words I didn't type.I realize I'm going out on a limb here, but try this out: if you're in, to pick a setting at random, Castle Ravenloft, it could be an honor-bound ascetic warrior cursed by a fiend to a horrific appearance and infernal powers (read: can breathe fire and brimstone), who was gifted, because of the traces of pity in the fiend's otherwise black heart, with a pair of fiendish engines of clockwork that he fears may be sucking out his soul with every sulfurous retort. Thus we come upon a hero torn apart, shunned by those he seeks to protect, thought to be his own hated foe, constantly walking the tightrope between putting each bullet to good use or succumbing to the hellish power of the clockwork devices. No, you are saying that if you say, "I am a short, big nosed humanoid with a +2 Con, -2 Str, the ability to cast speak with animals, dancing lights, ghost sound, and prestidigitation each once per day, a +4 dodge bonus against giants, a +1 attack against kobolds and goblinoids, a +2 craft and listen checks, a +2 save against illusions and a favored class Bard." I should let you play a gnome. A DM who spent weeks/months/years hammering out the exacting details of a campaign(setting) should not, could not allow a player, regardless of pleas, to play something that does not mesh. If I make a world where elves are 2 ft tall and have a bonus to Craft(Toys), then by the Heavens, you WILL NOT play a Tolkien-ized elf that stands 6'4" in that game, come hell or high water. No, I'm not crazy. I have two campaigns myself that I had worked on for several years before a PC ever stepped foot on it and I know many others that have as well. Why does the DM have to be set in stone?Preferably the DM is not set in stone, or concrete for that matter. :rofl: Why does he have to know all the details of his world? Is there no room for madcap ad-libbery in today's harsh world? No one ever even hinted that the DM must know all the details of a world; however, if a DM does have something predefined, then that is part of the world, and the DM can use that as a foundation on which to build the story.This aside, however, you're saying I said things I didn't say again. Don't play something that's not going to mesh with the campaign. But if something comes along that is interesting and enjoyable, don't turn it down because it doesn't fit your rigid preconceptions of "your world". At least try to make it fit, and you may find that the whole idea deserves further incorporation into your world.When a DM makes a ruling about a class or power or race or whatever it has far reaching implications, ones that aren't always immediately apparent. A good DM has already thought these issues over for a long time before he sets down at the gaming table, and has at least tried to make the logical ramifications part of his campaign setting/world.Start your own group.Please refrain from such childish personal attacks, I have.the DM is not the symbol and pillar of order at a chaotic crossroad of rules and statisticsI disagreeIn my admittedly somewhat limited experience, "The DM is always right" tends to be invoked only when the DM is, in fact, wrong.The DM is never 'Wrong'. A DM may have incorrectly recalled a rule, miscalculated, or made an unpopular or bias decision, but the DM is always right. -------------------------------400. Beards On players or characteres? Why does the berserker say "Hi, berserker Joe!"? Why does the wizard say "Hi, wizard Bob!"?A: They like talking to themselves. B: The wizard is named, 'berserker Joe' and the berserker is named, 'wizard Bob. C: There is a massive government conspiracy to cover up the existence of Aliens, Elvis Presley still being alive, the JFK assassination, and zombies.
FeceMan 08-09-06, 03:28 PM	B: The wizard is named, 'berserker Joe' and the berserker is named, 'wizard Bob. That one works the best, but I'm afraid it's not true.
tharivol266 08-09-06, 04:13 PM	actually having a berserker named wizard and vice verse it would be great at low levels in uncercover ops
AkumaDaimyo 08-09-06, 04:54 PM	Sorry but I don't belive in the phrase "The DM is always right.", and this includes when I DM. The DM has been quiet wrong before on more than one occasion. They are especially wrong if they say something is stated in the book that is NOT in the book or states differently. I agree with the person who said that that is usually only invoked when the DM is wrong because the DM is not man enough to admit to being wrong. It's really just a excuse for a person to not admit to mistakes or being wrong. A good DM (or person or player) would admit he or she made a mistake and correct it, instead of stubbornly admiting no fault. I say if you can't admit to being wrong on occasion, then don't be a DM. I also see the DM is always right excuse made a lot when a DM isnt polite enough to tell players he's changing a rule or using a house rule. Players should always be informed when a DM has house rules or changes or doesn't use a rule. Oh and on the Frenzied Berzerker note, we had one in a game. Warforged fighter.barb/frienzied berzerker. He has killed party members more than once and he is totally broken. He does ungodly ammounts of damage in a short ammount of time. I say NEVER allow this PrC in your game. It is broken and annoying as hell. It's also a excuse for a PC to kill other players and not have to be evil alinged or take real responsibility for his actions. I like the player even though I dislike the DM of that game now, but I HATE the Warforged character for Frenzied Berzerker. I will never allow it in any game I run. It's a NPC PrC now.
ElIsRa 08-09-06, 07:36 PM	Sorry but I don't belive in the phrase "The DM is always right.", and this includes when I DM. The DM has been quiet wrong before on more than one occasion. They are especially wrong if they say something is stated in the book that is NOT in the book or states differently. I agree with the person who said that that is usually only invoked when the DM is wrong because the DM is not man enough to admit to being wrong. It's really just a excuse for a person to not admit to mistakes or being wrong. A good DM (or person or player) would admit he or she made a mistake and correct it, instead of stubbornly admiting no fault. I say if you can't admit to being wrong on occasion, then don't be a DM. I draw a line between inaccuracy and being wrong. Any good DM should be willing to concede inaccuracies and work to correct them. Errors only become mistakes when you don't correct them.That said, it has been my experience that the phrase, "The DM is always right." is the last line of defense between stupidity (ie Commoner Railgun) and a DM's game world.I also see the DM is always right excuse made a lot when a DM isnt polite enough to tell players he's changing a rule or using a house rule. Players should always be informed when a DM has house rules or changes or doesn't use a rule.Agreed, but sometimes a DM should have the power to legislate from the bench.
RadicalTaoist 08-09-06, 10:09 PM	1-1001: Anything that would threaten the fun and enjoyment of my group (of which I count myself a member). Corollary to 1-1001: A lack of the stuff that my group (of which I count myself a member) would find cool and fun. Alright folks, thread over, go home.
Sphyre 08-09-06, 10:47 PM	73. Natural spell. Oh no! Please don't take away my CODzilla!!! :P
The Amazing Dancing Bear 08-09-06, 10:48 PM	First of all, I'd like to note, with extreme satisfaction, that you didn't comment on my backstory. On to business. I think you were blunt enough the first time.No, you are saying that if you say, "I am a short, big nosed humanoid with a +2 Con, -2 Str, the ability to cast speak with animals, dancing lights, ghost sound, and prestidigitation each once per day, a +4 dodge bonus against giants, a +1 attack against kobolds and goblinoids, a +2 craft and listen checks, a +2 save against illusions and a favored class Bard." I should let you play a gnome. Please don't turn my statements into hyperbole. It's childish and unsporting. I'm saying that, to go back to my wilder example, that if show you the Wilder, point out how Wild Surge and the limited power selection complement my roleplaying concept, and ask if I could play a Wilder, allowing that you will change the flavor so it's magic and won't violate the tender, filet mignon-esque flavor of your campaign, you shouldn't say no because you won't ever allow psionics ever because you hate it. No, I'm not crazy. I have two campaigns myself that I had worked on for several years before a PC ever stepped foot on it and I know many others that have as well. So when you said "DMs do 10 times the work of players", what you meant was "I, and some other people I know, have made themselves do 10 times the work of players." Preferably the DM is not set in stone, or concrete for that matter. :rofl: Rapier wit, good sir. No one ever even hinted that the DM must know all the details of a world; however, if a DM does have something predefined, then that is part of the world, and the DM can use that as a foundation on which to build the story.When a DM makes a ruling about a class or power or race or whatever it has far reaching implications, ones that aren't always immediately apparent. A good DM has already thought these issues over for a long time before he sets down at the gaming table, and has at least tried to make the logical ramifications part of his campaign setting/world. I agree with you; I'm just saying that if the rule reversal is only in a few specific cases, it shouldn't be that big a deal. Please refrain from such childish personal attacks, I have. What part of that was a childish personal attack? Was I misinterpreting your screen name? I was thinking of it as "Israel" changed around so that it also said, to paraphrase, "Yahweh is the Egyptian sun god." Nothing childish about it; I wouldn't stoop to that level. I disagreeThe DM is never 'Wrong'. A DM may have incorrectly recalled a rule, miscalculated, or made an unpopular or bias decision, but the DM is always right. Okay, the DM is never wrong. The DM may be "a complete jerk", a "biased jerk", or a "jerk who doesn't deserve to have people gaming with him and shouldn't be allowed anything more pointy than a d6", but he's never wrong.
ChaosFire 08-09-06, 11:15 PM	Okay, the DM is never wrong. The DM may be "a complete jerk", a "biased jerk", or a "jerk who doesn't deserve to have people gaming with him and shouldn't be allowed anything more pointy than a d6", but he's never wrong. Then leave and/or stop playing with him. Simple.
ElIsRa 08-10-06, 05:40 AM	I'm saying that, to go back to my wilder example, that if show you the Wilder, point out how Wild Surge and the limited power selection complement my roleplaying concept, and ask if I could play a Wilder, allowing that you will change the flavor so it's magic and won't violate the tender, filet mignon-esque flavor of your campaign, you shouldn't say no because you won't ever allow psionics ever because you hate it....but you see, if I have one person that has the abilities of a Wilder, then logically, there should be more. They should have a popped up in the history once or twice at the very least as a rumor or something. That means, that I have to go back and rewrite history, plan for another wilder every once in a while. I have to reconsider public reactions. How it would effect pop culture, Theology, philosophy, superstition... It's the butterfly effect. If you were desperate to play something like the Wilder, I'd suggest a Barbarian/Sorcerer, or the Spellfire Wielder feat, or the Warlock class, or any host of other options.So when you said "DMs do 10 times the work of players", what you meant was "I, and some other people I know, have made themselves do 10 times the work of players."Actually my players go the extra mile and deserve me working so hard on my games for them. **HUGS GAMING GROUP** :cheer: Rapier wit, good sir.Thank you.I agree with youThen stop arguing me;)Okay, the DM is never wrong. The DM may be "a complete jerk", a "biased jerk", or a "jerk who doesn't deserve to have people gaming with him and shouldn't be allowed anything more pointy than a d6", but he's never wrong.Then leave and/or stop playing with him. Simple.
babysamurai 08-10-06, 07:50 AM	On players or characteres? Players – no weirdy-beardys or fatbeards at my table.
oxybe 08-10-06, 09:42 AM	i don't know if these have been said, if so i am repeating them. so nya. 403 - annoying over-actors, as well as their counterparts, horrible over-actors. if you don't have anything relative to say, don't hog the spotlight with your horrible fake accent. 404 - page not found 405 - bad jokes made by both players and dm's 406 - too much wasted time between combat rounds thinking about what to do. if a round is 6 seconds game time, why does is it 6 minutes real time to resolve it? think about your next turn's actions during your comrade's turn as well as the enemy turns. long s-block'ed rant on my views on various things. read at your own risk. i am not held responsible for any bodily or psycological damage that may occur upon reading my views. this is not recommended for small children, small animals, people on cough medicine, people over the age of elminister, people who need people and furbies. especially vampiric furbies. ... don't ask. On Rip-offs: 130) blah, blah, blah. No, you cannot recreate your favorite Reloading-Hand-Crossbow Large-Adamantine-Greatsword Scar-on-the-face anime character. Ever. what no Guts? aw nutbunnies, not even once? but he's sooooooo cool. (i honestly recommend reading the beserk manga, it's quite the facinating story. quick warning it's very visual & gory though). there is nothing inherently wrong with basing a charater off of a popular one. it is sometimes fun playing a character similar to another one, the problem begins when you play an exact copy. if i wanted to play a barbarian in black full place, who's missing an eye & uses both a greatsword & repeating crossbow(ie. Guts) there is nothing wrong, since he is based off of guts. the problem begins when i take said character's mannerisms, personality traits, ect... and try to RP them to a fault. even then, i personally don't mind having a rip-off in any of my games, as long as no one really complains about it (if only 1 person complains, then your're being annoying, if more then 50% complains, then the character goes). i don't play rip-offs, but i often base my characters off existing characters. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- on the Frenzied Berserker: that "step on nail, go crazy bumkill" is rediculous. i am sorry, but in no way, shap or form can you be serious about that. while i can see a FB cursing loudly and being a bit sullen about his hurting foot, i doubt he would go in a frenzy and kill everything in sight (he also has a chance to no go crazy. there is a will save involved anyways). unless the nail peirces the skin & tendons, it would deal no damage. most people would pull the foot away before it can deal any serious damage. same goes for : toe stubbing, accidental foot smashing, elbow bumping, table bumping, being jokingly poked by a twig, ect... these things do not cause HP loss, at best 1 point of non-lethal damage, and even then only in extreme cases. if you, as the DM, makes it so there just "happends" to be a single small nail, in an inn floor, pointing upwards & that the pc is too dense to jerk his foot away when it comes down on the nail so that it deals physical damage (if he has DR 1/- then he would be immune to such things), just so you can wail on the party with their own member, you need to look for another position in the gaming group buddy. no offence to you or anyone who thinks like that, just my opinion. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- on psionics: it ain't that broken. i have played as a psion, against a psion & with a psion, as both PC and DM. it took a little time to adjust to it, but i like the power point system (very similar to MP systems used in video games and other RPG's), like magic there are good & bad powers. the only real problem is that some enemies that are strong because they have spell resistance are highly vulnerable to psionics. i believe in the ExPsiH they allow SR to affect both magic & psionics, so no biggie there, it's magic, only diffrent. i have seen people say "too sci-fi, too this, too that", this is laughable. how is it that you can allow people to bend reality with "magic" but not "psionics"? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- on races: i am a bit more fussy on this. if you can give me a very good reason as to why person from "Race X" would be here, then yes, i will allow, as long as the PC is of the same ECL as everyone else -------------------------------------------------------------------------- on PrC's/feats: all campaign specific is banned, because they require regional feats, have deity X, ect... that cannot exist on my campaign (ex: red wizard of thay requires a feat that requires you to be from Thay. the PrC itself is OK, but the required feat is banned, so it's a no-go). if it is a "generic PrC", like Frenzied Barb, Incantrix or Cragtop Archer, i will look at it on a case by case basis. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- on homebrew/3rd party stuff: give me a week to look at it, then i will decide. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- on anime/scifi/ect... based equipment : i honestly don't see a problem. 6-7 foot long swords are weird, but not uncommon. Pier Gerlofs Donia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pier_Gerlofs_Donia) had a sword mesuring 2.12 meters, a 7foot, 2 centimeter sword. do a quick search on either google or wikipedia on odachi, zweihander, greatsword and other such large weapons for real examples of big swords. the tetsubo was a real life great club used in japan to destroy the knees of a horse-rider's mount, the weapon was said to be so heavy that only demons used it (due to their strenght), though some strong warriors have the proper training to use it fully in combat. just because a weapon seems unfeasable does not mean it hasn't been made. that being said, use said weapons on a case by case basis. while i will rarely let a lvl1 pc start off with such an exotic weapon, when he reaches a higher level, i don't see why he cannot have expert smiths craft him such a weapon. if many diffrent adventuring companies/guild exist, having someone with a giant's sword (and the strenght to use it) will be a great way of identifying yourself from the group, and surely get the attention of a few patrons. many people have done strange things for recognition, and few have succeeded. those few people have been remembered. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- on beards: being a moderately large-framed & bearded fellow myself, i find a beard adds a dignified touch of class to a person if well trimmed and kept neat, thank you very much. that being said, if the bead is a foot long, bushy, is braided and is orange-red, you had better be playing a dwarf PC with a scottish accent. otherwise, it's a nay nay.
Krackatowa 08-10-06, 09:43 AM	Fighters..........kidding, Players who question every bloody thing I say and do. they can just pack up their crap and go!!!!!!!!
Tormsskull 08-10-06, 09:54 AM	...but you see, if I have one person that has the abilities of a Wilder, then logically, there should be more. They should have a popped up in the history once or twice at the very least as a rumor or something. That means, that I have to go back and rewrite history, plan for another wilder every once in a while. I have to reconsider public reactions. How it would effect pop culture, Theology, philosophy, superstition... It's the butterfly effect. Yes! This is exactly what I have tried to tell people in the past many many times, but they just don't seem to understand it. For some reason some players think they are DMs before the campaign starts, no, that is not the case. Just because you write a story saying that you are the descendant of so and so who came from the island of blah blah doesn't mean those places/people exist. It means that is what you believe. A good player will consult with their DM and make sure their character's story fits with the campaign, and a good DM will be as accomodating as they can be in regards to a player's desires. More often than not, it seems players are demanding certain things exist in a world that the DM spends countless hours on to justify some strange PrC they are going to take or some half-half-half template they want to be. This is why I treasure my players, they aren't like that at all.
Gottwick 08-10-06, 10:05 AM	404 - page not found LOL. Awesome. 9/10
oxybe 08-10-06, 11:40 AM	thank you, thank you, i'm here all session! if you need me, i'll be sorting the loot and leveling up! i was ready to write 405 as "resource stupidly not allowed" (IE: banning without a valid reason. as DM & player, i find giving "just because" as a reason for banning something both insulting to the player and selfish as a DM), but that would have been pushing boundries on both D&D and Tech humour. :P by questioning, are they asking "what is the reason as to why can't i be X?", or is it more like "Dude, no Fair! you are teh suXXor!" i am in the camp that the DM is but a player with special privilages, privilages that the other players consented in giving him when they offered him that position. like a govenor/prime minister/mayor... a DM can be impeached if he does brash decisions without justification. you may have planned out the world, but they are living in it, so there should be some give and take when creating it (world creation should never be a DM only task, but one the group takes as a whole. the players should have a big imput on what exists, what kind of government is there, ect... why spend a year and up making a world no one wants to play in? when the group has finished laying the foundation for the setting, then the dm builds up from there. i find the task MUCH easier that way, since everyone gave you the legos, all you have to do is make a model. how complex is up to you). most critical decisons that can affect the game as a whole should be taken by both players & the dm. then again some players are bumfarts.
JadeReaver 08-10-06, 12:10 PM	407. Players who are disruptive to the group, under the guise of "playing in character" despite the group's obvious dislike of said action or actions. Roleplaying, while encouraged, shouldn't involve taking away other member's enjoyment. 408. Players who's personal lives are apparently so dreary or/ and empty that they need to force their uber concept on me as a DM (to live vicariously though it, thus giving themselves some sense of illusory power) and if I don't accept it (or require modifications be made), I must therefore be a jerk. 409. No machineguns. What game are you playing anyway? 410. Books that I do not own. This isn't much of a limitation as my library is vast, but I don't need to pick up yet another sourcebook just because said player somehow can't pull off their concept without it. 411. No magic marts. Magic costs xp and losts of gold, its not lying around like loose change under my sofa cushions. Not that magic items aren't bought and sold, its just not common. Please accept that as part of my world. You'll get what you need, just trust your DM. 412. No classes that involve freaking out and killing other party members. 413. Players who can't find their own stats/equipment/spells because their homemade character sheets are as busy as a Nymph on a boat of Pirates. 414. An Elf is an Elf is an Elf. No flying, wild, were, shapechanging, dopple sub, extraplanar variant that amounts to basically a nearly immortal pointy eared prom queen with stats built to sunder any campaign in two sessions. You wanna be a wild elf? Smoke peyote and stick twigs in your hair. There ya go. No stat adjustments needed.
Greg K 08-10-06, 01:10 PM	I look at DMing as if I am inviting friends for dinner. I am cooking stir-fry on Sunday so I invite over my friends. You receive my invitation and a) choose to come and have stir-fry. If nobody wants stir-fry either someone offers to host a different dinner or everybody does something different for the evening b) choose not to come, because you don't like stir-fry and so you find something else to do possibly going elsewhere to eat. c) decide after having my stir-fry that you like it and are willing to come again. d) decide after having my stir-fry that don't like it and decide not to eat my stir fry again. Maybe you even decide to have everyone over for your own version of stir-fry or for something completely different. However, do not come over and demand that I allow everyone to throw whatever they want into the pot. The result is not going to be the experience I wanted to create for my friends and most likely going to result in too many cooks spoiling the pot. Just as I have chosen to provide a certain experience with food, I am trying to provide a certain experience with the setting that I create/run. You can: 1) choose to participate and decide you do or do not like my setting or choices. If you like it, you come back. If you do not, you either offer to run an alternative or find something else to do. 2) You can choose to not participate, because you don't like my initial design choice(s) (e.g, rules that I allow or disallow, campaign theme) and find something else to do. Just don't demand that I allow everyone to throw in their own preferences or allow the proverbial kitchen sink of options. In my experience, when everyone decides on what to allow, games start looking the same. [QUOTE=oxybe] why spend a year and up making a world no one wants to play in? [\quote] Because I enjoy creating settings that I may use at a later even if with another group. Thankfully, though this has not been a problem. My players are willing to try my settings. I just find that I never get to play for very long as, when someone else runs, everyone else asks when I'll be ready to run again.
ElIsRa 08-10-06, 03:30 PM	a DM can be impeached some players are bumfarts.AgreedI look at DMing as if I am inviting friends for dinner. I am cooking stir-fry on Sunday so I invite over my friends. You receive my invitation and a) choose to come and have stir-fry. If nobody wants stir-fry either someone offers to host a different dinner or everybody does something different for the evening b) choose not to come, because you don't like stir-fry and so you find something else to do possibly going elsewhere to eat. c) decide after having my stir-fry that you like it and are willing to come again. d) decide after having my stir-fry that don't like it and decide not to eat my stir fry again. Maybe you even decide to have everyone over for your own version of stir-fry or for something completely different. However, do not come over and demand that I allow everyone to throw whatever they want into the pot. The result is not going to be the experience I wanted to create for my friends and most likely going to result in too many cooks spoiling the pot. Just as I have chosen to provide a certain experience with food, I am trying to provide a certain experience with the setting that I create/run. You can: 1) choose to participate and decide you do or do not like my setting or choices. If you like it, you come back. If you do not, you either offer to run an alternative or find something else to do. 2) You can choose to not participate, because you don't like my initial design choice(s) (e.g, rules that I allow or disallow, campaign theme) and find something else to do. Just don't demand that I allow everyone to throw in their own preferences or allow the proverbial kitchen sink of options. In my experience, when everyone decides on what to allow, games start looking the same.Exactly!!
LordHawkeye 08-10-06, 04:45 PM	No, I'm not crazy. I have two campaigns myself that I had worked on for several years before a PC ever stepped foot on it and I know many others that have as well. .... That sounds like a tragedy in the making. You spend a good portion of your life for a big elaborate plot that may or may not even see the day of light depending on whether your PC's do what you think they will? How do you live with that? o.O Though part of me think you're just stretching the truth to make a point. I'm not sure I buy it. As for your argument, you're dodging his point. His point is that a good DM makes calls on a case by case basis and universally banning material should be kept to a minimum. Like me, I don't allow evil PC's because my plots just don't accomodate them very well so it doesn't end up being very fun for them anyway and I reserve the right to veto obvious attempts at twinking. (making your character strong is great and all but if it's clouding the true spirit of role playing, I'm heading that off at the pass) Otherwise, I allow near anything so long as it's put in front of me beforehand to check over. It's simple, it's fair and it works.
Greg K 08-10-06, 05:58 PM	.... That sounds like a tragedy in the making. You spend a good portion of your life for a big elaborate plot that may or may not even see the day of light depending on whether your PC's do what you think they will? How do you live with that? o.O Who said that the focus is on a big elaborate plot that relies upon the PCs? The focus could be upon creating the details (e.g., geography, cultures, history, overview of major cities/towns/organizations, npcs, famous ruins, artifacts, etc.) that bringalive the campaign alive. With the details prepared ahead of time, the DM can better help integrate your character into the setting via class variants, campaign specific clerics with set domains. tenets and/or unique spell lists by deity, organizational ties, etc.
ElIsRa 08-10-06, 07:14 PM	That sounds like a tragedy in the making. You spend a good portion of your life for a big elaborate plot that may or may not even see the day of light depending on whether your PC's do what you think they will? How do you live with that? o.OAt least 90% of my time is spent on the setting, not the plot. I personally dislike Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk knock-offs (not to say that I dislike either Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk themselves.) Who said that the focus is on a big elaborate plot that relies upon the PCs? The focus could be upon creating the details (e.g., geography, cultures, history, overview of major cities/towns/organizations, npcs, famous ruins, artifacts, etc.) that bringalive the campaign alive. With the details prepared ahead of time, the DM can better help integrate your character into the setting via class variants, campaign specific clerics with set domains. tenets and/or unique spell lists by deity, organizational ties, etc.Though part of me think you're just stretching the truth to make a point. I'm not sure I buy it.That part of you is wrong, but you are entitled to your opinions.As for your argument, you're dodging his point. His point is that a good DM makes calls on a case by case basis and universally banning material should be kept to a minimum.I disagree that, that is his point, and I disagree with the point, as stated.
Diplominator 08-10-06, 07:28 PM	I admit that I have not read this thread in its entirety, but in case in has not been said: Only a Sith deals in absolutes!
X-Codes 08-10-06, 07:58 PM	As for your argument, you're dodging his point. His point is that a good DM makes calls on a case by case basis and universally banning material should be kept to a minimum. Hey, I have some universal bans: Serpent Kingdoms. Every last part of this book has been banned on a case-by-case basis. Savage Species. It's 3.0 anyway, but it's very close to 3.5. Regardless, I see it as, at most, a DM tool to make some really strange monsters for the party to find, not a free buffet of +6 Wisdom +0 ECL races. Magic of Incarnum. Honestly, I just don't like the system. I read it through once, and many parts of it twice or even three times, I just don't like it. Tome of Magic. To quote Elan: And that never struck you as needlessly complicated?
revnk 08-10-06, 09:22 PM	I look at DMing as if I am inviting friends for dinner. I am cooking stir-fry on Sunday so I invite over my friends. You receive my invitation and.... I agree entirely. The DM is a "host" and should do as much as he can to make sure his "guests" have a good time--but it's a rude guest who complains about the dish being served and insists something else should be prepared instead....
kicheria 08-11-06, 02:16 PM	when it is suddgested that a female Aasimar barbarian go in to a rage constantly for 7 days a month. and you all know what i mean!
LordHawkeye 08-11-06, 04:00 PM	Savage Species. It's 3.0 anyway, but it's very close to 3.5. Regardless, I see it as, at most, a DM tool to make some really strange monsters for the party to find, not a free buffet of +6 Wisdom +0 ECL races. Make no mistake about it. Sacrifices are made for those pumped up stats. I once had a campaign where near all the PC's were monster races, three of which were celestials. That was kickass. Oh yes, had a notorious twinker in that game. In the end, he died because he got cocky. With a little thinking, it's quite easy to set them up for that. The solution to twinking isn't banning left and right, it's using your head. Look at Lex Luthor. Guy has no powers other than intelligence and even he can make Superman have to sit down and think for a second.
Mikal 08-11-06, 04:01 PM	PC 1: "Hi, berserker Joe!" PC 2: "Hi, wizard Bob!" PC 1: "Lets go to the pub." PC 2: "Okay." DM: "Joe, you step on a nail." PC 1: "FRENZY TIME!!! MUST KILL NEAREST TARGET!" PC 2: "HOLY CRAP! DOMINATE PERSON! DOMINATE PERSON! BESTOW CURSE! AUGH MY SPLEEN! MY PRECIOUS BODY ORGANS! THE UNIMAGINABLE PAIN! FREAKING FRENZIED BERSERKERS! FAIL YOUR SAVES! FAIL YOUR FREAKING - " DM: "You're at -32." PC 1, OOC: "So, no more combatants, right? Can I end my rage now?" DM: "You see a frightened man running away." PC 1: "KILL! KILL! PURSUE WITH BOOTS OF SPEED AND KILL!" DM: "He starts screaming and running away, but you catch up to him. He starts to yell something along the lines of 'No! This can't be AUGH! AUGH! AAA- ' until you rend off his head." PC 1, OOC: "Are we done yet?" DM: "You see a day care center." PC 1, OOC: "You've got to be kidding me." DM: "No, there's nobody." PC 1, OOC: "Sorry, PC 2. Guess you have to make a new character." If the PC is gonna be a FB, he'd have a mega high will save if he's not a moron, thanks to feats like Ponderous Will, Blooded, and Iron Will, and save boosting items. The DC to get out of a frenzy is like 10-15. I can make a barb character that can hit that on anything but a 1 pretty easily. Or, just be Exalted good and takes Rightous Wrath. Or use a Tome of Battle combo.
ElIsRa 08-11-06, 04:16 PM	Only a Sith deals in absolutes!I know a bunch of StarWars fans are going to jump on me, but I never really seen the Sith as all that bad. One can easily see how the political bias that is theamatical for the books/movies/games could cloud the truth about them.With a little thinking, it's quite easy to set them up for that. The solution to twinking isn't banning left and right, it's using your head. Look at Lex Luthor. Guy has no powers other than intelligence and even he can make Superman have to sit down and think for a second.I totally agree with that.
Drausktanchache 08-11-06, 04:29 PM	trying to get numbering started again 430- Joy, happiness, anything that is cheerful 431- anything that benefits my players more than my NPCs 432- Combat in which there is not at least 1 unconsiousness or death 433- cure disease (my NPCs might give the ability to players) 434- Anything in a book other than the ones I own 435- Stupid people 436- Chaotic good half-drow/half-grey elf ranger (no joke, my friend actually let it slide i don't care much but the player is a complete power freak i was showing my dm and friend this when the player left the room, we had the three figurine there i took theplayers away, this is a cr of 4, *add the player's figurine* now its a CR 6!!!! :headexplo: My thoughts on this: That :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: Power gamer) (a little more on this guy, he killed an ogre practically by himself at lvl 2 with a single shot!!!!!) [see my above thoughts] 437- anything that CANNOT BE RAISED BACK INTO UNDEAD!!!! (and i have the power to turn practically anything into undead too...just not all of it...god i love clerics!!!!) 438- Anything that ends encounters in 2 rounds.
turalisj 08-11-06, 04:53 PM	I know a bunch of StarWars fans are going to jump on me, but I never really seen the Sith as all that bad. One can easily see how the political bias that is theamatical for the books/movies/games could cloud the truth about them. *releases his clone army to attack ElIsRa* j/k.....
wilken 08-13-06, 07:00 PM	439- Savage gnome dire weremoles.
BrotherMarcus 08-13-06, 08:13 PM	No Books outside the Core Books(DMG, PHB, MM I, II, II, IV).
turalisj 08-13-06, 10:09 PM	MM II III and IV are supplements....
PhaedrusXY 08-13-06, 10:38 PM	Not reading this whole thread, but even if it has already been listed... it deserves to be listed again... The Thought Bottle Oh, and anyone who thinks a Katana can cut through the barrel of a tank. Or who even talks about Katanas at all, really... unless they are joking.
trapspringer 08-13-06, 10:59 PM	*releases his clone army to attack ElIsRa* j/k..... Luke Skywalker, the friggin' chosen one (BTW, Anakin totally brought balance to teh force. Not only did he kill the emperor, but he played yin to Luke's yang), made decisions based on love, hate, and anger, and still won. I blame George.
Duregar Stonehammer 08-13-06, 11:17 PM	16) Ninja Class. Because a rogue wearing black SHOULD have been enough. Bravo! Along with anything martial arts related or even settings related to...oh I don't know, say - the unapproachable east! I like Jet-Li and Jackie Chan - they don't belong in a medieval setting or D&D.
Duregar Stonehammer 08-13-06, 11:20 PM	Oh, and anyone who thinks a Katana can cut through the barrel of a tank. Or who even talks about Katanas at all, really... unless they are joking. I just read this one, and again - bravo! See? It isn't like I'm saying the world is square or anything...everybody knows this is how it is!
turalisj 08-13-06, 11:35 PM	You know, this thread is just showing how screwed up some people are... (self included/not included)
Arem_K 08-14-06, 02:20 AM	You should ban... Non-Core base classes (for brokeness) Barbarian (Frenzied berserker is broken) Bard (broken due to sucking) Cleric (Codzilla) Druid (Codzilla) Fighter (Spiked Chain is broken) Palidan (Alignment restrictions, just generally a pain to have in the party) Edit: Monk (saves too good, thanks Maximum Pain) Ranger (All TWFs are Drizt clones) Rogue (they steal stuff) Sorceror (polymorph, etc. is broken) Wizard (see sorceror) If you make this simple change, I guarantee you will never have another complaint that someone else is too powerful.
Aryxbez 08-14-06, 04:13 AM	Wounding weapons
MaximumPain 08-14-06, 04:34 AM	You should ban... Non-Core base classes (for brokeness) Barbarian (Frenzied berserker is broken) Bard (broken due to sucking) Cleric (Codzilla) Druid (Codzilla) Fighter (Spiked Chain is broken) Palidan (Alignment restrictions, just generally a pain to have in the party) Ranger (All TWFs are Drizt clones) Rogue (they steal stuff) Sorceror (polymorph, etc. is broken) Wizard (see sorceror) If you make this simple change, I guarantee you will never have another complaint that someone else is too powerful. You forgot Monk (saves too good) :P
X-Codes 08-14-06, 08:10 AM	Oh, and anyone who thinks a Katana can cut through the barrel of a tank. Or who even talks about Katanas at all, really... unless they are joking. Thats about 90% dependant on the quality and composition of the Katana. It is possible, but I'm not going to say it's easy. :P I also agree, the Thought Bottle is perhaps one of the best intended items to ever go so terribly, terribly wrong in... well for as long as I've played the game. Apparently intended to help allieviate the heavy XP costs of high-level spells, this item was mutated into a tool by which one could get epic spells starting at... when... 7th level? Oh yeah... something I'll never let into my game are giant mechsuits, or anything even resembling a giant mechsuit.
Karma 08-14-06, 03:09 PM	---) PvP. Once a PC attacks another with intent to kill, I controll the characters, you roll the dice, I take notes and let you know how it turned out. ---) Interparty conflicts resulting from poor party creaton. This could be anything from a Kobold and a Gnome adventuring together to extreme alignment or philsophic differences. Most notably though is the player the creates a character that is radically different from the other characters... like a Goliath that has his own personal quest (to redeem himself with his tribe) origionating from his back-story who happens to hangin out with a Paladin that follows St Cuthbert. They have become fast friends. ---) Psionics... unfortunately, I just don't get it... but I will some day. Fortunately for me, nobody has wanted to play one so far. ---) Pixie Warlock. As rad as it is, just not plausible in my mind. Other than that, my other points have been mentioned already (like random/rampant muticlassing) anything WotC and not pun-pun-ish (d'oh) is fair game provided it fits the campaign. My world is not fragile and I will adjust the challenge accordingly. Some things have conditions though. I will allow just about any LA provided that you work with me and for it. I will allow homebrew classes as long as we brew it together. I don't need know the details of what you choose to play but I insist that I become familiar with it.
ElIsRa 08-14-06, 05:37 PM	Thats about 90% dependant on the quality and composition of the Katana. It is possible, but I'm not going to say it's easy. :P I implore you to show me a RW example of such a blade.
TarlSS 08-14-06, 06:05 PM	Bravo! Along with anything martial arts related or even settings related to...oh I don't know, say - the unapproachable east! I like Jet-Li and Jackie Chan - they don't belong in a medieval setting or D&D. Congratulations on your ignorant eurocentrism. Everyone knows Asian history starts with World War II. And significant contact between Asia and Europe/America only began after the invention of the Kung Fu movie. Bruce Lee was the door to the East! Honestly. You're either terrible at sarcasm or a latent racist, both are not good traits to have.
zvbxrpl 08-14-06, 07:16 PM	You should ban... Non-Core base classes (for brokeness) Barbarian (Frenzied berserker is broken) Bard (broken due to sucking) Cleric (Codzilla) Druid (Codzilla) Fighter (Spiked Chain is broken) Palidan (Alignment restrictions, just generally a pain to have in the party) Edit: Monk (saves too good, thanks Maximum Pain) Ranger (All TWFs are Drizt clones) Rogue (they steal stuff) Sorceror (polymorph, etc. is broken) Wizard (see sorceror) If you make this simple change, I guarantee you will never have another complaint that someone else is too powerful. :rofl: Don't forget expert (skilled tradesmen make too much money) and commoner (the ability to farm food rather than paying for it is bah-ro-ken)
maragin 08-14-06, 07:17 PM	A few additions to this banned/ restricted list. 437 - Actions taken by players that ruin the enjoyment of others. This includes in-fighting, antagonizing, stealing, betrayal, roleplaying like a jerk, being a jerk, etc... 438 - Lawful stupid characters 439 - Normally, I ban Evil PCs unless it is an all Evil game. 440 - Manginas. No men playing female characters, no females playing male characters. If someone really, really wanted this... maybe. Otherwise, it gets odd/ distracting. 441 - "20 is an auto success for anything". I prefer the +10/ -10 rule. 442 - I use a set list of polymorphable creatures 443 - Feeble Characters. When using 4d6, reroll characters below a 22 point buy. 444 - No, you can't kill the Tarrasque. 445 - 7th level 12 year old elfs. (campaign I was playing in) 446 - Leadership feat 447 - Neckbeards
turalisj 08-14-06, 07:45 PM	A few additions to this banned/ restricted list. 437 - Actions taken by players that ruin the enjoyment of others. This includes in-fighting, antagonizing, stealing, betrayal, roleplaying like a jerk, being a jerk, etc... 438 - Lawful stupid characters 439 - Normally, I ban Evil PCs unless it is an all Evil game. 440 - Manginas. No men playing female characters, no females playing male characters. If someone really, really wanted this... maybe. Otherwise, it gets odd/ distracting. 441 - "20 is an auto success for anything". I prefer the +10/ -10 rule. 442 - I use a set list of polymorphable creatures 443 - Feeble Characters. When using 4d6, reroll characters below a 22 point buy. 444 - No, you can't kill the Tarrasque. 445 - 7th level 12 year old elfs. (campaign I was playing in) 446 - Leadership feat 447 - Neckbeards You forgot chaotic retarded and good aligned pussies. And don't forget nuetral characters, just because. Oh, and let's get rid of all martial weapons, because not every character can use them. same with exotic weapons. Did we leave anything out? Hm... The weapon focus feat chain because only fighters can use them. Get rid of the toughness feat because you get +3 hp. Hm... Let's just check chuck everything out the window because it's too broken.
Far_Traveler 08-14-06, 07:49 PM	By the way, where is the thought bottle? Some more bans that garuntee Satifaction Arcane magic Divine Magic Psionics Shadow magic Truename magic Pact Magic That nine-swords stuff Alternate magic systems Ranged Ammunition Ranged Weapons Thrown weapons Melee Weapons Unarmed Strikes Skill checks Ability Checks Modifiers d2 rolls d3 rolls d12 rolls d10 rolls d8 rolls d4 rolls d6 rolls d20 rolls DC's Ability scores Classes Races Genders Deities Names Players Paper Pointy things Lubrication Equipment Sound Sight Taste Smells Feelings Emotion Brains Copyrights Good Evil Law Cha-wait, what am I saying? that stays Planets Stars Matter Antimatter Am I missing something? Ah yes, satisfaction MUST be banned. Sarcasm is fun!
maragin 08-14-06, 08:18 PM	You forgot chaotic retarded and good aligned pussies. And don't forget nuetral characters, just because. Oh, and let's get rid of all martial weapons, because not every character can use them. same with exotic weapons. Did we leave anything out? Hm... The weapon focus feat chain because only fighters can use them. Get rid of the toughness feat because you get +3 hp. Hm... Let's just check chuck everything out the window because it's too broken. Um, Lawful Stupid (as opposed to Lawful Evil, Lawful Good) is a gaming term we use for those characters that play lawful to such an extreme that they impose on the enjoyment of others. I'm guessing you didn't understand that. I'm actually fine with chain, toughness, and almost all "core" mechanics. I didn't say things were broken, I was merely listing things I wouldn't want in my game. If you want an extensive ban list, check out Living Greyhawk (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=lg/dndlg/startplaying) . (Which still makes for a very playable game) Or, if you'd like, you could continue to lash out if that makes you feel better.
Tiefling_Warlock 08-14-06, 08:25 PM	448 Me (dont ask)
mathew99 08-14-06, 09:04 PM	449: you're mom, nuff' said.
The Amazing Dancing Bear 08-14-06, 10:45 PM	449: you're mom, nuff' said. Holy twelve-year-old kids who play Halo, Batman! There's enough stupidity on this thread without you ineffectually demonstrating your grasp of hackneyed "jokes" (And I use the term in the loosest possible sense) and horrific grammar.
CPAtheFat 08-14-06, 10:48 PM	450) Sarcasm
DericFeld 08-14-06, 11:38 PM	What's with all the kender hating? I love the Bard: "Hey, where the hell is my hat?" Kender standing in the corner with a much too big and over done hat: "Oh! Here it is you must have dropped it good thing i picked it up for you."
Gold Medal Jedi 08-15-06, 01:39 AM	> deck of many things > starting stats over 18 (with racial mods and i dont care what you give up to get it) > no mummy PC's > no geshtalt > no one under 21 > no other DMs running my game > no rod of wonder > no monkey grip > no anime inspired items or characters (especially naruto and inuyasha) > no miniatures (just ends up causing more debate than necessary) > no dressing up (egad i hate larpers) > no cross genre characters (if you want to play vampire the masqurade go do so, im playing forgotten realms here) > this is D&D not steampunk so dont even try to bring your steam powered adamantine exo skeleton in my game > and finally, never under an circumstances even attempt to ask for a brilliant long sword, while playing a psionic monk... Im an uber star wars geek and i can spot a jedi from a mile away.
necrom99 08-15-06, 03:24 AM	Bravo! Along with anything martial arts related or even settings related to...oh I don't know, say - the unapproachable east! I like Jet-Li and Jackie Chan - they don't belong in a medieval setting or D&D. Why not just have a country/island/continent thats uber far to the east/west/etc.... that has an oriental feel to it? unless of course your using a pre-made campaign setting. my choice is the Eberron campaign setting and the greyhawk one, and Forgotten Realms too.....those crazy place will never appear in my game, Ever
Tordek 08-15-06, 04:13 AM	450: PC-designed Prestige classes. 451: Designing a prestige-class for your followers. 452: I'll add weight to "Deck of Many Things" here.
pmurray@bigpond.com 08-15-06, 05:20 AM	Thats about 90% dependant on the quality and composition of the Katana. It is possible, but I'm not going to say it's easy. :P No, it is not dependent on the quality of the katana: it is impossible. Katanas are inferior blades. The reason they are such a big deal is that Japanese iron is low quality and brittle (too much phosphorus), not to mention scarce, so it is tricky and expensive to make a usable blade at all. Even then, the fighting style adopted by people who used katanas avoids direct blocking because a block will make the blade shatter: unlike a good broadsword made of european steel. Katanas are not for cutting through armour. Slashing weapons are useless against any kind of armounr. To get through armour you can bash it until it breaks (heavy mace, greatsword), you can punch through chain with a good heavy dagger, or you can finesse a rapier into the joints in plate. But like its cousin the curved cavalry sword, the main use of a katana is cutting down unarmoured troops who are running away from you. :devil:
LordHawkeye 08-15-06, 07:45 AM	Oh, and anyone who thinks a Katana can cut through the barrel of a tank. Or who even talks about Katanas at all, really... unless they are joking. Considering that a lv.16 monk can punch through iron like nothing says to me that ship already sailed.
necrom99 08-15-06, 11:49 PM	DMG p.41 DEATH AND EXPERIENCE POINTS If a character takes part in an encounter, even if she dies during the encounter, that character gets a share of the experience points. If a character dies and is raised, the awarded experience points are granted to her after she comes back from the dead (and after she loses the level from death, if appropriate). this is such a dumb rule I veto'ed it right as i read it
cancerousmango 08-15-06, 11:54 PM	> no anime inspired items or characters (especially naruto and inuyasha) There's Inu-Yahsa inspired items? What are they so i can ban them?
Tobus Neth 08-16-06, 12:21 AM	No Loxo's no bee people
ChaosFire 08-16-06, 12:22 AM	DMG p.41 DEATH AND EXPERIENCE POINTS If a character takes part in an encounter, even if she dies during the encounter, that character gets a share of the experience points. If a character dies and is raised, the awarded experience points are granted to her after she comes back from the dead (and after she loses the level from death, if appropriate). this is such a dumb rule I veto'ed it right as i read it Not necessarily. Experience points are there to represent what was learned int he battle, not some magical inspiration that comes after. And when someone is resurrected, they keep their memories, thus you would still account for what they learned. Allowing for this train of thought, it makes sense. Now, of course, there are always exceptions. For example, if someone dies immediately (first action of combat), then the DM decides what is to be done. Of course, the DM is always in control, and therefore, if they feel it necessary, could assign instead a lower amount of experience points, to account for not being alive for the whole combat.
PhaedrusXY 08-16-06, 12:28 AM	Considering that a lv.16 monk can punch through iron like nothing says to me that ship already sailed.I meant people who say it is possible in real life...
Gold Medal Jedi 08-16-06, 12:44 AM	There's Inu-Yahsa inspired items? What are they so i can ban them? Dai Katana... ie. a katana that is like 10 ft long. Stupid stupid stupid.... I actually had a person beg me to let him have Tetsiga (sp?) Thats when i came up with the rule of no one under 21 ever again too. Thats not only 21 actual age but 21 mental and emotional age as well.
Gold Medal Jedi 08-16-06, 12:47 AM	DMG p.41 DEATH AND EXPERIENCE POINTS If a character takes part in an encounter, even if she dies during the encounter, that character gets a share of the experience points. If a character dies and is raised, the awarded experience points are granted to her after she comes back from the dead (and after she loses the level from death, if appropriate). this is such a dumb rule I veto'ed it right as i read it the jury is still out on this one at my table. Not sure i like it but not sure its fair to the player. I do however dont award campaign XP to those that choose not to resurrect their character and build another fresh one.
coldfire_x 08-16-06, 01:25 AM	4) Sex in any way, shape, or form well... y not XD
Gold Medal Jedi 08-16-06, 01:39 AM	almost forgot ... never never never never again will i ever even remotely consider the faintest possibility of allowing the absolutley most completely heinous feat in existence... the dreaded the dastradly the most vile of broken rules the foulest of foul VOW OF POVERTY AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGG GGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rubicari 08-16-06, 03:27 AM	Not sure what number is next, but here's mine: 1) The Player's Handbook 2. Especially Robilar's Gambit Feat. It's more powerful than most Epic feats, yet the Pre-req's ridiculously easy. 2) I'm tired of the broken 3rd party books as well. 3) Called shots. 4) Astral Devas. Never again...
LordHawkeye 08-16-06, 08:20 AM	Psh, I had an astral deva WITH the vow of poverty once. She was tough but by no means unmanageable. Beat that!
DarkThoughts24 08-16-06, 10:44 AM	Mdc
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-16-06, 11:27 AM	Dai Katana... ie. a katana that is like 10 ft long. Stupid stupid stupid.... I actually had a person beg me to let him have Tetsiga (sp?) Thats when i came up with the rule of no one under 21 ever again too. Thats not only 21 actual age but 21 mental and emotional age as well. Its about this time I'd point out that Tetsaiga is more like a Large Falchion that's also a Weapon of Legacy. Also, its probably only around 6', not counting the hilt. And finally, "AAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGG GGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" is probably well under the emotional age of 21 too.
Golden Zealot 08-16-06, 11:51 AM	Dai Katana... ie. a katana that is like 10 ft long. I once heard that dai katanas don't exist as they are a grammatical impossibility.
Solik 08-16-06, 01:50 PM	I look at DMing as if I am inviting friends for dinner. And that's where you made your mistake. DMing and cooking are not in any way the same thing. Nor is playing D&D similar to sitting around a table eating stir fry. Like it or not, D&D is a "many cooks in the kitchen" game. The DM controls his characters, the PCs control their characters, and everyone plays by a set of rules agreed upon before play begins. The PCs should, in fact, have at least as much control of the game as the DM. The players are the ones who decide how they react to situations, where they choose to take their characters, what personality to play, which abilities to acquire (while following the agreed-upon initial rules), and so forth. The DM presents the plot and challenges and roleplays the NPCs. It is not, however, his game. I do like your little explanation, however. By showing it to prospective DMs and seeing if they agree with it, I can spot problem DMs long before getting into a game with them.
Greg K 08-16-06, 02:29 PM	And that's where you made your mistake. DMing and cooking are not in any way the same thing. Nor is playing D&D similar to sitting around a table eating stir fry. I still prepare the setting. They have a choice whether to particpate or not. Like it or not, D&D is a "many cooks in the kitchen" game. The DM controls his characters, the PCs control their characters, and everyone plays by a set of rules agreed upon before play begins. The PCs should, in fact, have at least as much control of the game as the DM. The players are the ones who decide how they react to situations, where they choose to take their characters, what personality to play, which abilities to acquire (while following the agreed-upon initial rules), and so forth. The DM presents the plot and challenges and roleplays the NPCs. It is not, however, his game. Once the game starts, they have plenty of choices kind of like adding extra soy sauce or other seasonings once the meal has been served. However, the seasoning they add depends on what I make available to them in preparing the campaign setting. I do like your little explanation, however. By showing it to prospective DMs and seeing if they agree with it, I can spot problem DMs long before getting into a game with them. Whereas my player and I might might consider you a problem player and show you the door.
Arn 08-16-06, 02:52 PM	We're probbably somwhere around #480 or so, so I'll pick it up there... 480. Pretending that this works like a computer game. See, in this world, algorythems don't tell you what happens: I DO. 481. Quoting worthless crap from video games. Once had a player who'd played through FFVII about 80 times. I eventally told him that if he said "I stab (so-and-so) and call you a puppet!" agian I'd have a blue dragon breathe on him. 482. A fullblade weilded by a meduim sized character. Even with the exotic proficiency, NO. 483. Dragons/half-dragons as PCs or allies. The same guy who kept quoting FFVII wanted to play a half-dragon dragoon. With a fullblade. /headdesk 484. PCs based off of lame-ass anime characters. I don't care HOW much Full Metal Alchemist or InuYasha you've watched. 485. A Holy Avenger in the hands of a lvl 6 Paladin. Our GM allowed this to happen in our very first game. You can imagine how that worked out.
Gold Medal Jedi 08-16-06, 03:29 PM	Its about this time I'd point out that Tetsaiga is more like a Large Falchion that's also a Weapon of Legacy. Also, its probably only around 6', not counting the hilt. And finally, "AAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGG GGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" is probably well under the emotional age of 21 too. I didnt say tetsaiga was anything i just pointed out that a player asked for one. The Dai Katana was another point entirely... additionally my explecative was a sign of repressed aggression. I let one person play the VoP and it wrecked a perfectly good character not to mention foiled just about every damn encounter i placed against them. I mean for the love of god, if i strand them on an island so that they can find a freaking cave leading to a portal to another plane, and the Monk says wait right here i will be back in a few days with a ship and plenty of supplies... what the heck am i supposed to do? He can go without food water or oxygen indefinitely and his whirling fists of rage take down adult dragons singlehandedly... i mean within the realm of respectable reason what can i throw at him that doesnt look like im just trying to off the guy. Luckily he sacrificed himself as a noble gesture for the party later. So as far as that character went I had a really good player that knew when to call it quits, but had it been just about anyone else they would have milked it for everything it was worth and waited for me to kill them off and then feel righteous in their complaints of my attempt to rebalance the game.
JasonOrlandoHawk 08-16-06, 03:41 PM	487) (?Right Numbering): KOTOR references in my Star Wars campaign. 488) Poor Backstories/Stat Justifications (i.e.: "My Peasent who worked the land for years before adventuring has a very high charisma, reasonably good IQ, and very poor physical stats.") 489) Druids. (I love the class, but I'm just sick of them. There are far too many...) 490) Almost any material (especially New Base Classes, WHY OH WHY did they think Spelltheif was a BASE class?) from Complete Arcane on... 491) Anti-group characters (Oh, let's see, we have a Paladin, a NG Cleric and a LG Wizard... Can I be a Blackguard sent to infiltrate the group?) 492) Bad Rules Lawyers. (I don't mind if you want to stick to the rules, just please quote them correctly!) 493) An HK-47 (KOTOR) based character in ANY campaign. "No, you do not want to eviscerate everyone. Stop that!" 494) People who complain about average stats. (No, your Int. of 12 does not mean your character is Mentally Handicapped, though I doubt you have a score of 12 if you think so. People, 10 is AVERAGE!) You don't have to have an 18 to have a powerful character.
JasonOrlandoHawk 08-16-06, 03:47 PM	I know what you mean when you complain about VoP. Excellent Role-Playing Material, but practically broken in half. I refuse to use the feat w/ my characters, and the only member of my group who knows about the feat pretends it doesn't exist. Still, there are weaknesses. Archers. Lots and lots of Archers in good defensive positions w/ well enchanted bows and arrows. If you want to be really dirty, Arcane Archers. ("I grab the arrow in mid-flight." "Cool. And the Fireball spell that was set to go off whereever the arrow landed explodes." "What?!?") Best part, it can screw w/ an entire group, not just the VoP Monk Demigod.
Solik 08-16-06, 03:58 PM	I still prepare the setting. They have a choice whether to particpate or not. This is still ludicrous and does not justify your illogical kitchen comparison. D&D is a group game where one person is designated the DM. I might could understand where you're coming from in, say, a con, where you have a table and invite people to come over, instead of a regular social gathering among friends as the game generally is. Once the game starts, they have plenty of choices kind of like adding extra soy sauce or other seasonings once the meal has been served. "You can play whatever character you want, as long as it's my character with a few of your own dressings added. You can pick from 3 hair colors, how's that?" No thanks. Also, stop with the bad kitchen comparison. Whereas my player and I might might consider you a problem player and show you the door. I know this was merely a failed attempt to turn my statement around on me without actually making any kind of argument, but whatever. You know nothing about my play style, as I've offered nothing. But enough of your DM style has been revealed that I'd know better than to step foot through your door in the first place.
Steelwill 08-16-06, 05:03 PM	495) Monks using TWF with Flurry of Blows 496) Any material not officially from WoTC 497) Drama Queens (I arbitrate a game, not adults who act like children) 498) Any WotC published materials I don't have access to or a solid understanding of. I was hoping to hit 500, but I can't think of any other major exclusions, although I have to ask, because I am dying from curiosity...what the heck is Pun-pun???? PS Sex has been excluded a few times in this thread...aww man, I allow it. In game if its done well, and on/around the table especially if its done well :D But then again, I have some freaky players...and me too!!
turalisj 08-16-06, 05:53 PM	499) People who do not have an understanding of the rules. 500) People who don't deviat from the RAW. I got post 500 :P
Greg K 08-16-06, 08:10 PM	Solik The point was that you know precious little about my DMing just as I know little about you as a player. In either case, both of us could easily be mistaken so stop making assumptions. If you came to one of my games, I wouldn't hand you a sheet and base my decision upon that. I would sit down and ask what kind of games you like and tell you about my setting and the kind of games that I run which actually provides the players plenty of freedom in determining the direction that the campaign takes once play begins. As for putting limits reflecting a problem DM: Plenty of choice can be found in a world with fifteen classes, six to ten distinct human cultures (further divided into nobliity, rural, and urban backgrounds), three dwarven cultures, three elven cultures, one non-nomadic halfling culture, one lizard man culture and a dozen organizations each with their own favored starting classes, class variants, cultural weapon groups, and cultural aspects (e.g., mores, religious beliefs, dress, subsistance pattern), there is still plenty of player choice. The campaign may not include warforged, half-dragons, warlocks, spell-thiefs, ninja,spiked chains or some other specific race, class, feat or piece of equipment, but the choices made as to what is are is not included are a part of what defines a settng thus making it different from another setting or an anything goes campaign. Similarly, if I create a pantheon with a dozen world specific deities (with their own specific domains, doctrine, dress, rivalries etc.) and rule that all clerics must have a deity chosen from that list- player's have a choice play a cleric of one of those deities or play something else. Now a world created like that above may not be for you, but it does not make the DM (in this case me) a problem DM-at least as far as my players over the years have been concerned and they are all that matters.
ElvenRngDM333 08-16-06, 08:17 PM	I would like to say that for everyone that was posting against "close-mindness", the DMG states that the DM is in charge of his campaign and only has to allow what he wants. I would agree that any DM who shoots down player backgrounds or personalities because he doesn't like those is close-minded, but controlling what classes, PrC's, feats, and spells are allowed into his campaign is just trying to balance the game and create a world that he likes. After that point, he builds his world into exciting and interesting place for the PC's to play in. If you disagree with me, thats fine, but I am not going to allow everything that is created for DND because I feel that some of it ruins the game or just doesn't fit with what I want my campaign to be.
Whisper_Swiftblade 08-16-06, 08:29 PM	I was hoping to hit 500, but I can't think of any other major exclusions, although I have to ask, because I am dying from curiosity...what the heck is Pun-pun???? think of the hightest number you can, take that to the edge of eternity, triple it , square it, add 9.999.999.999, multiply it by it self 174 times and then you will have a number that is far far lower then pun-pun's stats.
mithraldragon 08-17-06, 10:57 AM	for those who hate psionic because it's broken. PROVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (I dont mind if it's not good in your campaign or other reason like that) anything a psionic can do with its powers, a damn $%?/"&?% mage can do EXACTLY the same. and for some spell, can do more than a psionic. lets take a psion and a wizard of the same level(first) with the same intelligence (17). the psion has 3 pp, allowing him to use three first level powers, and he know three of them. a wizard of the same level start knowing 3 first level spell and cast 2 of them, plus the one granted by it's intelligence to a total of three the strenght of a psionic caracter is the fact that he can evlove his power by spending more pp. the mage, on the other hand, if he has the wealth for, can praticly have all the spells in the book. and the psionic powers don't overpower those of a mage. for example, the energy bolt (3rd level psionic power) does exactly the same dmg than a fireball (about 5d6) yes, the psion can upgrade is power in spending pp, but he can't spend more pp in a round that his level
mithraldragon 08-17-06, 11:03 AM	for the thing I never allow in my game player with bad sense of humor kender anything that is relative with dragonlance campaign setting player who built their caracter without telling me so evil caracters books not related to the game for the rest it depend of the campaign
trapspringer 08-17-06, 11:26 AM	the strenght of a psionic caracter is the fact that he can evlove his power by spending more pp. the mage, on the other hand, if he has the wealth for, can praticly have all the spells in the book. emphasis added Actually, the wizard gets the psion's bonus for free. His spells deal more damage as he levels up for no additional cost.
babysamurai 08-17-06, 11:32 AM	-Mountain Dew -Cheetos -People with no necks
SakuraTheDM 08-27-06, 05:18 PM	-Idiots -Cheetos for the characters -Mr. Tiger Woods -Mountain Dew for the Characters -Wish without an exp cost -Rudeness -Marriage without a cleric :D
Kaligrad 08-27-06, 05:25 PM	Forcecage. No save, no spell resistance, and large and larger creatures can't reasonably attack through one inch bars, whereas PC's with swords and spells can attack it back. PS- is it just me, or does the new forum symbol look like a confused ampersand?
AkumaDaimyo 08-27-06, 05:29 PM	Idiots Cheaters People who can't roleplay to save their own lives. Immature teenagers. (See idiots above). People who cannot correctly RP things like Drow or Kender. Unlike other people I have no problems with those races, I just dislike so many people can't play them right and ruin it for everyone else. People who are not open to multiple settings (IE people who will ONLY play Forgotten Realms or Eberron, ect.) People who will ONLY play D&D. There ARE other games out there and it's nice every once and a while to play something else for a change of pace. People who are rude to the GF. The Frenzied Berzerker PrC. I've played in a game with another player who had this PrC. It's broken and annoying as hell to deal with, especially when he turns on the other PCs. I will never allow super twink races unless there is a level progression (IE Savage Species) and even then most likely not because I don't run games where they would fit.
syntaxerror37 08-27-06, 06:51 PM	The Frenzied Berzerker PrC. I've played in a game with another player who had this PrC. It's broken and annoying as hell to deal with, especially when he turns on the other PCs. Its not broken, it is just not ment for PCs. It works just fine and dandy as a NPC PrC as intended. To everyone who bans PHB classes or races, what the hell? :confused: Finaly, just about the only thing I will flat out ban: Fortification Encantments on Armor. You will worry about crits and SA in my game.
Horemheb442 08-27-06, 07:05 PM	Any 3rd Ed stuff
AkumaDaimyo 08-27-06, 07:27 PM	Its not broken, it is just not ment for PCs. It works just fine and dandy as a NPC PrC as intended. To everyone who bans PHB classes or races, what the hell? :confused: Finaly, just about the only thing I will flat out ban: Fortification Encantments on Armor. You will worry about crits and SA in my game. So they can't use any spells that temporarily give them immunity or at least a chance to not be crited? There are also PrC that give such immunties as well. I'd also suspect that your not doing Eberron then as Warforged automatically have light fortification. And YES, the Frenzied Berzerker is indeed broken. They can do just gobs and gobs of damage. It's unreal.
Yue Ryong 08-27-06, 10:21 PM	BESM d20.
ShadowDragon8685 08-28-06, 01:41 AM	The only things I ban: Players who set out to disrupt and ruin the game. Players who can't handle mature topics like violence and sex. Frenzied Berzerker (Really covered under the above, but just 'cause.) Hulking Hurler (Just because... I need to feel big by banning something for no reason. Hulking Hurler is it.) Warhulk (Any class that forbids you to THINK is munchcheeze with no redeemable qualities, and also covered under disruptive and ruinous.)
Gyrofthewastes 08-28-06, 03:32 AM	No, frenzied berserker isn't balanced. But my play group discovered a wonderful method of making them function better in a party of PCs. It goes something like this: Every morning the OTHER PCs use some method of getting out of reach, such as mass flight, Rope Trick, Levitation, Antilife shell, etc. Then they pelt said Frenzied Berserker with pebbles until all his or her rages have been triggered for the day. This of course neutralizes many of the FB's strengths, but...that's what you get for playing a character that is potentially dangerous to his or her allies if you expect said character not to be abandoned at the earliest opportunity.
ShadowDragon8685 08-28-06, 04:27 AM	Much as I hate the FB, that tactic is not only frustrating to the FB player, it's ridiculously stupid. The FB can pick up rocks and heave them back. He can also use a ranged weapon, or throw melee weapons, while in Frenzy.
Gyrofthewastes 08-28-06, 06:20 AM	The FB can pick up rocks and heave them back. He can also use a ranged weapon, or throw melee weapons, while in Frenzy. While I abstain from discussions on fairness, don't be utterly ingenuous. No caster even marginally worth his salt has anything to fear from the -ranged- attacks of a raging FB...when said caster chooses time and location of the battle.
syntaxerror37 08-28-06, 09:40 AM	So they can't use any spells that temporarily give them immunity or at least a chance to not be crited? There are also PrC that give such immunties as well. I'd also suspect that your not doing Eberron then as Warforged automatically have light fortification. And YES, the Frenzied Berzerker is indeed broken. They can do just gobs and gobs of damage. It's unreal. I'll clarify, spells (and by association potions & scrolls) are fine, as is erning the imunity through a PrC. I reserve the right to aprove any non-core material however. I have not yet played Eberron, but I do not have an issue with the Warforged light fortification as it is ballanced against the other disadvantages. I specificly said "fortification encantments on armor" in my post. Honest question, how is having the PCs encounter a FB any worse then a mid-high level wizard or a well run dragon? "Gobs and gobs of damage" does not equal broken. This PrC it is just not meant for PCs, as I said.
metamind 08-28-06, 11:29 AM	What I will never allow: Uber light saber-weilding robo ninja monkey pirates who ride prismatic flaming dinosaurs who shoot laser beams from thier mouth. Wait...I do allow that. Never mind.:)