![]() ![]() The latter is not something you can provide an easy fix for, you need to monitor what spells your players are picking and ensure that they are appropriate to the party and the campaign. You need to do two things, limit their options, and limit the power of those options. Some other books that might be useful include the Player's Handbook 2, Complete Adventurer, and Complete Scoundrel.įirst, spellcasters. To do this, the absolutely fundamental supplements are Unearthed Arcana and Tome of Battle note that Unearthed Arcana is in the SRD and that the warblade, the feat list, and all maneuvers from Tome of Battle are available for free online ( is quite helpful too). This is the key insight we'll need to accomplish our goals. As long as the mechanics on your character sheet support your concept, it doesn't much matter whether it says barbarian under the class line. Basically, the archetype is that of the Norse berserker, or similar legends from other cultures. So let me answer a question slightly different from yours: how do you run a reasonably balanced and fun Dungeons and Dragons v3.5 (I'm ignoring 3.0) game where players can play whatever archetype they want and still contribute while using only WotC material (preferably with as few books as possible)? What do I mean by archetype? Consider the barbarian. Why is it impossible for banning to make the three character archetypes (spellcasters, skillmonkeys, and martial characters) balanced? Because the fundamental issue isn't just that certain options are overpowered (though that is totally an issue, banning, say, monks and wish will help somewhat), it is also that some classes get a tremendous number of those options (wizard) while some get almost none (monk) and some are in-between (rogue). Sure, if you have nothing but similarly optimized Wizards and Clerics and Druids the game will be balanced and possibly also fun, but you are removing a large part of the game (martial characters and skillmonkeys) and not everyone wants to play spellcasters. First off, what you are asking for is basically impossible without gutting the game. ![]() Similarly, what if I was running a 3.5E game?Īlright, I thought I'd chime in since none of the other answers seem particularly helpful, hopefully the OP is still interested. So, if I was running a strict 3.0E game in which any first-party WotC material that was published before 3.5E came out, what would I have to impose a blanket ban on to make the game playable until, oh, character level 20? If this is impossible, what's the highest level I can expect the game to go before I start having to ban more than a third of published material? Then you have a relatively playable and fair 3.x.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |