Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (
More info?)
laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
>
> Werebat wrote:
>
>>laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
>>
>>>Werebat wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Here's what you do as DM:
>>>>
>>>>Pick a conservative group of books from which all options will be
>>>>allowed... For example, PHB, DMG, and the four "Complete" books.
>>>>
>>>>Allow other stuff on a case-by-case basis.
>>>>
>>>>If a player wants to use something not in your group of "allowed" books,
>>>>get online.
>>>>
>>>>Go to your favorite search engine.
>>>>
>>>>Do a web search using keywords "Character" "Optimization" "XXX", where
>>>>"XXX" is the feat/PrC/whatever in question.
>>>>
>>>>If it is mentioned more than two or three times on the WotC Character
>>>>Optimization boards, it is right out.
>>>>
>>>>This handily eliminates such over-the-top nonsense as "Nymph's Kiss",
>>>>"Vow of Poverty", and "Item Familiar".
>>>
>>>
>>>I actually do this (except I don't really have to search Google, since
>>>I read the CO board regularly).
>>>
>>>The method needs more finesse, though; there are plenty of character
>>>options that are perfectly well balanced (and very interesting), except
>>>for a weird rules abuse or two which puts them over the top. Sublime
>>>Chord is a perfect example (and you'll find it all over the CO board).
>>>In these cases, it's much better to ban the specific rules abuse, not
>>>the whole option.
>>
>>Unfortunately, you are right.
>>
>>The problem is that some players, once they realize this, will try to
>>finagle the same way they do when they don't have a rule like this
>>staring them in the face.
>>
>>"Well it's really not any more powerful than Power Attack, when you
>>think about it..."
>>
>>Bah.
>>
>>It's best to just stick with the hard and fast rule. The loss of
>>Sublime Chord, etc. is a little sad, but much less annoying than opening
>>up a can of worms for the finagling player to do his cat's cradle BS with.
>>
>>If you're fortunate enough to not have such a player, being lenient is
>>more of an option. If you do have such a player, though, they'll sense
>>your "weakness" and pounce.
>
>
> I know the feeling. I _do_ have such a player. To avoid problems, I
> always tell my players to tell me their character advancement plans in
> advance, especially if they're planning on some funky combo or obscure
> feat. That way, they won't be unpleasantly surprised.
This is a good idea, and one I always mean to enforce but never do. I
should bring it up next session.
Trouble is, only 2-3 of the players (myself included) actually bother to
graph out character advancement in advance like that. The others would
find it to be a chore.
*Prediction Mode On*
So I'd tell them they didn't HAVE to do it, but if they didn't, I
wouldn't be responsible if/when they had some pivotal feat or PrC nerfed
on them. And when it inevitably happened, they'd get pissed anyway.
*Prediction Mode Off*
Heh. Yeah, that's pretty much how it'd go.
>>Just out of curiosity -- what's your take on the Radiant Servant of Pelor?
>
>
> I'll answer this tonight, when I have access to my books.
Sure -- I'm always curious what people think. I myself am in a bit of a
funny situation with it, as one of my players has just taken it for his
cohort. This player is the other local DM, and I have an interest in
playing a cleric of Pelor in the future (which would invariably be in
one of his future games). While I plan to focus him on Thaumaturge, I
recognize that I'd be a fool not to dip into RSP with him on the way, so
I'm leery about banning it unless it really needs to be banned. :^)
The two of us recently had to come to an "arrangement" about Web, as it
seemed overpowered in the hands of his wizard and I had a fighter/rogue
with UMD maxed out in his game. As written, Web is a spell where you
are generally screwed even if you make your save, so my wand-armed
fighter/rogue would be nearly as much of a threat as his wizard in the
web department. We had sort of a MAD thing going on there and ended up
nerfing Web somewhat (DC 5+ to move through after breaking out, instead
of 10+).
>>On Kineticists with Energy Stun and Energy Missile?
>
>
> There are very few truly overpowered psionic powers. Energy Stun,
> Energy Missile, and Ego Whip are the three big ones (I'm still on the
> fence about Vigor).
LOL and the player IMC who gives me headaches with this sort of thing
was playing a Kineticist with guess which powers? ;^)
(Clarification -- he didn't have Ego Whip. He did have Vigor and Energy
Stun. I think he was planning on getting Energy Missile.)
In the end I toned down Energy Stun by using the common houserule of
dropping the nonstandard DC pump, and standardizing all of the energy
effects to fire's +1 damage per die (nerfing the electric stun). The
player got frustrated and quit the character to play a bard with Nymph's
Kiss, which I later looked at more closely when he wanted his cohort to
take Nymph's Kiss, too, and nerfed. :^/
I had also had to nerf the psicrystal "pet" of the Kineticist character
because it was too easy to use it as a scout that could die over and
over again and come back at no real cost after 24 hours. But that's
another story. And one I still don't completely understand.
> I'd nerf all three. They are far too powerful and versatile.
>
>
>>On Raptorian clerics with racial substitution levels?
>
>
> Again, I'll have to check my books. I've never had a Raptorian PC.
The clerical racial substitution levels for Raptorians in Races of the
Wild reminded me of the Radiant Servant of Pelor in that they almost
seemed designed to be "stealth cheese", because they were clearly more
powerful than the standard cleric levels at no real cost, but not
*extremely* so. They can summon air elementals at one spell level lower
than they should, for example, but don't really lose anything for the
privilege (maybe they drop to d6 hit dice -- heh, just like the RSP).
- Ron ^*^
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram