[PF] What is valid for character creation?

[UndertakerSheep]

When you sit down and make your characters, what sources does your group allow?

You can use anything from anywhere, with GM approval.
You can only use things from the online Pathfinder SRD.
You can only use things you or another player can bring to the table.
You can only use things you bring to the table.


This is a discussion that is currently going on in my group, and I'm wondering how other people think about this.

In my group of 6, only me and one other player own any Pathfinder books, and we both own numerous books. I have all the GM-related books and the other player has pretty much all the Player's hardcovers, plus some Player Companions and third party stuff.

The other player has told me he is getting tired of the group leeching off of the stuff he works hard for to purchase. I agree with him, but I also understand that RPG products are expensive and not everyone can justify spending money on books. The other player was okay with it until he purchased Blood of Angels so he could give his Aasimar Oathbound Paladin a racial trait for Angelic Wings, only to have another player roll up an Aasimar Cleric with the exact same racial traits.

So, how do you guys handle character creation? What do you think of telling players: "He can use that because he purchased the book. You can't use it because you haven't bought the book." And as a bonus question: does it change things when the players' lack of books goes hand-in-hand with a lack of interest in the game beyond playing it?

[Zanos]

I don't expect people in my groups to drop loads of money on every book they want to use. If they, or someone, can provide me access to it in any form so that I can read what they're using, then it's fair game, as long as they're not pulling something insanely overpowered out of something extremely obscure.

My current 3.5 group allows any and all official published 3.5 material, including Dragon Magazine content, as long as you can provide the DM with something he can read and it's not ridiculous.

I'm not super familiar with Pathfinder, but I understood that everything was on the PFSRD website, and could be accessed like that. Do you even need the books?

It's a little on the nose to roll up a winged aasamir cleric right as someone else is, though. That's more of a "Are you serious?" moment.

[Ravens_cry]

If it's in the PF-SRD and it's not third party, it's game. However, if you think something is unclear, you should talk about it in advance with the DM to make sure you are square about your interpretation of the rules. Homebrew and 3.5 is almost always not allowed. However, I have once or twice being able to squeeze in a feat or two with express permission. For example, Wild Cohort.

[Psyren]

The other player has told me he is getting tired of the group leeching off of the stuff he works hard for to purchase.

Is there a specific reason for this? Are they mistreating his books or otherwise being ungrateful that he's providing them?

I have the most books in my group (aside from the DM) and I have no problem passing them around. Everybody has the PDFs/SRD of course but there's something fun about looking op options on a page.



The other player was okay with it until he purchased Blood of Angels so he could give his Aasimar Oathbound Paladin a racial trait for Angelic Wings, only to have another player roll up an Aasimar Cleric with the exact same racial traits.

It sounds like he's buying books for the purpose of having unique options the other players don't get to have. That's really the wrong way to approach Pathfinder, the system is built around an Open Gaming philosophy. He should be buying the books because he wants to have them, not for some kind of power advantage.

By the same token, rolling up the exact same character as someone else would likely be an issue for us. The guy who went with it first would have dibs, but so long as one of them switched (or at the very least, played different archetypes) it would be handled.



So, how do you guys handle character creation? What do you think of telling players: "He can use that because he purchased the book. You can't use it because you haven't bought the book." And as a bonus question: does it change things when the players' lack of books goes hand-in-hand with a lack of interest in the game beyond playing it?

As long as it's in A book we allow it. Our DM looks askance at sources like adventure paths, but anything in an Advanced or Ultimate is fair game. None of us own the Player Companions I think.

[Callin]

My 3.5 group allows all Third Party and anything WoTC except Dragon Magazine.

[Raven777]

Why would you ever limit ability availability to owning the books? You are not playing Pathfinder Society, are you? The OGL exists for a reason, and everything in it is made available on the internet for free, sanctioned by Paizo itself.

My usual group uses everything on d20pfsrd (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/) that is actual Paizo material (not third party, not fan adapted). I reckon that is how the game is meant to be played. I never owned an actual book in two years of playing PF.

[Zanos]

My 3.5 group allows all Third Party and anything WoTC except Dragon Magazine.
Seems odd to allow third party by default and axe dragon magazine entirely. Most stuff in Dragon is "with DM approval" for us, but third party publications typically aren't considered unless someone specifically asks for something.

[Callin]

It just goes back to how our usual DM feels about Dragon Magazine from years past.

[Keneth]

What do you think of telling players: "He can use that because he purchased the book. You can't use it because you haven't bought the book."

That sounds horrible. I would never force my players to buy books just so they can make the kind of character they want. :smallannoyed:

As far as I'm concerned, any first party material is game, whether found in actual books or on d20pfsrd.com (seeing as PRD doesn't include the vast majority of content). There are, of course, a few things that are banned (like paragon surge), and some that require direct approval (like Leadership), but otherwise I don't limit my players in any way.

I also own PDF copies of every single Pathfinder book (except for PFS scenarios since PFS is a horrid abomination), and I share them with all of my players if requested.

[Psyren]

Presumably the folks you're playing with IRL are your friends, or at the very least you don't mind being under the same roof with them for hours at a time. Just lend them your books while you're there. As long as they're not eating cheetos or something it should be fine.

[Zanos]

Presumably the folks you're playing with IRL are your friends, or at the very least you don't mind being under the same roof with them for hours at a time. Just lend them your books while you're there. As long as they're not eating cheetos or something it should be fine.

A D&D book isn't a D&D book without cheeto stains.


It just goes back to how our usual DM feels about Dragon Magazine from years past.

That's understandable. Dragon had questionable balance pretty much across the board. I guess you could argue the same about a lot of third party content, but there's a lot of stuff out there that's really well written, so it's hard to determine.

[Gigas Breaker]

You can't use that unless you buy the book yourself. What? Share the books that I bought with my money? What is this? SOCIALISM?


Your friends sound like buttholes.

[gartius]

At the moment my groups for charcter gen stands as the following

CRB, APG, UC all fine UM case by case basis as that book has some really powerful stuff in there

All other 1st party sources are bring to the group and let them decide on the power of them. If the spell/class feature does not meet group consensus then it is banned.

3rd party is banned (shame as the psionics is pretty good from what I've heard and with Dreamscarred bringing out the new ToB stuff its looking really down :( )

also copying another persons character?- show some originality.

[OverdrivePrime]

We allow any Paizo materials on d20pfsrd.com, except some stuff that might be setting-inappropriate. (I don't want guns in my game, so the gunslinger and associated feats & equipment are out, none of the DMs want to bother with psionics, so the psionics rules are out.)

3rd party material available on the SRD are allowed on a case-by-case basis that must be approved by the DM. Most of the time no one brings up anything from 3rd parties, except me - I tend to use a fair bit of 3rd party monsters and 'fight of the week' centerpieces.

[CTrees]

If it's in the PF-SRD and it's not third party, it's game. However, if you think something is unclear, you should talk about it in advance with the DM to make sure you are square about your interpretation of the rules. Homebrew and 3.5 is almost always not allowed.

This is where I am, with two additions: firearms technology level is on a campaign-by-campaign basis, and DSP's psionics rules are allowed (their Tome of Battle stuff likely will be as well).

[Ravens_cry]

This is where I am, with two additions: firearms technology level is on a campaign-by-campaign basis, and DSP's psionics rules are allowed (their Tome of Battle stuff likely will be as well).
To me at least, the former was almost too obvious to mention. Given the controversial nature of guns in fantasy, I think it is only fair. I'd love to use psionics, I love the flavour of it, but no one else does in my group so, pooh pooh to that.

[Novawurmson]

You can use anything from anywhere, with GM approval.

This. The party I'm DMing for is a Half-Giant Aegis/Soulknife (with a homebrewed feat), an Elan Binder (using my own update of the binder+Secrets of Pact Magic/Villains of Pact Magic, third party books), an Oread Druid (using an alpha playtest of a new magic system and some 3.5 feats), and a Human Warder (http://dreamscarredpress.com/dragonfly/ForumsPro/viewtopic/t=3021.html). PF+3.5+Homebrew+3rd Party 3.5+3rd Party PF).

[peacenlove]

Since I am the DM I consider anything stuff that the player can physically show me (either via a book or in electronic format). Over the years I have banned/restricted 1st party material (Mindsight, wizard) and allowed 3rd party / dragon material (Secrets/Villains of pact magic, DSP Psionics, Cerebrosis/Bloodline feats). In reality, since I have the most books / organized electronic library, I usually make suggestions to the players.

However I enforce this simple rule: Whatever you build, have a complete rule analysis of what your character does, so that it does not bog down play.

One way to solve this is joint optimization, meaning all the players meet together and build their whole party, not each one individually. This however requires system mastery and some years of knowing each other.

[Vulnudaemon]

As long as it is fun and not unbalanced on the too powerful side. I even allowed a player to roleplay a Gnoll, and it was a obscure entry of the Advanced Race Guide.

Although to keep yourself sane you may want to limit the scope of books. If only to not be overloaded with books.

[genesaika]

For the most part anything that's available on hero lab because it's easier to manage. Of course if one of my players asked for something special, and it wasn't crazy, I'd allow it. I might even homebrew some stuff if I like it or disagree with some requirements or something.

[Keneth]

I even allowed a player to roleplay a Gnoll, and it was a obscure entry of the Advanced Race Guide.

I'd hardly call it obscure...

[Squirrel_Dude]

When you sit down and make your characters, what sources does your group allow?

You can use anything from anywhere, with GM approval.
You can only use things from the online Pathfinder SRD.
You can only use things you or another player can bring to the table.
You can only use things you bring to the table.


This is a discussion that is currently going on in my group, and I'm wondering how other people think about this.It's inconsistent from game to game. Most of the time it's probably going to be hardcover stuff (CRB, APG, ARG, UC, UM, UEG, ISWG, B1 2 and 3) and whatever stuff is in the adventure path or module we're running or the most updated version of that material. 3rd Party is probably limited to DSP for the time being.


The other player was okay with it until he purchased Blood of Angels so he could give his Aasimar Oathbound Paladin a racial trait for Angelic Wings, only to have another player roll up an Aasimar Cleric with the exact same racial traits. That's annoying, but not related to the sources allowed. That's just kind of being an annoying player. I'm not sure how you should handle the situation, but I can tell you what I saw in a similar situation and how that is the wrong way to do things.

2 players both wanted to be a Druid (a class that definitely can't be played in two very different ways"). They couldn't agree who should be a Druid, and so neither one of them was a Druid. Instead they played a Ranger and a monk.


So, how do you guys handle character creation? What do you think of telling players: "He can use that because he purchased the book. You can't use it because you haven't bought the book." And as a bonus question: does it change things when the players' lack of books goes hand-in-hand with a lack of interest in the game beyond playing it?I've never had these issues really show up in any table that I was at, so I don't have any experience to draw on when answering these questions.

[Vortenger]

My groups are both 3.P so it may not be entirely pertinent to your PF game, but we allow all WoTC, all Paizo, most 3rd party PFSRD content (until we find it is over or underpowered by our standards, in which case you get a free replacement), and some dragon mag (always upon approval). This allows for an incredibly diverse game.

As to your question, GM approval is all that maters for any character creation. Source is irrelevant if its ok'd. Barring content because someone does not own the books seems laughable and immature. If you have the info, utilize it. That's what its for. Most people have acclimated to the idea of free sharing of information due to the wonders of the interwebs, but some people may require nudging to get on board.

[Vulnudaemon]

I'd hardly call it obscure...

Perhaps it was a poor choice of words, but Paizo didn't cover much the issue of the playable Gnoll. Gnolls don't have alternate racial traits or unique feats unlike other monstrous races such as the Goblins. As far as I know, that entry was the only mention of a playable Gnoll and it was only to serve as an example of race building, it isn't in other books an it isn't in the web d20pfsrd, that's why I called it obscure.

[JusticeZero]

I allow the SRD, minus any spellcasters, plus DSP. Other 3p only allowed if I have it placed in world building.

[Keneth]

it was only to serve as an example of race building

True, but all the example races are valid playable races, even if they don't have alternate racial features or special options.


it isn't in the web d20pfsrd

It is, actually. All races that haven't (yet) been expanded upon are listed under the More Races (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/other-races/more-races) category.

[Amphetryon]

My Pathfinder DM allows anything in the PFSRD, but things from one particular publisher there need to be specified ahead of time, and may be changed.

He's also expressed willingness to accommodate some porting of 3.5 material to Pathfinder, on a per-case basis.

[Stux]

Its Pathfinder, use the online SRD. Get players to print off the class page if they don't have the book.

I'm currently running a PF game, none of the players had played PF before (but had played 3.5) and so do not have any books. It has not been an issue in the slightest. I don't see much reason to have players leafing through books constantly at sessions anyway. They should know their class (and as I say, have a printout if necessary), and if they are casters they should have the details of spells they use to hand too. I as DM have a laptop with me, and so have all the PF material at my fingertips, so any rules query is quickly cleared up.

[navar100]

My group allows anything published within Pathfinder. Third party on Paizo's site is looked at with extreme prejudice. Psionics has already been vetoed after one session. :smallmad:

[JusticeZero]

Psionics has already been vetoed after one session. :smallmad:Always frustrating. I've had a lot more problems with core spellcasters than with psionics, and the Psionics rules are one of the few ways I have to fill the "we need a healer" request without dominating the game at some point.

[Psyren]

My group allows anything published within Pathfinder. Third party on Paizo's site is looked at with extreme prejudice. Psionics has already been vetoed after one session. :smallmad:

I find that a professional layout and pretty pictures tend to sway DMs into giving something the benefit of the doubt. One more reason to get Ultimate Psionics!

Stack that Wayne Reynolds cover art up with your other Ultimates and the DM might not notice anything's amiss :smallwink:

[Raven777]

Dreamscarred Press stuff does have a way of looking like legit Paizo stuff :smalltongue:

Still not sure why so many consider pistols and muskets to be heresy but are A-OK with Psionics, though. Sure, gunslingers are... wonky... but psychic powers and all their associated lingo feel like they belong way less in Generic High Fantasy than late renaissance firearms do...

[navar100]

Always frustrating. I've had a lot more problems with core spellcasters than with psionics, and the Psionics rules are one of the few ways I have to fill the "we need a healer" request without dominating the game at some point.

While I don't have the dislike of evocation damage spells as many here . . .

The complaint against Psionics was that I was doing more damage than a wizard. Mind Thrust for 1d10 base damage as a 1st level power compared to Magic Missile. Energy Missile for 3d6 base damage to five targets as a 2nd level power compared to Scorching Ray.

When I was low on power points and couldn't do much offensively I readied actions to use a dorje of Control Objects on arrows fired at me by an enemy archer for an automiss. To be honest in hindsight I'm not sure that's legal, using the power on a fired arrow, but I was being creative and it made sense at the time.

One final thing that got the DM mad at psionics was when I expended my psionic focus for an autoroll of 15 on a Concentration check to manifest defensively as an autosucceed, something spellcasters can't do without feat investment.

I gave all the usual arguments on the balance of psionics and the need to spend extra power points on a power while spells automatically scale with level but to no avail. All the players deemed psionics too powerful and banned it.

[JusticeZero]

Yeah, I avoid being a blaster in games where psionics are not seen normally, until they've been lulled by watching me get slapped around with a more supporty character for awhile. They can get some really high numbers early on, and people tend to look more at big numbers. This is made worse by the fact that people who don't know how to play wizards think that wizard blasting damage is a good high benchmark.
I've not had the chance to ask to bring in a psionic character in return for getting my OPed T1 out of the game yet. I'm sure it'll happen eventually.

[JusticeZero]

Still not sure why so many consider pistols and muskets to be heresy but are A-OK with Psionics, though....
guns require me to invoke a couple of acts of worldbuilding to handwave their absence outside of select characters, and doesn't fit theme very well. Psionics are just a bunch of monastic sorcerers with a thing for crystals.

[Psyren]

You could always make firearms experimental for that one character. Require them to make Alchemy and Engineering checks to create the powder and cartridges. Play around with the misfire chances a bit. Perhaps have him find exotic components like starmetal to experiment on and come up with the other kinds of gun.

[Vulnudaemon]

It is, actually. All races that haven't (yet) been expanded upon are listed under the More Races (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/other-races/more-races) category.

Uhm, I stand corrected then. Cool, I didn't know that section. Thanks. It seems that there is an error listing the Gnoll's Natural Armor (and the Lizardfolk's for that matter) as a +2 instead of a +1, though.

[UndertakerSheep]

Thanks for the replies everyone.

I sat down with the player and talked with him about it. Turns out it's been going on for a while longer. Our group also plays 4e, and the book situation is exactly the same there, and we are both the only ones with a D&DI subscription. They also always use our printers to print out their characters.

I explained to him that I buy all of my books/maps/miniatures for the enjoyment of our group as a whole. If I didn't think it was worth it, I wouldn't spend the money. He agreed with me, but he had enough of people not thanking him for things. He seemed to have some trouble realizing that for some people, RPG products simply aren't worth the investment.

Everything's worked out now. We're talking with the Cleric player about perhaps changing his character.

And back to the original topic: we've decided to go with ''you can play anything from the pfsrd, but you have to bring it to the table in one way or the other.'' If the other player doesn't want to share his books for that purpose, it won't effect the other players' options. But I don't think he's unwilling to share.