DM questions?

[Otep]

So I'm thinking of starting a 3.5 game. how ever i havn't played in ages and i'm fairly decent at DM.

heres where i run into problems.... i have way too many books! in your experiance which books are great (low to mid lvl cheese) and which do you simply say hell no to? in addition to what do you let the player's have access to?

my list:
arms and equipment guide
Book of challenges
BoED
BoVD
Champions of valor
cityscape
complete adventurer
complete arcane
complete champion
complete divine
complete mage
complete psionic
complete scoundrel
complete warrior
defenders of faith
deities and demigods
dragonomicon
dragon compendium vol I
dragon magic
DMG
DMG II
dungeonscape
eberron campaign setting
eberron explorer's handbook
enemies and allies
epic level handbook
expanded psionics handbook
faiths and pantheons
fiend folio
frostburn
hero builder's guidebook
heros of horror
Libris mortis
lords of darkness
lords of madness
lost empires of faerun
MIC
Magic of Incarnum
Manual of the Planes
Masters of the Wild
Monster Compendium
MM 1-4
More Ultimate Equipment
OA
planar handbook
planescape
players guide to eberron
players guide to faerun
Players handbook
Players handbook II
races of destiny
races of faerun
races of stone
races of the dragons
races of the wild
savage species
song and silence
spell compendium
stronghold builders guidebook
sword and fist
tome of blood
tome of battle
tome of magic
Underdark
Unearthed arcana

[nedz]

Players handbook
At least as far as the classes go. :smallamused:

Really it doesn't come down to books. Most of the OP and under powered classes are in the PH. It's also where most of the broken spells can be found. The cheese is scattered more thinly in the other books.

[lsfreak]

I really don't think there's many, or ANY, 3.5 books that are blanket-broken. Cheese comes first and foremost from combinations of nonbroken thing + nonbroken thing (+ nonbroken thing + ...) to make something ridiculous.

That said, the best-balanced ones are the late ones - PHB2, CC, CM, CS, ToB, and the first third of ToM (first 2/3rds with a little tweaking). Throw in XPH and Incarnum, and add in a few other classes (e.g. wildshape ranger, bard, spirit shaman) and you have a decently-balanced game, way better than a normal PHB+Completes game.

When I've got a group and I'm DM'ing, players have access to everything, plus homebrew if it's run by me. Play nice and don't break things or I'll start banning stuff.

[SciChronic]

Allowing access to splat books helps mundane classes more than caster classes, so keep that in mind if your group optimizes heavily.

that said, to add a good amount of variety i'd allow:
Core, Completes, XPH, PHB2, ToB, MIC, SpC + books for setting you're using. As for creatures, all books are open for perusal. Normally though, i allow all splatbooks

[aeauseth]

Ah the cheese factor. Every DM has their own method to handle player equity. The tier system assumes every player has the same skill set, but that usually isn't true.

One method I've found to work well is to let player pick a class from any source book (within reason - you set the list). Let players pick their initial feats. Then require any new class, feats, and magic items be found in-game. This allows you as the DM to place limits (if necessary).

Power gamers are likely to complain. Offer them the opportunity to send you a preliminary 20 build w/feats, so you can "pre approve" the build. This will also let you know who your power gamers are. :smallbiggrin:

Newbies or flavor builds will never be a problem and you can offer custom items to bump their effective power level.

I dislike banning certain books. Many of the splat books offer great flavor, which I hate to limit.

You can also guide character creation, suggesting tier 1 classes to non-optimizers, and tier 3-5 classes to cheese players. Some optimizers like the challenge, some just want to be the most powerful.

I have one campaign where I let a cheese player do his thing, but play toward his weaknesses. He takes blurry eyed, and I put out incorporeal foes. He goes high damage, low AC, so I put out a city of mid level giants. Working with highly optimized players is a challenge, but as a DM you can work around most of that. The biggest issue is to make sure all players feel like they are contributing. BTW: The more foes, the less advantage a cheese player has, put out 2-3 times the number of foes as players and everyone will get a chance to do something. Obviously be cautious about the ECL of such an encounter.

If your running a published module you will need to keep the power gamer and cheese factor in check. If it is your own custom content then you just need to make sure all the player/characters have similar power levels.

If one character is overpowered, consider making them all overpowered, instead of bringing out the nerf bat.

[ArcturusV]

I wouldn't say that adding extra books helps mundane characters more than casters. Remember that mundane characters typically have limited options by feat choice. And a lot of feats in a lot of books are just... really... really meh. Divine Counterspelling? Stigmata? Lichloved? Falling Star Strike?

But almost every book has new spells. And while not all of them will be good... it's a REALLY low cost for most spellcasters to get additional spells added to their repertoire. From Divine "I already know them automatically" to Arcane "I pay a few measly GP to get access".

And generally I judge things on a case by case basis. My first criteria being "Do I have this book, am I familiar with it and how it works?" That's why no ToB, Incarnum, etc in my games. I don't have the books on hand and I'm not familiar with their systems. Not for any percieved power basis. Psionics I don't use mostly because I am still traumatized by the stupidity that was Psionics in 2nd Edition.

Remember that a lot of the "Broken" stuff is in the Player's Handbook and Monster Manual. If you're looking for Broken don't think someone saying "I'm a core only druid" means that he's not going to break your game over his knee if he has a desire to.

[aeauseth]

There are some ban-able combos I've run across. A short list might include:

Persistent Spell combo allowing persistable spells over level 3.
Pounce as a feat or ACF
Dungeon Crasher
Celestial animal companions
Leadership + Bard cohort + Dragonfire Inspiration

I'm not suggesting you ban these, just be careful when you see them. Obviously this is an incomplete list.

[Otep]

Interesting points however, i've never encountered the term "Splat book"

as an after thought, i did have a random SQUIRREL!

for feats, how the hell do you magically learn how to do something? like cleave for example? it would make scene IMO to have to learn how to do something... i believe there was a rule variant where you had to pay X amount to learn a feat or skill etc....

but i dont think i will have to many super cheese characters (thats my department for bosses :P)

but allowing all books (within reason) sounds fairly logical, i just wanted to know if there was an unspoken rule i wasnt aware of.

i'm fairly giving as a DM... if you want something i may allow you to have it.

typically, i'll do something to the extend of 115-125% of the recommended treasure for x encounter but the creatures are harder, plan effective tactics, and actually use the +1 vorple scimitar in their treasure

i believe on average, it would end up 9-10 encounters per level vs the typical 13.3

are there any other recommendations you guys/gals may have for a DM? anything from as a player's perspective to the DM's perspective.

Edit: i'm aware of the dungeon crasher combos... i had a goliath wolf totem barb, fighter, crusader for a while :) i believe it was 2/2/11 :P

but i'll keep the list in mind for the minion type players specifically

[ArcturusV]

Well, one thing I commonly do is limit things to just one Setting Reference, book wise. That means if I'm using Eberron stuff, you can use Eberron stuff. But you can't use Forgotten Realms, or Dragonlance, or Dark Sun, Greyhawk Deities, Planescape, etc. That's not necessarily a common rule... but I find it a logical one myself. Sometimes I ban Setting based books altogether. "I'm not playing in Eberron, there are no warforged. Nor am I in Faerun, there is no Weave to Shadow, etc".

One rule, if the feat thing bothers you? Make it so players can't just level up spontaneously, but require them to spend some time in study/training/contemplation or the like. So they have the XP to hit a new level,l but they don't actually get a new level until they go back to town, train, learn, apply the lessons they learned in the field, etc. It's something that some older editions used to suggest. It doesn't really hurt hte game to do it unless you're planning some Adventure where the players clear out a single massive dungeon, non-stop, going for 20 levels.

[lsfreak]

for feats, how the hell do you magically learn how to do something? like cleave for example? it would make scene IMO to have to learn how to do something... i believe there was a rule variant where you had to pay X amount to learn a feat or skill etc....

You don't. You're training, tinkering with new ways of combining your stances and strikes, seeing if you can dump more power into your spells, trying out new things constantly while you're leveling. Gaining cleave is not suddenly knowing how to cleave, it's that you've spent a decent amount of time practicing, throwing in little changes to how hold yourself or the direction you make your attack from, whatever. Gaining the feat is just showing you've perfected it - you've got it down to the point where you can always do it and actually benefit from your practice, training, or experimentation.

[Otep]

@isfreak: never thought of it from that angle, point taken thank you

[lsfreak]

It's one possible take on it. I basically handwave it entirely, but if someone wanting an explanation of why we don't spend time training in-game, that'd be my answer. I dislike paying or spending specific time in-game leveling up, I'd rather reserve paid training or spending time training under a master for special circumstances, things that are beyond the rules, like a sorcerer giving gifts to a fey to be gifted with a new spell, a warblade training under a master to gain access to an additional discipline, or spending time meditating at a shrine to gain an Incarnum feat.

[ArcturusV]

Although that sort of master/student thing is how you're supposed to PrC it up. Least generally.

[Otep]

i typically do master/apprentice for prestige classes (off line typically but you have to do a quest to "prove your worth their time")

as i said several posts ago, it was a squirrel (ADD moment :D) that i never had an answer for

[lsfreak]

Although that sort of master/student thing is how you're supposed to PrC it up. Least generally.

There's nothing about that in the DMG where prestige classes are first presented, and it's another thing I would argue against. There may be no difference between a prestige class and any other class - both are merely improving their abilities. If you're bettering your casting, that may mean more levels in wizard, or going master specialist, or going archmage... but those are not any more special than taking more levels of wizard from the character's perspective.

[ArcturusV]

I'd say otherwise. A lot of PrCs have a clear "training" motif. You don't just become an Assassin, you join their guild and learn their secrets, to pull one out of the DMG. Never mind a ton of other PrCs out there which have requirements listed in the blocks involving some sort of in character relationship/transaction like Witch Hunter. I'd say it's more the norm for the PrCs I've seen to require something more than just "ping, I leveled, I'm now a (PrC here)". But most people drop it because it's inconvenient for them and makes Dipping more of a pain in the butt. And later books seemed to have tried to gloss over it a bit more.