Does the origin rulebook matter?

[jedipotter]

So each of the D&D rule books have a couple of feats, spells, and so forth in them. So:

1. Do you feel each thing in a book is made just for use by the types represented in the book?

OR

2. Anyone can use anything printed in any book.

And just to get it out of the way, I'm not talking about Setting Books, with a setting logo on the cover (though guess that would not count Races of Ebberon as that is a 'normal' D&D book as they knew Ebberon setting books were not selling, so they need to trick the normal D&d players into buying the book...lol, it is still funny)

This came up with Uncanny Forethought, from Exemplars of Evil. Is this a feat only know by villainous wizards? Or is it a feat every wizard knows of and uses and automatically takes every time?

{Scrubbed}
So what others think? Do things from a sourcebook need to stay with the type of thing in the sourcebook, like elves are free use to use anything in Races of the Wild, but not Races of Stone.

And if your going to say ''the feats in Races of the Wild are primarily used by the 'Wild' races, but others can take them ''sometimes'', then how do you define the ''sometimes''?

[eggynack]

If a majig doesn't want you to make use of it, it can say so. If only a villainous wizard can use a feat, then they can make alignment a prerequisite. If they want a connection between elements of a sourcebook, then they can do that. It's really as simple as that. The only thing that should stop you making use of the stuff in a given sourcebook, aside from explicit things along those lines, is the DM not allowing that sourcebook in the game. If the book is allowed, then it's allowed, by my way of thinking.

[*.*.*.*]

Of course, it goes without saying that the cheating optimizer types say that ''anything printed'' is useable and they would demand free access to everything. After all to make a lot of CO bulids they need to use that one feat from the Dragonlance book, and change this word or two and ignore that rule or two to get what they want anyway....
0/10, you're getting worse at this

As a DM with arguably the best system Mastery in my group; I know of which feats are problematic and I don't want in my games. I will also ASK players not to take certain feats or combo if I feel they are too good compared to the rest of the group. So, I believe everything that does not fall into the above groups is fair game. If a feat choice or combo just seems against the fluff of a character, I will talk to the player and ask why the character studied or practiced in such a way(You took 'Spell Focus:Evil' for your monk? I know for a sacrilegious fist build, but why in character?).

[Flickerdart]

There is nothing evil about being unusually prepared for a situation, and so Uncanny Forethought can be taken by non-evil characters. It's not complicated.

Feats from Races of the Wild might be often used by elves, but it's because those elves live in the wilds and find those feats useful, just like dwarves might want to learn close-quarters fighting techniques that appear in Races of Stone. But there's no reason that an elf can't learn a dwarven fighting style (perhaps for fighting drow, or because he hates gnomes and wants to slaughter them all).

There's no worse way to ban or restrict content than by the book it appeared in. For example, I know Tae Kwon Do, a Korean martial art. However, I am not Korean. I also know English, despite not being from an English-speaking country. I am currently using a computer made in China and designed in Japan to converse with you about a game designed by Americans. Yesterday I drank a Scottish beer while eating Polish pierogies and Mexican guacamole.

I guess I'm a cheating optimizer for using all these things from cultures I don't belong to.

[*.*.*.*]

I guess I'm a cheating optimizer for using all these things from cultures I don't belong to.

How dare you enrich yourself culturally and expand your cultural experience! A REAL ROLEPLAYER would stick with their one way of life and be happy being ignorant of the rest of the world!

[Flickerdart]

How dare you enrich yourself culturally and expand your cultural experience! A REAL ROLEPLAYER would stick with their one way of life and be happy being ignorant of the rest of the world!
It gets worse! I'm watching a Canadian television show right now, and I have some Britsh telly lined up next. We're talking TO levels of cross-culturalism here, people.

And to think, we can't even teleport across continents or literally read the thoughts of other people and we manage to achieve this much.

[Troacctid]

If the DM doesn't want to allow a certain book in their game, it's pretty widely accepted that they're within their rights to restrict access to it. For the most part, when a book is allowed, it's assumed that all of the options in it are allowed unless otherwise stated. (For example, Leadership is often banned in games where the rest of the Player's Handbook is legal.)

I've heard of games where a given character is restricted to a certain amount of sourcebooks, so for example you could pick three books and use any content from them, but not from any other books, and the other party members could pick their own three, but they wouldn't have to be the same three. But that is certainly the exception and not the rule.

[Greenish]

Of course, it goes without saying that the cheating optimizer types say that ''anything printed'' is useable and they would demand free access to everything.If the DM says anything printed goes, then anything printed goes. I don't see what's that to do with cheating (or even optimizing).


And if you're going to say ''the feats in Races of the Wild are primarily used by the 'Wild' races, but others can take them ''sometimes'', then how do you define the ''sometimes''?As in, "if they want to".


If a book is game, then it's game. If not, then not. I don't see what's gained by inventing extra restrictions on content you're allowing anyway based on where it happens to be printed. (Case in point, why would you have to manifest psionic powers to use Greater Manyshot (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#greaterManyshot)?)

[Troacctid]

(Case in point, why would you have to manifest psionic powers to use Greater Manyshot (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#greaterManyshot)?)

The placement of some of the feats in EPH is a little baffling. Stand Still, Reckless Offense, Greater Manyshot, Open Minded, Deadly Precision...they're great feats, but what in Boccob's name do they have to do with psionics? It's almost as if they just went "Whoops! We accidentally left these out of the Player's Handbook! What's the next book we're printing? The psionics one? Well, just toss them in there, it'll be fine."

[Sgt. Cookie]

{Scrubbed}

To answer your question, though, no. If you step on a dog turd, it doesn't matter if it came from a Dachshund or a Bulldog, you've still got crap on your shoe. The same goes for a feat, PrC or what-have-you, it doesn't matter where the feat comes from as long as it improves your build.

[SiuiS]

How dare you enrich yourself culturally and expand your cultural experience! A REAL ROLEPLAYER would stick with their one way of life and be happy being ignorant of the rest of the world!

'MURICA *salutes*

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Thread locked. This is one part restarting a locked thread topic and one part trolling.