PDA

View Full Version : Quick question, is this going too far?



Wafflecart
2009-09-04, 03:12 PM
I personally do not like it when players can play only a couple sessions and then be able to blow up every creature thrown at them, so, I've started DMing my own game (DnD 3.5 btw) and the starting requirements were that u needed 1 stat to be an 8, and no 1 could be above 16 before racial bonuses were factored in...also it was only 28 point buy. So, was this going too far? Because I realize its impossible to keep players low for long since this is an urban setting, and eventually they could pool their WBL together and buy the city. But I sort of have a plan for that. Also I should probably mention that I am a little bit DM v. PC, I think its fun to have PC death be a very real option starting day 1.

Tyndmyr
2009-09-04, 03:16 PM
I'm perfectly ok with low-powered campaigns, really. I think focusing too heavily on the stats might miss the bigger issue with characters gaining power rapidly. Stats mean relatively little compared to class levels...

So, I suggest you use some fraction of book standard exp for encounters. This has a lot of nice side effects, and keeps progression to a lower rate, while not really messing with much else in terms of balance. If you're feeling generous, reduce exp costs for spells/etc by an equivalent rate.

Dixieboy
2009-09-04, 03:19 PM
Limiting their ability scores won't make a whole lot of a difference; 28 point buy would have most people only going to 16, and keeping a couple of stats at 8 anyway.

So no, you aren't going too far.
You are being a bit anoying, simply because it's a limitation.
One that players will look at and cry foul, simply because it would SEEM to be holding them back a great deal.

The easiest solution is simply having their enemies be smart, and don't give them a lot of loot.

Wafflecart
2009-09-04, 03:21 PM
It's just a little odd, the campaign is basically in 2 parts, 1-10 and 10+. i want them to be in 1-10 fairly low powered, but once 10+ hits, I'm totally fine with everybody optimizing. For Pt 2 I want to see raw power...its just weird.

LibraryOgre
2009-09-04, 03:27 PM
Take a look at E6 (http://esix.pbworks.com/); the central concept is that you play D&D 3.5 normally until 6th level, but, at that point, you stop. Instead of advancing in levels, you gain a feat every 5000 experience.

Skorj
2009-09-04, 03:27 PM
Not too far, but it's a bit control-freaky. Min 6, Max 18 (before race) would only give players a +1 over what you're allowing, and wouldn't seem like you were freaking out before the game even began. :smallbiggrin:


Take a look at E6 (http://esix.pbworks.com/); the central concept is that you play D&D 3.5 normally until 6th level, but, at that point, you stop. Instead of advancing in levels, you gain a feat every 5000 experience.

Ah, that's lke Gygaxian D&D, except there you played normally until 6th level, by which point you were dead. :smallamused:

Tyndmyr
2009-09-04, 03:28 PM
It's just a little odd, the campaign is basically in 2 parts, 1-10 and 10+. i want them to be in 1-10 fairly low powered, but once 10+ hits, I'm totally fine with everybody optimizing. For Pt 2 I want to see raw power...its just weird.

This is a bit more unusual. This is probably easier to do by being tight with wealth and item drops at first. A reasonly low point buy doesn't hurt either.

I wouldn't bother with the limit to 16, simply because with a sufficiently low point buy...it hurts to boost it high anyhow.

quick_comment
2009-09-04, 03:33 PM
It's just a little odd, the campaign is basically in 2 parts, 1-10 and 10+. i want them to be in 1-10 fairly low powered, but once 10+ hits, I'm totally fine with everybody optimizing. For Pt 2 I want to see raw power...its just weird.

At level 10 you can start gestalting them. So at level 20, a hypothetical build might be Wizard 10/Ultimage Magus 10//Sorcerer 10

Wafflecart
2009-09-04, 03:34 PM
This is a bit more unusual. This is probably easier to do by being tight with wealth and item drops at first. A reasonly low point buy doesn't hurt either.

I wouldn't bother with the limit to 16, simply because with a sufficiently low point buy...it hurts to boost it high anyhow.

well, i just remembered that i forgot to mention i have already started the campaign, my players managed to bother and rush me into it, so im trying to figure out what it is that im doing. Also I've discovered that it's a very bad idea to start the game before the settng is done being made.

Wafflecart
2009-09-04, 03:35 PM
At level 10 you can start gestalting them. So at level 20, a hypothetical build might be Wizard 10/Ultimage Magus 10//Sorcerer 10

That's...That's a good idea =)...gestalt just means u get 2 class lvls instead of 1 right?

LibraryOgre
2009-09-04, 03:37 PM
Ah, that's lke Gygaxian D&D, except there you played normally until 6th level, by which point you were dead. :smallamused:

Not really. At 6th level, you were likely on your 10th character (except that one guy who always seemed to be incredibly lucky), and were really starting to get into stride.

quick_comment
2009-09-04, 03:38 PM
That's...That's a good idea =)...gestalt just means u get 2 class lvls instead of 1 right?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm

Wafflecart
2009-09-04, 03:39 PM
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm

Thank you.

Wings of Peace
2009-09-04, 03:45 PM
It's just a little odd, the campaign is basically in 2 parts, 1-10 and 10+. i want them to be in 1-10 fairly low powered, but once 10+ hits, I'm totally fine with everybody optimizing. For Pt 2 I want to see raw power...its just weird.

The problem with this is that it's not really optimizing if for the first half they're underpowered since most of the stronger builds are planned out over 20 levels. Unless they're playing a late blooming setup they're going to have to make some power sacrifices to gimp themselves while they wait to hit the part where you're fine with them being strong and then when they hit that plateau they won't be as optimal as they could have been.

Wafflecart
2009-09-04, 03:47 PM
The problem with this is that it's not really optimizing if for the first half they're underpowered since most of the stronger builds are planned out over 20 levels. Unless they're playing a late blooming setup they're going to have to make some power sacrifices to gimp themselves while they wait to hit the part where you're fine with them being strong and then when they hit that plateau they won't be as optimal as they could have been

That makes sense, I just mainly didnt want them blowing up my city halfway through the campaign.

Wings of Peace
2009-09-04, 03:52 PM
That makes sense, I just mainly didnt want them blowing up my city halfway through the campaign.

How experienced are they as optimizers? Because having the potential and being able to use it are two different things. Though, if they are experienced at it I would just tell them that they're free to build as they like but if their characters are suddenly able to take out a solar with minimal effort (Exaggerated example) then there's going to be some forced changes. Don't have to be harsh changes maybe just have them re-level their characters or something if their power level gets to be a problem. They won't like it much but if they know ahead of time that's what will happen it will be in the back of their minds when they're thinking of what classes and abilities they want to take anyways.

Fiery Diamond
2009-09-04, 11:10 PM
Also I've discovered that it's a very bad idea to start the game before the settng is done being made.

Not necessarily, I do it all the time and have a blast.

Lorien077
2009-09-05, 12:34 AM
Personally I find such strict limits as a player confining. Being a RPer first, being forced to min max to have a half decent character can be frustrating. My suggestion is you talk to your players, explain your concerns, and strictly limit those you know will power game. It depends on your group.
My advice for your monsters getting destroyed too quickly, and avoiding city blow ups is to buff your critters. Throw a CR or two higher for encounters, more if they can handle it or you want a challenging fight. To avoid city blow ups just don't let your players idle and get bored. If someone wants to blow up your city for no adequately explained reason, you may have a problem player on your hands.

Xenogears
2009-09-05, 12:42 AM
I think a fair degree of control can be had just by severely limiting wealth until 10th level. Melee classes are obviously gimped but even wizards could be since no/low wealth means no/low scrolls which means they have to get by with the two new spells per level in the wpellbook. This would limit their choices considerably. Druid and Cleric still crush everything even more than usual since they are not noticably weaker and everything else is...

Milskidasith
2009-09-05, 12:46 AM
I find the "give a fraction of EXP" idea to be a terrible one, simply because levelling up slower does not, in fact, mean that your characters are any less powerful than they level up. Having a lower rate of levelling up is fine if you want your campaign to last for a while, but saying it will keep your players playing lower powered characters is untrue. It will just mean that the players will spend a lot of combat encounters doing their signature "OHKO" setup at that level after they figured it out a few encounters back but just haven't leveled up yet.

Jergmo
2009-09-05, 01:23 AM
I personally do not like it when players can play only a couple sessions and then be able to blow up every creature thrown at them, so, I've started DMing my own game (DnD 3.5 btw) and the starting requirements were that u needed 1 stat to be an 8, and no 1 could be above 16 before racial bonuses were factored in...also it was only 28 point buy. So, was this going too far? Because I realize its impossible to keep players low for long since this is an urban setting, and eventually they could pool their WBL together and buy the city. But I sort of have a plan for that. Also I should probably mention that I am a little bit DM v. PC, I think its fun to have PC death be a very real option starting day 1.

If by "blow up every creature thrown at them", you mean "have an extra +1 in a couple saves or skill checks", and by "pool their WBL together and buy the city" you mean "buy 1 or two shops and not turn over a profit for a couple years when they could have bought magic tiems".

ericgrau
2009-09-05, 08:30 AM
I personally do not like it when players can play only a couple sessions and then be able to blow up every creature thrown at them, so, I've started DMing my own game (DnD 3.5 btw) and the starting requirements were that u needed 1 stat to be an 8, and no 1 could be above 16 before racial bonuses were factored in...also it was only 28 point buy. So, was this going too far? Because I realize its impossible to keep players low for long since this is an urban setting, and eventually they could pool their WBL together and buy the city. But I sort of have a plan for that. Also I should probably mention that I am a little bit DM v. PC, I think its fun to have PC death be a very real option starting day 1.

You know, you can get about the same with the standard dice rolling rules, with players rolling in front of you. The average high roll is a 15-16, and an 8 is also typical. Ya, you can get (un)lucky, but the chance of getting lucky repeatedly on 24 dice is low and usually means you need to watch the players roll more carefully. Worst case scenario you can ask for a reroll in cases of extreme luck (but not "zomg my high stat is a 14?"). Rolling is also roughly equivalent to a 25-28 point buy.

Other things likewise work best if you learn the rules and then adjust from there, because nobody has time to invent proper rules from scratch. For example houses cost 1,000-5,000gp each, not counting mansions, keeps, etc. which can get up to 150,000 gp each. The players being able to buy a city any time soon is unlikely. But even without knowing the rules, the simplest answer is to just say no to hair-brained schemes. Or say, "Look, I dunno if that's even legal, maybe I'll check the rule after the session. But right now can we please go back to playing a role playing game?"

Haven
2009-09-05, 09:44 AM
Have you considered trying a setting where its assumptions make buying a city impossible? Like a more medieval one where everything is done at the behest of the lords of the realm? Or, here's one you'd probably love--Ravenloft!

cupkeyk
2009-09-06, 03:39 AM
The most obvious problem to that solution is that powerful classes(Wizard, Cleric, Drui) won't be hampered while mid-tier(Tob: BoNS classes, rogue, bard, sorc) to underpowered classes(Fighter, Monk) won't have the power to match their more powerful allies.