Why so much ban forgotten realms and Eberron?

[BloodSnake'sCha]

I was reading in this forum and I saw that a lot of groups ban forgotten realms and Eberron and I can't understand why.

[Dagroth]

I was reading in this forum and I saw that a lot of groups ban forgotten realms and Eberron and I can't understand why.

A lot of the PrCs in Forgotten Realms books are... highly powerful (Incantatrix & Telflammar Shadowlord to name two). There are also some very power feats (Sword of the Arcane Order & Spellfire Channeling to name two).

Eberron... Personally, I don't like the setting. It's too Magi-tech-y for me. So, rather than just ban Warforged & trying to find the other magi-tech-y things, I just ban everything (except Changelings... I like them).

[noob]

Forgotten realms gods are all horrible unsympathetic evil monsters especially if it is written that it is good.
Because of that a player having a good alignment can say things like "I ate the souls of all the villagers because it makes me more powerful" or "I murdered him because he did not accepted to suicide in front of me to please me" because that is a thing good aligned gods do in that setting.

[Eldariel]

Much of the broken-to-hell and makes-the-top-tier-way-stronger-than-it-was-already stuff comes from Forgotten Realms. Spelldancer, Hathran, Halruaan Elder, Incantatrix, Red Wizard of Thay just off the top of my head. All the Serpent Kingdoms nonsense (including Sarrukh, the mother of Punpun - and stupid-but-technically-playable stuff like Venomfire, Ability Rip & co.) is also Forgotten Realms. Far as spells go, there's really strong stuff like Streamers, Animate Dread Warrior, etc. And of course, Initiate of Mystra in all its glory, the feat that turns Antimagic Field into a defensive buff, is naturally also FR-based. Naturally the feat that does the same, Selective Spell, is also from a FR source. Mythals, some of the more broken Epic stuff, naturally hails from FR as well. Spellguard of Silverymoon and such as well.

Some of the stuff for the weaker classes is sweet and really useful - Sword of the Arcane Order Rangers/Paladins, Runescarred Berserkers, Crinti Shadow Marauder, Telflammar Shadowlord, etc. And there are some nice non-broken PRCs and such, Olin Gisir, Magelord, Sunmaster, Divine Disciple, Shadow Adept, Shadowcrafter, etc. Forgotten Realms in general is just really high-powered and it offers a lot of cool stuff but it also has more than its share of broken-to-all-hells stuff including the worst things to see print (looking at you, Sarrukh). It's a real pity if it's not allowed but for a DM who isn't intimately familiar with the material, all of it and adjudicating it on an individual basis may be overwhelming.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

If I read it right groups ban them because they have some powerful stuff in it.
This sound very weird.

I am ignoring the fact that some of you(Dagroth for example) don't like farts of them because this is very reasonable reason but I don't think it explains why so much ban it.


(I am a non English talker, tell me if I am not explaining myself properly).

[Zombimode]

Is your assertion that "so many" ban FR and Eberron material even correct?

Regardless, my personal polity is that setting specific material is bound to the setting it belongs.
If we are playing in Eberron, all Eberron source books are open (in addition the the setting neutral stuff), but FR books are off the limits.

[AnachroNinja]

There are two problems.

Powerful feats/spells/classes: the main issue here is not just that there are powerful things. The problem is that they are scattered throughout many books. There are a lot of books for both settings. It is difficult for most GMs to know all the material. It is much easier to just ban all of it. This is how most people treat Dragon Magazine as well.

The other issue is some people don't like the story behind the setting. Or gotten Realms has a large number of very strong NPCs running around and gods and similar creatures that take an active role in the world. It often leads to people wondering why their level 5 party is fighting off the orc invasion when the ruler of the kingdom being attacked is a level 20 wizard who is personal friends with the goddess of magic.

Everton just has a very technology type of flavor with robots and flying ships and similar things that many people do not enjoy mixed into their fantasy game.

If I was unclear in any way, please let me know and I'll try to clarify. I understand the difficulties in trying to use a second language online.

[ShurikVch]

Red WizardIs core in 3.5 (and was better in 3.0)


And of course, Initiate of Mystra in all its glory, the feat that turns Antimagic Field into a defensive buff, is naturally also FR-based. Naturally the feat that does the same, Selective Spell, is also from a FR source.Extraordinary Spell Aim is setting-neutral (same for Mastery of Shaping and Shield of the Master)


MagelordIs it really that good?

[BloodSnake'sCha]

Is your assertion that "so many" ban FR and Eberron material even correct?

Regardless, my personal polity is that setting specific material is bound to the setting it belongs.
If we are playing in Eberron, all Eberron source books are open (in addition the the setting neutral stuff), but FR books are off the limits.
I don't know if it correct or not, this is what I was able to see.

There are two problems.

Powerful feats/spells/classes: the main issue here is not just that there are powerful things. The problem is that they are scattered throughout many books. There are a lot of books for both settings. It is difficult for most GMs to know all the material. It is much easier to just ban all of it. This is how most people treat Dragon Magazine as well.

The other issue is some people don't like the story behind the setting. Or gotten Realms has a large number of very strong NPCs running around and gods and similar creatures that take an active role in the world. It often leads to people wondering why their level 5 party is fighting off the orc invasion when the ruler of the kingdom being attacked is a level 20 wizard who is personal friends with the goddess of magic.

Everton just has a very technology type of flavor with robots and flying ships and similar things that many people do not enjoy mixed into their fantasy game.

If I was unclear in any way, please let me know and I'll try to clarify. I understand the difficulties in trying to use a second language online.

That was very clear, thank you.

But, why the DM need to know all the material?
Isn't it enough to just know what is players using?
He should have access to their sheets.


BTW, I am ignoring the things that make sense to me.

[Eldariel]

Is core in 3.5 (and was better in 3.0)

Fair enough. Though while it's printed in Core, it still hails from FR-sources and is written to be rather FR-specific, relying on an FR-organization, feat, etc. (yes, I know the means to make it work with just Core in a non-descript settings)


Extraordinary Spell Aim is setting-neutral (same for Mastery of Shaping and Shield of the Master)

They don't provide the defense I referred to though, save for Shield of the Master (which has its own set of issues, namely that you can't cast the spell and affect yourself but rather your underling). They protect you against melee guys and enable you to use AMFs offensively, which is nice, but as long as one of your squares is not covered by AMF, enemies have line of effect to you and can affect you with magic. The key difference is, with Initiate of Mystra/Selective Spell (and Shield of the Master) you can cover yourself entirely in the AMF. This means for anyone to ever affect you with anything supernatural (spells, SLAs, psionics, supernatural abilities) they have to either also have the means to affect targets in an AMF (short list, most of which I just listed - Invoke Magic and some tricks outside that do exist though) or the means to remove/disperse the AMF (off the top of my head, Incantatrix can use Metamagic Effect on it to make it not cover you through few means and there's Disjunction, but even that requires a lot of effort to reliably destroy AMFs).

This basically means you're immune to 99.9% of the relevant stuff in the game as being immune to all the mundane stuff is childs' play when you have access to magic. Then you just walk at things buffed up immune to everything and do whatever the hell you want. Having access to full level 9 casting and being immune to others' magic is pretty close to the ultimate defense available in D&D 3.5 and the list of means to achieve that is short indeed.


Is it really that good?

No, certainly not. It's just cool stuff that's actually rather balanced - I listed it among the nice non-broken PRCs for a reason. It gets some spontaneous casting and if you have means to Mastery a lot of spells, it can actually be really strong but it's certainly not the level of broken the actual gamebreakers from FR are.

[Calthropstu]

Aside from what people mentioned above it is also setting specific. The response of "Great, and when we play in forgotten realms, you can use that..." sounds totally acceptable to me.
For example how can you be a red wizard of thay without ever going to thay?

[Eldariel]

Aside from what people mentioned above it is also setting specific. The response of "Great, and when we play in forgotten realms, you can use that..." sounds totally acceptable to me.
For example how can you be a red wizard of thay without ever going to thay?

Well, you can call it Red Wizard of Harunquan with the exact same mechanics based on the metropolis of Harunquan of course, or just refluff it into a non-descript "Red Wizard"-class for Wizards who are into circle magic and specializing. Refluffing allows enriching the game with a lot of material you would lose out on if you weren't willing to do it. The balance issues however, you have to rewrite the class if you wish to use it without causing issues in the game, be the game set in Forgotten Realms or anywhere else.

[Calthropstu]

Eh, true enough. I tend to steer clear of setting specific books though. Too much money already invested in the game by the time they come out.

I already have $300 worth of books and you want me to spend another $50 to get a few feats and a couple prestige classes? No thanks.

With all of that moving online though, it becomes a different matter though.

[Eldariel]

Eh, true enough. I tend to steer clear of setting specific books though. Too much money already invested in the game by the time they come out.

I already have $300 worth of books and you want me to spend another $50 to get a few feats and a couple prestige classes? No thanks.

With all of that moving online though, it becomes a different matter though.

That's fair enough. I think this is more a question of "if you already have access to the books, why not use them"-sort of thing though - of course "I don't have the books/access to the books" is an excellent reason to not use them. My group has the FR-books lying around and we usually make use of them far as we can without breaking things just 'cause it's an investment made and there's little reason not to.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Well, you can call it Red Wizard of Harunquan with the exact same mechanics based on the metropolis of Harunquan of course, or just refluff it into a non-descript "Red Wizard"-class for Wizards who are into circle magic and specializing. Refluffing allows enriching the game with a lot of material you would lose out on if you weren't willing to do it. The balance issues however, you have to rewrite the class if you wish to use it without causing issues in the game, be the game set in Forgotten Realms or anywhere else.
True, but a lot of people get hung up on that sort of thing, deservedly or undeservedly. I think "I'm not running a game in [setting], so no material from [setting]" is probably the most common reason for the ban by far.

[AnachroNinja]

I don't know if it correct or not, this is what I was able to see.


That was very clear, thank you.

But, why the DM need to know all the material?
Isn't it enough to just know what is players using?
He should have access to their sheets.


BTW, I am ignoring the things that make sense to me.

It can vary. For some DMs, they have a hard time saying "No" after the player has made their character. It can be a large time investment for the player, so they prefer to be able to give them a set of guidelines ahead of time rather then banning things as they come up.

In other cases, a feat or prestige class may not seem powerful on its own, but may become unbalanced three levels later in combination with something else. At that point, do you just say no to the new feat, and the player is stuck with the previous one even if it's no longer useful? It can be easier to avoid the issue by sticking to books you are more familiar with. Some DMs ban Psionics for the same reason, or new systems like Incarnum. They just do not want to devote the time to it.

In some ways, the question likely ends up being: Are the books for this setting going to add enough to my game to make it worth my time to read it all? For some, the answer is no.

Edit: And as noted with Grod, some people prefer to restrict things to the setting or world that they come from because that feels correct to them.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

Thank you guys, I can understand it now.

[Rerednaw]

Thank you guys, I can understand it now.

Actually since most of the abuse comes from Tier 1-2 (a.k.a. primary spell casting) if you allow those sources for Tier 3 and below, the combinations are not as egregious. Most DMs don't bat an eye at making a sword and board fighter better with stuff from Eberron/FR.

I'd have a talk with your DM if there's something you'd like to use and see where it goes. I mean again FR/Eb has some some hefty competition if not outright being overmatched once you bring in the Complete Arcane/Divine/Mage/etc or heck even Spell Compendium. And again it's mostly for Tier 1-2.

Then again I wouldn't bat an eye at a flying firebreathing robot(Dragonborn Warforged) using (warblade) Time Stands Still with his Lightning Style Adaptive Improved Crit Talenta Sarrash (reach 17-20x4, extra attack on threat) because I like having martials having nice things and almost being as effective as a cleric in the hands of a newbie who spends 5 minutes googling OP combos for clerics.

[Clistenes]

I was reading in this forum and I saw that a lot of groups ban forgotten realms and Eberron and I can't understand why.

Are you speaking of the whole settings, or just of character options like feats, prestige classes...etc.?

If you are speaking of character options, I guess it is because they are considered not just overpowered, but they help the most powerful classes most, making the game even more unbalanced in their favor.

If you are speaking about the setting as a whole, I know many people hate the history, gods, organizations and NPCs of Forgottem Realms with a passion. They hate how little room for imagination leaves the hyper-detailed world; they hate the world-changing events used to justify the edition changes; they hate the jerk-ish, meddling gods who constantly interfere with mortals and play favorites; they hate that you can't move a finger without entering the turf of some uber-powerful organization; and more than anything, they hate the godlike epic NPCs who could solve every challenge your PCs face with a gesture, because that means that a) either that threat your PCs are facing isn't that great or otherwise somebody important would do something, or b) one of those godlike NPCs are pulling the PCs strings and using them as tools to solve the crisis...

[BloodSnake'sCha]

Actually since most of the abuse comes from Tier 1-2 (a.k.a. primary spell casting) if you allow those sources for Tier 3 and below, the combinations are not as egregious. Most DMs don't bat an eye at making a sword and board fighter better with stuff from Eberron/FR.

I'd have a talk with your DM if there's something you'd like to use and see where it goes. I mean again FR/Eb has some some hefty competition if not outright being overmatched once you bring in the Complete Arcane/Divine/Mage/etc or heck even Spell Compendium. And again it's mostly for Tier 1-2.

Then again I wouldn't bat an eye at a flying firebreathing robot(Dragonborn Warforged) using (warblade) Time Stands Still with his Lightning Style Adaptive Improved Crit Talenta Sarrash (reach 17-20x4, extra attack on threat) because I like having martials having nice things and almost being as effective as a cleric in the hands of a newbie who spends 5 minutes googling OP combos for clerics.

I can't play a Cleric and be good at fight :( you can't write that a cleric is effective in the hands of a newbie.
(I can make a really good knife trowing Rouge, but I spent weeks preparing for my first game and she was only good in killing stuff).

Anyway I was playing in a group with all 3.5e books, I wasn't able to see any problem with it. The GM always can make an enemy that the fight will be hard enough to be fun, he is the role after all and role-playing should not be affected be it.


Are you speaking of the whole settings, or just of character options like feats, prestige classes...etc.?

If you are speaking of character options, I guess it is because they are considered not just overpowered, but they help the most powerful classes most, making the game even more unbalanced in their favor.

If you are speaking about the setting as a whole, I know many people hate the history, gods, organizations and NPCs of Forgottem Realms with a passion. They hate how little room for imagination leaves the hyper-detailed world; they hate the world-changing events used to justify the edition changes; they hate the jerk-ish, meddling gods who constantly interfere with mortals and play favorites; they hate that you can't move a finger without entering the turf of some uber-powerful organization; and more than anything, they hate the godlike epic NPCs who could solve every challenge your PCs face with a gesture, because that means that a) either that threat your PCs are facing isn't that great or otherwise somebody important would do something, or b) one of those godlike NPCs are pulling the PCs strings and using them as tools to solve the crisis...

If people don't like I can understand it but I can't understand the problem with the balanced, after all you are playing in a group of players that you can talk to in order to make your party the same level of power if you want or to give each one a role to fill in a why the power levels will not be a problem or any different solution you want, after all you want your group to have fun if you are playing in one.

I really can't understand the balance problem.

[Dagroth]

I can't play a Cleric and be good at fight :( you can't write that a cleric is effective in the hands of a newbie.
(I can make a really good knife trowing Rouge, but I spent weeks preparing for my first game and she was only good in killing stuff).

Anyway I was playing in a group with all 3.5e books, I wasn't able to see any problem with it. The GM always can make an enemy that the fight will be hard enough to be fun, he is the role after all and role-playing should not be affected be it.



If people don't like I can understand it but I can't understand the problem with the balanced, after all you are playing in a group of players that you can talk to in order to make your party the same level of power if you want or to give each one a role to fill in a why the power levels will not be a problem or any different solution you want, after all you want your group to have fun if you are playing in one.

I really can't understand the balance problem.

1) There are guides online (even on this message board) you can read on how to be a powerful melee Cleric.

2) Not every player is interested in being the same power level as every other player at the table. If your group is like this, congratulations. My group is usually like this... but one of my fellow players complains every time I use Knowledge Devotion, because he thinks it makes my character too powerful. Despite the fact that my character (Cleric) consistently does the least amount of damage in the combat. And another player likes to find bizarre things that end up overpowered... like half-fleshbound-vampire air goblins :smalleek: .

[Eldariel]

Balance is all fine and good if:
1) All players want to be the same powerlevel.
2) All players are skilled enough to create something of similar powerlevel.
3) DM is in on it all.

If any of those points fails, you'll likely have power discrepancies. It takes a lot of experience and skill to coordinate the power levels and it can be really annoying to play games where one player is doing the playing and others are watching. Like that time we had a party with Warlock/Dervish on level 13 - it was fine. Warlock died, rolled an Ultimate Magus (using Nar Demonbinder entry) - not quite as strong as a Wizard but close. Suddenly the party was the Wizard Binding a Glabrezu and doing stuff while the Dervish hung around. No overshadowing intended but it kinda happened naturally when the caster's abilities just skyrocketed.

The other matter is when a player wants to go all-out. DM can match that, yes, but other players, if not built on the same level, will have a very difficult time keeping up with a top tier class using top tier PRCs going all out. Now, if everyone is skilled enough to go at it, it can be an awesome experience but the road to true mastery is so very long.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

1) There are guides online (even on this message board) you can read on how to be a powerful melee Cleric.

2) Not every player is interested in being the same power level as every other player at the table. If your group is like this, congratulations. My group is usually like this... but one of my fellow players complains every time I use Knowledge Devotion, because he thinks it makes my character too powerful. Despite the fact that my character (Cleric) consistently does the least amount of damage in the combat. And another player likes to find bizarre things that end up overpowered... like half-fleshbound-vampire air goblins :smalleek: .
1) I can make a build but I know I will not be able to play it, maybe I don't want to(I don't really know why and I don't care).

2) Thank you for agreeing with me on the power level(unless you didn't understand me, you should know that I think the same about number 2).

Balance is all fine and good if:
1) All players want to be the same powerlevel.
2) All players are skilled enough to create something of similar powerlevel.
3) DM is in on it all.

If any of those points fails, you'll likely have power discrepancies. It takes a lot of experience and skill to coordinate the power levels and it can be really annoying to play games where one player is doing the playing and others are watching. Like that time we had a party with Warlock/Dervish on level 13 - it was fine. Warlock died, rolled an Ultimate Magus (using Nar Demonbinder entry) - not quite as strong as a Wizard but close. Suddenly the party was the Wizard Binding a Glabrezu and doing stuff while the Dervish hung around. No overshadowing intended but it kinda happened naturally when the caster's abilities just skyrocketed.

The other matter is when a player wants to go all-out. DM can match that, yes, but other players, if not built on the same level, will have a very difficult time keeping up with a top tier class using top tier PRCs going all out. Now, if everyone is skilled enough to go at it, it can be an awesome experience but the road to true mastery is so very long.

About the "keeping up with the top tier" part of your reply:

1) I think that if you are playing in a group you can let everyone fight even if the top tier is stronger.

2) The group can help every one go all-out(if everyone want to), I got a lot of help in my first game from my group.

3) There are people like me that have no problem with being weaker then the party or even want to be weaker.

[Eldariel]

About the "keeping up with the top tier" part of your reply:

1) I think that if you are playing in a group you can let everyone fight even if the top tier is stronger.

That depends. At the point where the fights are teleport/plane shift wars and about divination and the first strike, the characters without such abilities really have trouble contributing meaningfully even if the other characters go out of their way to enable them. This was the dynamic in the Ultimate Magus/Dervish party for example; the demonic underlings of the Ultimate Magus were factually stronger than the Dervish and thus class features of one character were more important than the whole second character.


2) The group can help every one go all-out(if everyone want to), I got a lot of help in my first game from my group.

Aye, but it takes a lot of work from the learning player and depending on the group, not every build has a similar ceiling anyways leaving lots of trouble when everyone is going all out.


3) There are people like me that have no problem with being weaker then the party or even want to be weaker.

Aye, but there are also people who would like for everyone to be equal. I've spent two long campaigns being extremely underpowered by comparison in my early naivë days. Initially I was unperturbed but the dissatisfaction and annoyance grow over time, particularly since I was playing a warrior type each time meaning my combat was restricted to "attack things"; got old around the 1000th fight (and of course, the power discrepancies certainly made themselves known during interparty schism, when it was very clear who had the ultimate power to decide what we were doing if it came down to blows).

[Bohandas]

Forgotten Realms is hackneyed, and Eberron's crunch relies heavily on action points, which don't exist in the core game

[Rerednaw]

I can't play a Cleric and be good at fight :( you can't write that a cleric is effective in the hands of a newbie...
(I can make a really good knife trowing Rouge, but I spent we...
I really can't understand the balance problem.

Well since I don't know the specifics of your campaign...and five minutes on google (or on these forums) apparently did not work...I could only relate what I have known several other newbies have done. Including my first go at one. Did not take long for a few basic combos make them more effective than another character at their specialty...and you have all the other tier 1 stuff besides.

Maybe your DM bans the stuff for other reasons. I don't like the fluff because I've read the books and in FR the gods are jerks, big-time. But the nuts and bolts work...and I generally don't ban anything. I am a big fan of choice.

Can't speak to statement regarding optimization relative to the rest of your party. It seems you state your damage output appears subpar? First damage is nice, but not necessarily king of the walk at all times. There are many ways to defeat an encounter, unless your DM insists in making everything a fight vs. sacks of hit points.

In any case I'd ask your DM why or explain what you are looking to use and why. If he/she is reasonable and you present it so, can't hurt to ask. Or start your own campaign where said stuff is allowed, if you're group has more fun that in itself is a strong argument.

[Dagroth]

Forgotten Realms is hackneyed, and Eberron's crunch relies heavily on action points, which don't exist in the core game

Oh yeah, action points... the other reason I hate Eberron. :smallfurious:

[GilesTheCleric]

If you are speaking about the setting as a whole, I know many people hate the history, gods, organizations and NPCs of Forgottem Realms with a passion. They hate how little room for imagination leaves the hyper-detailed world; they hate the world-changing events used to justify the edition changes; they hate the jerk-ish, meddling gods who constantly interfere with mortals and play favorites; they hate that you can't move a finger without entering the turf of some uber-powerful organization; and more than anything, they hate the godlike epic NPCs who could solve every challenge your PCs face with a gesture, because that means that a) either that threat your PCs are facing isn't that great or otherwise somebody important would do something, or b) one of those godlike NPCs are pulling the PCs strings and using them as tools to solve the crisis...

Clistenes' points are probably an important factor for many.

I do really enjoy reading lore and grounding my NPCs/ PCs in the history of a setting, but unless you know exactly what you're looking for, digging through the extensive FR lore to make sure your character doesn't break anything is exhausting.

As a GM, it also makes coming up with non-published adventures nearly impossible. Yes, there's plenty of ruined forts and lost civilisations that I could use fairly generically, but as soon as I try to connect them to the world/ larger plot threads, suddenly I need to explain why they weren't mentioned more prominently, or again try not to step on the toes of extant history.

And, maybe this is a personal one, but I'm just tired of FR. It's not a very interesting setting in terms of "being different" from a lot of popular high fantasy. It's also connected to a bunch of other settings (eg Maztica, Al-Quadim, UE, Underdark, etc), so it's difficult to get away from it even if you try. Not to mention that it replaced Planescape+Grayhawk as the default setting in 5e, so even changing editions doesn't help.

Eberron is similar to the PF default setting, so folks might prefer to use the more fleshed-out PF version.

[tiercel]

1) If a DM doesn't know the campaign setting material (because of not running or even playing much in that setting), it is highly reasonable to not allow material from that setting. (This explains why some DMs also don't run psionics/incarnum/Tome of Magic, even though they are smaller reads.)

2) While 3.5 game balance is basically mythical, there's no point exacerbating the issue with "something for nothing"/"straight upgrade" options generally (perhaps with lower-power-tier classes) - but do wizards need a straight power upgrade? Even Song of the Heart is basically "why wouldn't you?" for bards.

That doesn't mean there don't already exist such options (*cough*Natural Spell*cough*), but why add to them -- especially if not playing in that setting?

[Mechalich]

It can be easier to avoid the issue by sticking to books you are more familiar with. Some DMs ban Psionics for the same reason, or new systems like Incarnum. They just do not want to devote the time to it.


This. Looking up rules in game to adjudicate something is generally bad - it ruins immersion, slows down action, and leads to arguments and backtracking. There is a strong incentive for a GM to adventure with only rules they properly understand and can effectively manage. The 3e/3.5e/PF catalogue is gigantic with more rules than can ever possibly be utilized in any given campaign and than all but a handful of true rules tsars will ever fully master.

Some GMs are willing to roll with whatever the players come up with and just deal with the various rules that make it onto character sheets how that may turn out. That's one style and it's fine. Others, however, prefer to have a greater handle on what they're dealing with an proactively forbid whole systems because they don't feel they know them well enough to balance and manage effectively. It is quite common for tables to go so far as 'Core Only' in terms of a restriction for this reason.

The argument for banning setting-specific material from campaigns not set in those settings is particularly strong, since that material is built around specific assumptions of those settings which probably don't hold in a non-setting campaign and therefore are almost certain to be unbalanced to at least some degree. For example, it would be kind of ridiculous to import rules from Ghostwalk into a standard campaign, but Ghostwalk is explicitly non-standard in significant ways. The Forgotten Realms and Eberron are much more generic, but the principle is the same.

[weckar]

There's a genuine problem with balance between the settings, which is mostly due to the expected progression. FR expects the 'normal' 1-20, progression, where in Eberron MOST stuff won't stand up to you if you are 12+. This difference expresses itself in many ways, making blending the two inadvisable at best.

[Coidzor]

I was always left with the impression that the principle reasons were either:

A. the DM or group really didn't like a particular setting and didn't want to deal with even setting-neutral content from books having to do with it

or

B. the game isn't set in that setting and the DM or group erroneously believe that all content in those books is inextricably tied to the setting or they felt that it would be too much work to port it to other settings.

With C. Lack of access to the books/content as a more distant third option.

[Marlowe]

I can't play a Cleric and be good at fight :( you can't write that a cleric is effective in the hands of a newbie.


Playing a Cleric that's good in a fight is as easy as...playing a Cleric.:smallconfused:

[Khedrac]

But, why the DM need to know all the material?
Isn't it enough to just know what is players using?
He should have access to their sheets.
No, it is not enough because the players usually don't know it either.

Far too often a player will see a neat feat/class/ability and think "that's cool, but what happens if I combine it with this?" and generate a very nice character who relies on rules that don't actually worth that way; what the players usually do not do is check the detailed rules to see how it really works. (I did once have a player attempt to stack 4 different sources of "treat your unarmed strikes damage as if the character is one size larger than they actually are" completely ignoring the underlined part.)

Further, even when the player has done their homework, the DM needs to know the rules (after all they are the game's arbiter). Many abilities have built in weaknesses and limitations, if the DM doesn't know them they won't know when they should apply, and the player may not be aware that they do apply (even when they remember the limitation) because they only know what their character knows, and not what else may apply.

Simple example: warlocks - all invocations use somatic components (and no verbal ones) and can be used in a silence effect
Player type 0 see the invocation Baleful Utterance and assumes that are all vocal only.
Player type 1 knows they are not V but does not recall that there is a somatic component.
Player type 2 knows they are S, but does not know that there are invisible archers with orders to shoot anyone making "weird gestures".
Hence the DM needs to know all of the applicable rules.

[Zombimode]

B. the game isn't set in that setting and the DM or group erroneously believe that all content in those books is inextricably tied to the setting or they felt that it would be too much work to port it to other settings.

Why do you feel this believe is a matter of right and wrong instead of a matter of aesthectics?
I mean it is clear that you don't like it, but why do you feel it an objectively wrong thing to do?

[ghanjrho]

There's a genuine problem with balance between the settings, which is mostly due to the expected progression. FR expects the 'normal' 1-20, progression, where in Eberron MOST stuff won't stand up to you if you are 12+. This difference expresses itself in many ways, making blending the two inadvisable at best.

It's almost more severe than that: AD&D FR, IIRC had the first epic level rules (including 10th and 11th level spells). Eberron, by contrast, is more like the AD&D core's "name level" assumption (the idea that characters above level ~8 would just be given towers and keeps and hirelings through sheer fame). Put it another way? In the Forgotten Realms, reaching level 21 makes you a junior member of the big boys club. In Eberron, level 11 makes you important on a setting-wide scale.

[Stealth Marmot]

Greenbound summoning feat is a good example of a reason to be wary of Faerun options.

All things said though, many of the feats and options are regional and setting specific, and a DM might not want to be forced to shove something into their game they didn't intend to have. Want to play a Sun elf? Well all of a sudden, sun elves exist in his game. Now he has to have an explanation of their existence and history.

Either that or just allow the mechanics without the fluff, at which point the player is clearly min-maxing.

Yes, many of the feats are more powerful than their counterparts and there are some hefty prestige class possibilities, but really it's about not having to dive headlong into another campaign setting and read up on it.

It may just be me as well, but when someone starts asking about campaign specific feats, I get a red flag in my mind that reads "Munchkin warning".

[Cosi]

All things said though, many of the feats and options are regional and setting specific, and a DM might not want to be forced to shove something into their game they didn't intend to have. Want to play a Sun elf? Well all of a sudden, sun elves exist in his game. Now he has to have an explanation of their existence and history.

This doesn't make sense. There are a lot of reasons to complain about Forgotten Realms and Eberron stuff (power, concept, obscurity). But "it adds too much too the game" is not one of them. There are two different varieties of snake people in the Monster Manual (not counting the subspecies of snake people, or implied varieties of snake people like were-pythons or awakened vipers). There are more varieties of aquatic humanoid in the Monster Manual (6 -- Kuo Toa, Sea Elf, Triton, Locathath, Merfolk, Sahuagin) than there are varieties of humanoid in core Shadowrun (5 -- Human, Elf, Troll, Orc, Dwarf)*.

The point is, just "generic D&D" has enough stuff to overrun however much world building the DM was willing to do. If your DM was willing to allow you to play a Maug, a Bladeling, a Dracotaur, a Varag, or a Jaebrin (all of which are real, non-setting specific D&D creatures), the notion that allowing you to play a Shifter or a Sun Elf would overpower their world's ability to cope is basically absurd.

*: I'm not actually sure on this one, as my Shadowrun knowledge is incomplete. I think that's the full list of "PHB" races though.

[Bohandas]

If you are speaking about the setting as a whole, I know many people hate the history, gods, organizations and NPCs of Forgottem Realms with a passion. They hate how little room for imagination leaves the hyper-detailed world; they hate the world-changing events used to justify the edition changes; they hate the jerk-ish, meddling gods who constantly interfere with mortals and play favorites; they hate that you can't move a finger without entering the turf of some uber-powerful organization; and more than anything, they hate the godlike epic NPCs who could solve every challenge your PCs face with a gesture, because that means that a) either that threat your PCs are facing isn't that great or otherwise somebody important would do something, or b) one of those godlike NPCs are pulling the PCs strings and using them as tools to solve the crisis...

To be fair, Greyhawk has some of this too to an extent. The penultimate boss battle in Temple of Elemental Evil turns into a standoff between Iuz and Saint Cuthbert, who both appear halfway through. Greyhawk also has the character Zagyg Yragerne, who cononically was powerful enough to hold several gods prisoner in his basement.

[Coidzor]

Why do you feel this believe is a matter of right and wrong instead of a matter of aesthectics?
I mean it is clear that you don't like it, but why do you feel it an objectively wrong thing to do?

I feel it is an objectively incorrect conclusion. Much of the content in setting specific books requires no re-fluffing or only minor refluffing(e.g. replacing one deity of magic's name with a different one or just saying "a deity with the Magic domain").

Only a minority(albeit, a notable one) of the content actually requires effort to refluff to a different setting, unless that setting grossly departs from the base rules. Homebrew settings that grossly depart from the base rules seems to be a fairly uncommon reason for blanket banning all content from setting specific books, though.

I suspect because people who have enough system mastery to make a functional setting that departs from the base rules would tend to have a greater awareness of what can and can't be adapted to their setting easily and so can tell at a quick glance if a player asks about something.

[Stealth Marmot]

This doesn't make sense. There are a lot of reasons to complain about Forgotten Realms and Eberron stuff (power, concept, obscurity). But "it adds too much too the game" is not one of them. There are two different varieties of snake people in the Monster Manual (not counting the subspecies of snake people, or implied varieties of snake people like were-pythons or awakened vipers). There are more varieties of aquatic humanoid in the Monster Manual (6 -- Kuo Toa, Sea Elf, Triton, Locathath, Merfolk, Sahuagin) than there are varieties of humanoid in core Shadowrun (5 -- Human, Elf, Troll, Orc, Dwarf)*.

The point is, just "generic D&D" has enough stuff to overrun however much world building the DM was willing to do. If your DM was willing to allow you to play a Maug, a Bladeling, a Dracotaur, a Varag, or a Jaebrin (all of which are real, non-setting specific D&D creatures), the notion that allowing you to play a Shifter or a Sun Elf would overpower their world's ability to cope is basically absurd.

*: I'm not actually sure on this one, as my Shadowrun knowledge is incomplete. I think that's the full list of "PHB" races though.

My games are not generic, at least i like to think i add some twists to them in my homebrew. That said, I also don't necessarily add everything that's printed in a book. There are no dinosaurs so far in my game. No Drow.

I have a tendency to believe in the idea of not adding something unless I have a plan for it, and it would add something significant to my world. I am leery about Faerun and Eberron because adding it might mean adding a new wing to the game. While having more stuff to the game might sound good, if it doesn't do anything, then why have it? There is such a thing as dead weight to a story, even if it is interesting by itself. The character of Tom Bombadil is an interesting character, fun, and well written. But, he fits into the Lord of the Rings story about as well as a dance number in the middle of Schindlers List. What's more, if you never do anything with it but mention it, people end up wondering what is going on.

A game critic I like once said that you shouldnt have an interesting castle or monument in the background of a game if you never get to go to it. On that same note, never add something to your game that deserves the ability to delve further into it, but just have it be set dressing instead.

Adding nothing more than a feat or class with the titles or setting specific requirements stripped off obviously won't do that, but if the players want to go to Thay, well you have a problem.

[Âmesang]

With regards to setting content I think I've so far only banned Mordenkainen's disjunction and the Troll Blooded regional feat, both native to WORLD OF GREYHAWK®.

Otherwise I'm a big fan of cross-planar adventures… so long as they can be adequately explained away. To take Stealth Marmot's example, allowing a sun elf onto Oerth doesn't mean they're suddenly native to that plane—it just means a sun elf is visiting Oerth from Toril… whether willingly or not. How did that sun elf get there? Answering that question could open up some roleplaying and story possibilities that can be woven into the overall plot.

…granted, said sun elf would have to deal with the fact that Faerûnian Common isn't the same as Flanaess Common (and, considering how far back elven history goes, there's a chance the two brands of Elvish are dissimilar as well). So, he'd have to find some means of communication until he puts ranks in Speak Language/learns comprehend languages or tongues.

Still, those gosh-durned high-level NPCs have visited each others worlds (see: Ed Greenwood's "The Wizards Three"), so why not grant players that same opportunity once they gain access to shadow walk or plane shift?* Plus, while I won't argue that there's a lot of powerful, setting-specific stuff… I find there's also a lot of less-powerful, even mundane things… like glamerweave outfits woven by EBERRON'S® own Hellien Clamas Clebdecher, or the spell Thundaerl's universal taster from AD&D FORGOTTEN REALMS® (allows a caster to identify hazardous food, then make it emit illusions of hissing black snakes for others to realize the danger). I enjoy pulling bits and pieces from other settings just to add flavor—to give players an extra bit of distinction over your typical setting character.

And sometimes piecing it all together results in wonderful coincidences… 3rd Edition shades are native to FORGOTTEN REALMS® and, according to most timeline comparisons, their native land, the Empire of Netheril, fell centuries before the Suel Imperium of Oerth (−339 DR/−1124 CY and 363 DR/−422 CY respectively) …yet in between those events you have a "shade prince", Zol Darklock (Common for "Zol Tanthul?" Who knows?!), living in the Imperium and investigating a Mage of Power named Xodast (151 DR/−634 CY; see: Castle Greyhawk). Did he come to Oerth in search of powerful magic to help restore Netheril? That's something that could be explored by players…

But %&#$ Troll Blooded. :smallyuk:

*On a related note, I recently bought a steel-forged C-note tuning fork to use as a prop—the requisite fork needed to plane shift to material planes according to DRAGON #120, p.42.

[ross]

can't just let a ***** play a thri kreen

[Grod_The_Giant]

A game critic I like once said that you shouldnt have an interesting castle or monument in the background of a game if you never get to go to it. On that same note, never add something to your game that deserves the ability to delve further into it, but just have it be set dressing instead.
While I agree with the first part of your post, this bit bugs me. There's a lot of value to having interesting elements in the background of a game, even if they never come up in the plot. It helps a setting feel more alive, makes it feel bigger than the players. You want to feel like other people in the world are doing things, that there's stuff going on that's not part of your story.

[sleepyphoenixx]

I don't really get banning complete settings.
Sometimes one of those books has just the feat, prc or spell that makes a players concept work, so why should i take that away from them?
I ban specific options if they're too powerful and have my players send me an outline of their builds pre-game for approval, and that's enough to keep an eye on balance.

Fluff is ultimately mutable. The party wizard isn't a Wizard/Geometer/Divine Oracle/Rainbow Servant/whatever in-character. He's just a wizard who has focused on a specific set of abilities unless he specifically joins an order/mage guild/etc in character.
There are no Rogue/Fighters in my games, just a swordsman who has picked up some stealth training, learned to pick locks etc.
If a PrC requires a specific god you just use the setting equivalent that fits closest, or ignore it entirely. It doesn't hurt anything.

I'm not saying you can't ban specific things if you deem them too powerful for your campaign, but those are generally the minority, by a huge margin.
All the rest is just more options for your players to get the mechanics to fit the character they want to play, and more options for the DM to provide varied and interesting encounters.

[Stealth Marmot]

While I agree with the first part of your post, this bit bugs me. There's a lot of value to having interesting elements in the background of a game, even if they never come up in the plot. It helps a setting feel more alive, makes it feel bigger than the players. You want to feel like other people in the world are doing things, that there's stuff going on that's not part of your story.

Striking a good balance of background flavor is a positive thing, but I find that there is value in focus as well. Different styles I suppose.

[Bohandas]

With regards to setting content I think I've so far only banned Mordenkainen's disjunction and the Troll Blooded regional feat, both native to WORLD OF GREYHAWK®.

Otherwise I'm a big fan of cross-planar adventures… so long as they can be adequately explained away. To take Stealth Marmot's example, allowing a sun elf onto Oerth doesn't mean they're suddenly native to that plane—it just means a sun elf is visiting Oerth from Toril… whether willingly or not. How did that sun elf get there? Answering that question could open up some roleplaying and story possibilities that can be woven into the overall plot.

…granted, said sun elf would have to deal with the fact that Faerûnian Common isn't the same as Flanaess Common (and, considering how far back elven history goes, there's a chance the two brands of Elvish are dissimilar as well). So, he'd have to find some means of communication until he puts ranks in Speak Language/learns comprehend languages or tongues.

Still, those gosh-durned high-level NPCs have visited each others worlds (see: Ed Greenwood's "The Wizards Three"), so why not grant players that same opportunity once they gain access to shadow walk or plane shift?* Plus, while I won't argue that there's a lot of powerful, setting-specific stuff… I find there's also a lot of less-powerful, even mundane things… like glamerweave outfits woven by EBERRON'S® own Hellien Clamas Clebdecher, or the spell Thundaerl's universal taster from AD&D FORGOTTEN REALMS® (allows a caster to identify hazardous food, then make it emit illusions of hissing black snakes for others to realize the danger). I enjoy pulling bits and pieces from other settings just to add flavor—to give players an extra bit of distinction over your typical setting character.

And sometimes piecing it all together results in wonderful coincidences… 3rd Edition shades are native to FORGOTTEN REALMS® and, according to most timeline comparisons, their native land, the Empire of Netheril, fell centuries before the Suel Imperium of Oerth (−339 DR/−1124 CY and 363 DR/−422 CY respectively) …yet in between those events you have a "shade prince", Zol Darklock (Common for "Zol Tanthul?" Who knows?!), living in the Imperium and investigating a Mage of Power named Xodast (151 DR/−634 CY; see: Castle Greyhawk). Did he come to Oerth in search of powerful magic to help restore Netheril? That's something that could be explored by players…

But %&#$ Troll Blooded. :smallyuk:

*On a related note, I recently bought a steel-forged C-note tuning fork to use as a prop—the requisite fork needed to plane shift to material planes according to DRAGON #120, p.42.

This was the basis of Spelljammer

[Âmesang]

As well as PLANESCAPE™; also I would find it rather absurd to think the drow of Oerth and the drow of Toril aren't familiar with each other considering all they have in common.

[Mutazoia]

Forgotten realms gods are all horrible unsympathetic evil monsters especially if it is written that it is good.
Because of that a player having a good alignment can say things like "I ate the souls of all the villagers because it makes me more powerful" or "I murdered him because he did not accepted to suicide in front of me to please me" because that is a thing good aligned gods do in that setting.

That's not even close to being true.

[AslanCross]

I started on FR, but in general I tend to run Eberron, so I don't allow FR.
Mostly a matter of taste---there's an end-of-the-world event every so often in FR, which I don't like. It leaves too little to the imagination, which is something that is the complete opposite of the design philosophy of Eberron. There's a lot of mystery, a lot of room for the DM to play around with.

There are, however, some ridiculous balance issues. Isn't the Pun-pun exploit from Serpent Kingdoms? Yeah.

[noob]

That's not even close to being true.
Yes they are way more evil and murderhobo than the two example of behavior I gave.
Read all the stories of the gods there is a lot of horrible things they have done(like "a good aligned god eating another good aligned god")

[sleepyphoenixx]

I started on FR, but in general I tend to run Eberron, so I don't allow FR.
Mostly a matter of taste---there's an end-of-the-world event every so often in FR, which I don't like. It leaves too little to the imagination, which is something that is the complete opposite of the design philosophy of Eberron. There's a lot of mystery, a lot of room for the DM to play around with.

There are, however, some ridiculous balance issues. Isn't the Pun-pun exploit from Serpent Kingdoms? Yeah.

Everything has balance issues, not just FR.
FR is just (in)famous for it because some of the real whoppers are from that setting, and because all the wizards want to take Incantatrix.
Eberron also has its offenders (like the Planar Shepherd). Even core-only does.

But i can't say i've ever had a player try to go Pun-pun on me in an actual game, so i'm not sure how relevant it is to a balance discussion.
Incantatrix is "merely" high-op, and no worse than DMM:Persist (which is setting-neutral).

[Ashtagon]

Possibly the ban exists for the same reason my pc made with the d20 stargate was banned from a greyhawk campaign.

[Telok]

This was the basis of Spelljammer

The setting I've been on-and-off building has a link into the Spelljammer setup. Now, in Spelljammer weirder is better. That's an actual quote from one of the book too. So if you want to be a thri-kreen/drow/troll love-child and you can afford the LA and racial HD? That's fine... In Spelljammer.

The base setting, if the Spelljammer plot hook is ignored, does not run on that assumption. The description starts with "About a thousand years ago there was a massive magical catastrophe. It ended the old empire, flattened every major city, destroyed a great deal of magical knowledge, and unleashed centuries of wild magic, plagues, storms, mutants, and monsters." Someone asking to play a drow, thri-kreen, or troll-anything has just proven that they haven't even read to the end of the first paragraph of the setting. The setting and society is based on the fallout (in every sense of the word) of that catastrophe and there are restrictions on, and bonuses to, races and classes as a result of the thousand years that have passed since the end of the standard D&D setting. There are races and classes that are inappropriate because every single NPC that isn't a civilization destroying cultist or soul eating monster will either flee in terror or try to kill that race/class.

So yeah, in that setting Ebberon and FR stuff is almost certainly totally inappropriate.

Until they go for the Spelljammer ship, get caught up in a beholder-illithid-aboleth love triangle, and get suggested into babysitting "just until the fuss dies down".

[Âmesang]

Doesn't SPELLJAMMER® include its own material plane world outside of Oerth, Toril, Krynn, Eberron, &c?

That reminds me that I should take a crack at Dungeons & Dragons Online just to try out that FORGOTTEN REALMS®/EBERRON® crossover event (and get a stronger idea of when they crossover—despite being based on 3rd Edition mechanics I feel like they were attempting to sync the 4th Edition timelines).

Would it be too cruel to run a FORGOTTEN REALMS®, EBERRON®, or DRAGONLANCE®-only game ignoring all core material from WORLD OF GREYHAWK®? No Otto's irresistible dance, no Rary's mnemonic enhancer, no Boccob's blessed book…

[Grod_The_Giant]

There are, however, some ridiculous balance issues. Isn't the Pun-pun exploit from Serpent Kingdoms? Yeah.
There are ridiculous balance issues in all 3.5 material ever to exist...though now that I think about it, there are a lot of particularly egregious Wizard options from the Realms. (Also, I don't think I've heard of a single non-insane thing from Serpent Kingdoms.)

[Zombimode]

I feel it is an objectively incorrect conclusion. Much of the content in setting specific books requires no re-fluffing or only minor refluffing(e.g. replacing one deity of magic's name with a different one or just saying "a deity with the Magic domain").

Only a minority(albeit, a notable one) of the content actually requires effort to refluff to a different setting, unless that setting grossly departs from the base rules. Homebrew settings that grossly depart from the base rules seems to be a fairly uncommon reason for blanket banning all content from setting specific books, though.

Ah. Well, I think that you don't really "get" why some people don't want to use setting-specific material outside the setting.
It is NOT a matter of effort. It is a matter of aesthetics, of preserving the distinct mechanical feel of a setting. And yes, that includes that FR Bards don't get to employ Song of the Heart. It also means that Runecasting is not a thing in Eberron.

It is not so different from food:
I'm very fond of French cuisine and Food culture. But when going to a place that offers traditional Thai cuisine I don't want a varied plate of cheese at the end, even if it would be fitting. It is simply not what I came to experience.

Other People will not see it that way. And that is fine. But I don't think there is any Kind of objective truth to be found here.

[sleepyphoenixx]

There are ridiculous balance issues in all 3.5 material ever to exist...though now that I think about it, there are a lot of particularly egregious Wizard options from the Realms. (Also, I don't think I've heard of a single non-insane thing from Serpent Kingdoms.)

That's because nobody mentions them, not because they don't exist.
The PrCs have the same problems that most non-broken FR classes have - they lack focus, they have too many requirements (usually crap feats) and taking them tends to actually make you significantly weaker.
There's a whole bunch of new spells, not just Venomfire. Some are nice, some suck, some are in between, and some have very cool flavor. They're nothing outstanding though, so nobody mentions them.
It has more items than just the infamous Manyfang Dagger, but again they're nothing outstanding. Though the Viper weapon enhancement gets bonus points for coolness imo. Turning your whip into a snake is pretty sweet, even if it's not the best thing to buy.
It also has a bunch of new poisons with big AoE that don't affect Scaled Ones or even buff them, so that's useful for kobold builds right there.

There's a bunch of familiar options that range from terrible to pretty powerful, some cool new monsters that aren't the Sarrukh, some cool feats (Spit Poison comes to mind), some cool but not broken new spells, some lame PrCs and tons and tons of interesting fluff (which i actually enjoy reading, so it's a plus for me).

So overall the book is pretty cool. It just gets a bad rep because of Venomfire, the Sarrukh and the Manyfang Dagger. Everything else is somewhere between cool and crappy, like every other D&D book.

[Cosi]

My games are not generic, at least i like to think i add some twists to them in my homebrew. That said, I also don't necessarily add everything that's printed in a book. There are no dinosaurs so far in my game. No Drow.

I'm not disagreeing with this sentiment, I'm just saying there's no reason to apply it as a specific complaint against setting specific content. The base game, without any setting specific modifications, is already bigger than any setting will ever be. As a result, the logic of exclusion applies in essentially the same way to everything -- if including Shifters in your setting isn't something you want to do, including Bladelings is probably also not something you want to do, so the reason for the exclusion has nothing to do with Shifters being "from Eberron".

[tyckspoon]

Ah. Well, I think that you don't really "get" why some people don't want to use setting-specific material outside the setting.
It is NOT a matter of effort. It is a matter of aesthetics, of preserving the distinct mechanical feel of a setting. And yes, that includes that FR Bards don't get to employ Song of the Heart. It also means that Runecasting is not a thing in Eberron.


Can't really argue with 'it's a matter of taste', but my taste is squarely on the opposite side of this; I can understand if you don't want to find a way to export, say, Dragonmarks and Dragonshard-based items out of Eberron. Those are fairly essential to the setting's nature and tone. Similarly, I probably wouldn't use Spellfire anywhere but the Forgotten Realms. But magic runes and a feat that effectively says "Your bardic music is better?" Sure, port them around wherever. The fact that they appeared in a book labeled Eberron or FR doesn't make them part of that setting. (Especially Runecasting. *Everywhere* has magic runes. Heck, Warforged already have the Spellcarved Soldier prestige class, which is functionally rune magic.)

[Coidzor]

Ah. Well, I think that you don't really "get" why some people don't want to use setting-specific material outside the setting.
It is NOT a matter of effort. It is a matter of aesthetics, of preserving the distinct mechanical feel of a setting. And yes, that includes that FR Bards don't get to employ Song of the Heart. It also means that Runecasting is not a thing in Eberron.


To regurgitate your phraseology right back at you, I think you don't really get that there are things published in Eberron and Forgotten Realms (and Greyhawk for that matter) which are not setting-specific, they're just content that was included in the books.

There's three types of content, by and large. There's setting independent resources which just happen to be published in a setting book, some of which was republished elsewhere; there's weakly setting-related resources which are tied to something in-setting but are ultimately generic enough to have the names changed and work elsewhere, and then there are things that are strongly setting-specific, like the Shadow Weave and things relating to it, one could refluff them and use them in another setting but it would take actual work of some level to do.


There are ridiculous balance issues in all 3.5 material ever to exist...though now that I think about it, there are a lot of particularly egregious Wizard options from the Realms. (Also, I don't think I've heard of a single non-insane thing from Serpent Kingdoms.)

Muckdwellers? :smallconfused:

Although I suppose that depends upon how you feel about having a sapient humanoid of your own species as your familiar if you play as a Muckdweller who gets a familiar.

[Thurbane]

Speaking for myself, it's because I run a Greyhawk-based campaign, and a lot of the flavour from FR and Eberron seems quite out of place.

Some stuff (feats, PrCs, creatures etc.) are generic enough that I can include them without feeling like they are out of place.

[noob]

"Although I suppose that depends upon how you feel about having a sapient humanoid of your own species as your familiar if you play as a Muckdweller who gets a familiar. "
Nothing forbids from taking yourself as a familiar which will allow you to count as someone who have more hit dice than yourself possibly making you more resistant to holy word(And then when you take the diabolist prc you automatically get killed eaten by an imp even if you was the ultimate god of the multiverse with infinity levels one second ago).
Also there is some cool feats and spells for improving your familiar which will now work onto yourself.

[Zombimode]

To regurgitate your phraseology right back at you, I think you don't really get that there are things published in Eberron and Forgotten Realms (and Greyhawk for that matter) which are not setting-specific, they're just content that was included in the books.

Says who? Oriental Adventures details what parts of the material specific to Rokugan and what is not. FR and Eberron books do not make this kind of distinction. That the material in those book is somehow not part of the mechanical identity of those settings is make-believe on your part.

But I will not carry on this discussion any further. It is pretty clear at this point that we will not come to an understanding here. You have, for some reason, decided that you need to be objectively right instead of accepting it as a diverging opinion in a matter of aesthetics.

[Coidzor]

Says who? Oriental Adventures details what parts of the material specific to Rokugan and what is not. FR and Eberron books do not make this kind of distinction. That the material in those book is somehow not part of the mechanical identity of those settings is make-believe on your part.

Most people are capable of recognizing whether content is tied to a setting beyond what book it's published in by reading it, without it having to be declared as part of RAW directly.


But I will not carry on this discussion any further. It is pretty clear at this point that we will not come to an understanding here. You have, for some reason, decided that you need to be objectively right instead of accepting it as a diverging opinion in a matter of aesthetics.

Aesthetics has very little, if anything, to do with blanket bans based upon sources, and would instead tend to result in a list of banned, allowed, and grey-area content based upon what the particular group enjoys.

If you had provided an argument based upon aesthetics instead of asserting that content must be setting-specific in the face of being completely generic character options that aren't actually tied to the setting beyond the name of the book they're published in, then we could have had a discussion about aesthetics.

Since you did not, I ignored the tangent. After all, doggedly insisting that a militia that provides weapon's training could only ever exist in Faerun is coming from a source which is not a person's sense of aesthetics.

[Mutazoia]

Yes they are way more evil and murderhobo than the two example of behavior I gave.
Read all the stories of the gods there is a lot of horrible things they have done(like "a good aligned god eating another good aligned god")

If you happen to be referring to what happend during "The time of Troubles", that stuff was written for the novels, which has very little to do with the actual game setting. The time of Troubles, was inserted into the realms as a way to have a story line excuse for the rules change-over from 1st to 2nd Ed, and the novels were just a way to sell a bit of product, and "explain" why they did away with some Gods that were redundant, instead of just throwing down another boxed set and saying "here...deal with it." Very little of what happes in novels, for any setting, is cannon for the actual games.

[Bohandas]

I've to say that I think that regardless of balance problems FRCS material transplanted into a non-FRCS campaign is better than the same FRCS material in an FRCS campaign. There is very little that isn't greatly improved by the removal of FRCS themed flavor. Forgotten Realms is by a wide margin the worst least compelling campaign setting (or at least the worst I've encountered. So possibli not the worst out of all of them but at least the worst out of Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Eberron, Dark Sun, Planescape, Spelljammer, Ravenloft, Kingdoms of Kalamar, Mystara, Rokugan, Ghostwalk, Scarred Lands, and Birthright)