Standard DM ban list.

[Acrinos]

A while back I saw a list for things a DM should ban. The list included things like 'candle of invocation' and 'divine metamagic'. The list had a special name but I can't remember it. Does anyone know the name or have a link to where I could find a list like this?

[Kuulvheysoon]

Might you be referring to the banlist for the Test of Spite?

[eggynack]

Is the Test of Spite ban list (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113644) what you're looking for? If it's a thing that breaks the game, there's a good chance that it's on there. There are also some low power things on there, but it's not too hard to sort out.

[Acrinos]

Might you be referring to the banlist for the Test of Spite?

YES! thank very much, ill bookmark it this time.

[Humble Master]

I looked over that ban list and I can recommend it.

[NeoPhoenix0]

It's a good list. Why doesn't it have a fix for versatile spellcaster? It's easy, just don't have prepared caster known spells count for it, or make it so you can only use spells known for the class that's casting.

[VGLordR2]

A while back I saw a list for things a DM should ban. The list included things like 'candle of invocation' and 'divine metamagic'. The list had a special name but I can't remember it. Does anyone know the name or have a link to where I could find a list like this?

You could have just asked me, you know. :smallbiggrin:

[navar100]

There is no official ban list. There is nothing that a DM must ban. If you don't like something, fine, but that doesn't mean someone else can't like it and not ban it.

[eggynack]

There is no official ban list. There is nothing that a DM must ban. If you don't like something, fine, but that doesn't mean someone else can't like it and not ban it.
He wasn't asking for an official list, just a standard one. The test of spite list is just about the most standardized and complete ban list we have, and because of that, it's the one he desired. It's not like I'd expect every DM to transfer the ban list to their game as written, but it's a list of most of the game breaking and ill defined things in the game, so it's a great starting point. It's what I'd give to any DM who was trying to create a ban list, if only to give him something to model it after.

[Zombimode]

He wasn't asking for an official list, just a standard one. The test of spite list is just about the most standardized and complete ban list we have, and because of that, it's the one he desired. It's not like I'd expect every DM to transfer the ban list to their game as written, but it's a list of most of the game breaking and ill defined things in the game, so it's a great starting point. It's what I'd give to any DM who was trying to create a ban list, if only to give him something to model it after.

Point is, the Test of Spite is a PvP arena environment. This is a very different assumption then most actual D&D game have. What may be undesirable in Test of Spite may be perfectly fine in normally played D&D. Thats why its ban list is not the most useful thing.

Personal advice: don't have a ban list. But if you must, put only stuff in there that doesn't fit your vision of the game world. For everything else, there is "we try to actually play here, so no TO builds".

[eggynack]

Point is, the Test of Spite is a PvP arena environment. This is a very different assumption then most actual D&D game have. What may be undesirable in Test of Spite may be perfectly fine in normally played D&D. Thats why its ban list is not the most useful thing.

Personal advice: don't have a ban list. But if you must, put only stuff in there that doesn't fit your vision of the game world. For everything else, there is "we try to actually play here, so no TO builds".
That's not really the point of looking through the ToS list for a normal ban list. Basically, it's just a standard list of the most broken stuff in the game. For any DM who wants to know what about the game is broken, whether they're new or experienced, the ToS ban list is invaluable. Even if you don't know everything the list refers to, it's still nice to have the names of all the crazy stuff before you do a search. Even if you know every broken trick in the game, it's still nice to have a list in front of you in case you forget one. I don't think that DM's should just port this list over to their game without reading through it first. I just think that if a game is allowing planar shepherds, that should be an affirmative decision they're making, and not a thing they begin to regret when 10:1 time dilation becomes accessible.

[navar100]

He wasn't asking for an official list, just a standard one. The test of spite list is just about the most standardized and complete ban list we have, and because of that, it's the one he desired. It's not like I'd expect every DM to transfer the ban list to their game as written, but it's a list of most of the game breaking and ill defined things in the game, so it's a great starting point. It's what I'd give to any DM who was trying to create a ban list, if only to give him something to model it after.

He used the word "should" which implies not banning something means you're doing it wrong. Asking for what is very powerful is different than asking for what shouldn't exist.

[eggynack]

He used the word "should" which implies not banning something means you're doing it wrong. Asking for what is very powerful is different than asking for what shouldn't exist.
That's just being pointlessly pedantic. He was saying that the goal of the ban list was to list things that the author thinks should be banned, which is a generally accurate claim for most ban lists. Also, some of the things on that list actually do have a "should" attached to them. I can't really imagine a game working with a 1d2 crusader or pun pun in it. The list has a lot of that rules awkward TO stuff on it.

[Beheld]

That's not really the point of looking through the ToS list for a normal ban list. Basically, it's just a standard list of the most broken stuff in the game. For any DM who wants to know what about the game is broken, whether they're new or experienced, the ToS ban list is invaluable. Even if you don't know everything the list refers to, it's still nice to have the names of all the crazy stuff before you do a search. Even if you know every broken trick in the game, it's still nice to have a list in front of you in case you forget one. I don't think that DM's should just port this list over to their game without reading through it first. I just think that if a game is allowing planar shepherds, that should be an affirmative decision they're making, and not a thing they begin to regret when 10:1 time dilation becomes accessible.

In addition to being a PvP environment and therefore banning things that aren't a problem in game, like Awaken, it also bans a bunch of arbitrary things that are not any more powerful than other things it does ban, like Wildshape.

[undead hero]

That's just being pointlessly pedantic. He was saying that the goal of the ban list was to list things that the author thinks should be banned, which is a generally accurate claim for most ban lists. Also, some of the things on that list actually do have a "should" attached to them. I can't really imagine a game working with a 1d2 crusader or pun pun in it. The list has a lot of that rules awkward TO stuff on it.

Welcome to the giantitp forums :smalltongue:

But also +1 to your post.

[eggynack]

In addition to being a PvP environment and therefore banning things that aren't a problem in game, like Awaken, it also bans a bunch of arbitrary things that are not any more powerful than other things it does ban, like Wildshape.
Sure, which is why I suggest reading it rather than just copy pasting the list into a game wholesale. The list also has some stuff that it considers low power, which makes the copy paste method even less logical. The compendium of broken stuff is a subset of a broader ban list designed for that particular environment. It's not perfect, but it's a pretty great resource to have access to.

[ShriekingDrake]

For what it's worth, we've been banning these (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=261219) in one of my groups. So far so good.

[NeoPhoenix0]

For what it's worth, we've been banning these (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=261219) in one of my groups. So far so good.

Interesting, what's your opinion on Ray of Stupidity SC pg 167. Consider that it is a second level ray with no save that can kill any animal and a huge amount of magical beasts with one use. While it won't actually kill them it will make them helpless allowing you to coup de grace them to death.

[ShriekingDrake]

Admittedly, I hadn't thought about that spell and I agree it's powerful. Generally, my preference is to fix spells rather than remove them. My first instinct would be to treat it the way I treat the Shivering Touch line of spells and houserule it a "penalty" rather than ability damage. This would make it least effective against animals, many of which already have 1 intelligence.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Good call, i hear a lot of people make that house rule.

[Douglas]

Admittedly, I hadn't thought about that spell and I agree it's powerful. Generally, my preference is to fix spells rather than remove them. My first instinct would be to treat it the way I treat the Shivering Touch line of spells and houserule it a "penalty" rather than ability damage. This would make it least effective against animals, many of which already have 1 intelligence.
Making it a penalty does nothing but prevent it from stacking. If you want to stop it working against animals, you need to add a "cannot reduce below 1" clause.

[ShriekingDrake]

Making it a penalty does nothing but prevent it from stacking. If you want to stop it working against animals, you need to add a "cannot reduce below 1" clause.

I do agree about the "cannot reduce intelligence below 1" clause.

[Cheiromancer]

Generally, my preference is to fix spells rather than remove them.

I think this is a very good principle. You could let gate be used for planar transportation rather than chain-gating solars, make shun the dark chaos return the feat embraced (or else make the DCSF work like psychic reformation), make the daze effect imposed by celerity impossible to avoid, etc. Even so, some of the spells are probably unfixable (i.e. Tippy's list).

I am not altogether convinced that alter self needs to be banned. Maybe restrict it to MM1 forms, so your tiefling wizard isn't constantly in the shape of a Dwarven Ancestor, but what's the harm of him going around as a Troglodyte?

edit: Aside from a few quibbles, I agree with your assessment that most of the spells in the linked post are more trouble than they are worth, given that the game runs fine without them.

[koboldish]

Well... Alter self is good. I think a +6 AC bonus with a second level spell is pretty good, given that it stacks with most things. And that's in MM1. I would suggest instead of limiting forms, put a cap on the total bonuses a form can give.

[ShriekingDrake]

the spells in the linked post are more trouble than they are worth, given that the game runs fine without them.

This is exactly the metric I use. Some of the spells on the list could be nerfed to be un-broken, but for some it doesn't strike me as worth it.

[DementedFellow]

I disagree with following Test of Spite's banlist for regular D&Ding. Some people might look at it and assume everything that is banned is overpowered. By this logic, fighters are overpowered, and being a dungeoncrasher brings them down to earth.

As to banning things on the whole, there should really be only two things to ban at your table.

1) No PvPing unless everyone at the table agrees to it (that includes you)
2) No party member can steal from the party

The rest is something a group can work with. All you have to do instead of saying, "Hey guys, this is a list of things I banned!" just outline the world you are throwing them into and allow time for questions. More often than not if you say that you want a core-only game, then people understand that the game will not be featuring Pun-Pun-tier gamebreaking policies.

[Ashtagon]

My ban list only covers spells so far:

http://www.thepiazza.org.uk/bb/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=9310

fwiw, I also note:

* No pvp combat or theft from other PCs.
* The trap-making rules are NPC only; in essence, they are a guideline to frequency and setting CR, rather than a construction kit template.
* The only custom magic items allowed are weapons and armour made by mix-n-matching the already-published magic item abilities for weapons and armour.
* There are no magic marts. If you want a magic item, you either find it, or you find a wizard willing and able to custom-build it for you. He won't have a spare in stock.
* Many magic items simply won't exist. The banned spell list is a guide for that (if the spell doesn't exist, items based on that spell won't either — at least not ones made by mortals). This list isn't published, because characters only know what is possible, not what is impossible.
* NPCs are generally under the same restrictions as PCs regarding spell lists and magic items.

However, my list is made with the intention that the campaign is relatively low-magic. ymmv.