Build Limitations

[LaughingRogue]

As a DM what would you make the build limitations on a game such as part of the Shackled City (Dragon Mag) Trilogy if you had no intention of upping the encounters.

[myancey]

One? ...but seriously, I'm not even sure what you're asking.

[Metahuman1]

Ok, he's either asking "What things would you out right require as prerequisites and restrictions.", or "Just how high an optimization level would you allow?"

I'm not sure which.

[LaughingRogue]

Ok, he's either asking "What things would you out right require as prerequisites and restrictions.", or "Just how high an optimization level would you allow?"

I'm not sure which.

Sorry I had not made this clear but I was asking about how high of an optimization level you would allow, my apologies.

[myancey]

I see. Well, I'd say you should just allow everything but beholder mage. :smallbiggrin:

But I am also of the opinion that a good DM can handle anything the party can throw at him--especially because he can alter anything in the game. I'm not a fan of limiting my party too much..with a few exceptions.

[ImperatorK]

But I am also of the opinion that a good DM can handle anything the party can throw at him--especially because he can alter anything in the game. I'm not a fan of limiting my party too much..with a few exceptions.
The thing is, he's talking about a pre-made module. He doesn't want to change the encounters, which might or might not get steam rolled by his players if they optimize.

[LaughingRogue]

The thing is, he's talking about a pre-made module. He doesn't want to change the encounters, which might or might not get steam rolled by his players if they optimize.

yeah this is my major concern

[nyarlathotep]

If I recall shackled city is rather brutal and rips unoptimized parties apart so anything less than venerable dragon kobold loredrake should be fine. I personally like to discourage uberchargers on a similar principle to death effect spells, but that is a personal opinion and even if you don't just give a lot of enemies reach weapons prepared to trip.

[ClothedInVelvet]

If you limit them to 1 or 2 classes and 1 prestige class, you can limit a lot of breaks without severely cutting into the ways they want their characters to work. You can find prestige classes for just about anything, but without being able to stick them together, they often have a way of limiting themselves.

[myancey]

yeah this is my major concern

The answer is obvious then. Limit the players to core only. And maybe allow the books your module uses (An example: Red Hand uses ToB or something like that). And have them roll 4d6 stats, dropping the lowest. That'll keep them at relatively unoptimized levels.

But you can break a character using PHB...just saying.

And most modules are going to require some amount of work in adjustment. It's just how it goes.

[nyarlathotep]

The answer is obvious then. Limit the players to core only. And maybe allow the books your module uses (An example: Red Hand uses ToB or something like that). And have them roll 4d6 stats, dropping the lowest. That'll keep them at relatively unoptimized levels.

But you can break a character using PHB...just saying.

And most modules are going to require some amount of work in adjustment. It's just how it goes.

Core only is bar none the worst possible balance advice you could give. If you're going through radical blanket bans to balance party members and prevent game breaking, ban wizard, sorcerer, druid, cleric, favored soul, and spirit shaman. Replace these with wild shaping ranger, dread necromancer, beguiler, warmage, warlock, binder, and mystic ranger.

[ClothedInVelvet]

The answer is obvious then. Limit the players to core only.

Yeah... I'd much rather play a wizard than a Battle Sorcerer. Elements of core are extremely strong. The only thing that limiting players to core only does is make them choose casters (cleric, druid, wizard) over warriors (fighter, ranger, monk). ToB opens up melee classes, EPH opens up my favorite casting system.

The two things that will help about restricting the use of books is the amount of feats your players will be able to choose from and the amount of stuff that you need to know about.

All that said, outlawing Dragon magazine material can be very useful.

[myancey]

Core only is bar none the worst possible balance advice you could give. If you're going through radical blanket bans to balance party members and prevent game breaking, ban wizard, sorcerer, druid, cleric, favored soul, and spirit shaman. Replace these with wild shaping ranger, dread necromancer, beguiler, warmage, warlock, binder, and mystic ranger.

And in reading my earlier post you obviously knew while writings this that I personally felt he should allow everything. The limiting to core was largely a sarcastic response designed to show my disdain for limiting players to certain books.

That said, if he is a new DM then the easiest solution would be to limit the books to core books. He wouldn't need to check up on rules from any other books then. I didn't once state that it would balance the players. But it would limit all classes to that which is specifically allowed in core.

And OP hasn't stated levels yet. That being the case..its just as likely that all players would go melee if he started them at level 1. Level 1 as a wizard is pretty tough, no matter how you build him.


Yeah... I'd much rather play a wizard than a Battle Sorcerer. Elements of core are extremely strong. The only thing that limiting players to core only does is make them choose casters (cleric, druid, wizard) over warriors (fighter, ranger, monk). ToB opens up melee classes, EPH opens up my favorite casting system.

The two things that will help about restricting the use of books is the amount of feats your players will be able to choose from and the amount of stuff that you need to know about.

All that said, outlawing Dragon magazine material can be very useful.

And yeah, ToB does open up good martial classes. But it's also an entirely new set of rules to learn. But ToB is also widely known for its powerful base classes--something I felt the OP was hoping to avoid. He is trying to limit the optimization level, after all.

[LaughingRogue]

And in reading my earlier post you obviously knew while writings this that I personally felt he should allow everything. The limiting to core was largely a sarcastic response designed to show my disdain for limiting players to certain books.

That said, if he is a new DM then the easiest solution would be to limit the books to core books. He wouldn't need to check up on rules from any other books then. I didn't once state that it would balance the players. But it would limit all classes to that which is specifically allowed in core.

And OP hasn't stated levels yet. That being the case..its just as likely that all players would go melee if he started them at level 1. Level 1 as a wizard is pretty tough, no matter how you build him.



And yeah, ToB does open up good martial classes. But it's also an entirely new set of rules to learn. But ToB is also widely known for its powerful base classes--something I felt the OP was hoping to avoid. He is trying to limit the optimization level, after all.

yeah, for a game that was made in 2003 i'm very hesitant/won't allow new rules systems that are put into place by books like Tome of Battle

[myancey]

yeah, for a game that was made in 2003 i'm very hesitant/won't allow new rules systems that are put into place by books like Tome of Battle

It can be a great system--for the DM who wants to handle it. I'm having trouble in the group I'm DMing for because of ToB. I said it'd be fine for a player to choose a class from there. I didn't know the rules for it--and I truly don't have the time to go learn them. This creates a situation that can be severely abused. And the player is developing a reputation for misreading the rules...