Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 84
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Proven_Paradox's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default How would you react to these houserules?

    (Yes, another thread about houserules. And yes I expect it will devolve into a flamefest regarding the Tome of Battle in one page, but I hope to gain useful feedback before that happens.)

    I'm just testing the waters on a couple of things I'm considering telling players to some games I run in the future.

    On the one hand, I ask my players to do their best to make strong characters--I'm not talking about d2 crusaders and DMM persisting clerics with a stack of Nightsticks, but I like characters to be strong so I as a DM can construct interesting and challenging encounters without killing them. Also note that leveling happens faster to reflect the increased challenge level.

    On the other, there are the big five--able to easily overwhelm everyone else if played properly, and at the same time involve a lot of bookkeeping that I find cumbersome.

    So, here are some things I'm considering.

    -- Wizards, (cloistered) clerics, archivists, and artificers exist. However, adventuring characters of these classes do NOT exist: they're too busy studying in their towers/churches/libraries/laboratories to adventure, and as such are not available as player characters. They may be encountered as allies, enemies, or other. They (rarely) may join the party temporarily, but afterwards they will return to their respective hide-outs.

    -- Druids may choose to either have an animal companion (no wild shape) or take the PHBII shapeshift variant. Those who wish to have an animal companion AND be able to change into animals (as the iconic druid archetype often does), we will negotiate some spells to produce this effect. They cast spells spontaneously, based on wisdom, using the spells known/spells per day chart of a favored soul.

    -- Favored soul spell save DCs are based on charisma--no more dual casting abilities for them.

    -- Melee characters are encouraged to use the Tome of Battle in creating their characters or use re-balanced versions of classes (subject to approval; there are dozens floating around and I'm open-minded about them). This is not required, but if a character finds themselves falling behind, I am not responsible for the consequences.

    -- I will gladly give optimization advice to any who aren't adept in such matters. Possibly unbidden, but always when asked.

    Thoughts?

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    _Puppetmaster_'s Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    West of the Atlantic
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    I like them. But if your going to make the favored soul go SAD, you should probably buff the sorcerer up wth some class features mirroring the favored soul to make the arcane and divine spontaneous casters more even.
    Check out my class, the Clothfighter.

    Spoiler
    Show

    Thing-Thing and Inkscape Avatars by me


    Paint-atar by me.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Neon Knight's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    I certainly can't find anything wrong with them. They seem in line with your desire for strong characters without the overpowering levels that a tricked out wizard can perform at. They seem reasonable, given that you have made your expectations and desires apparent first.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Proven_Paradox's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by _Puppetmaster_ View Post
    I like them. But if your going to make the favored soul go SAD, you should probably buff the sorcerer up wth some class features mirroring the favored soul to make the arcane and divine spontaneous casters more even.
    That... is actually a decent point, but I'm not convinced that having access to a superior spell list isn't enough of a class feature to make up for that. Others thoughts on this?

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2007

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    If you need to make the Favored Soul SAD, I'd consider making it Wis-based rather than Cha-based. Mainly since all arcanists will need Cha.

    Actually the Sorcerer buff I like best is to give them 4 skill points/level and add a few social skills to the class skill list. They're certainly *powerful* enough as is, but adding a bit more versatility is nice.
    Last edited by Riffington; 2008-10-22 at 09:31 PM.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Proven_Paradox View Post
    -- Wizards, (cloistered) clerics, archivists, and artificers exist. However, adventuring characters of these classes do NOT exist: they're too busy studying in their towers/churches/libraries/laboratories to adventure, and as such are not available as player characters. They may be encountered as allies, enemies, or other. They (rarely) may join the party temporarily, but afterwards they will return to their respective hide-outs.

    -- Druids may choose to either have an animal companion (no wild shape) or take the PHBII shapeshift variant. Those who wish to have an animal companion AND be able to change into animals (as the iconic druid archetype often does), we will negotiate some spells to produce this effect. They cast spells spontaneously, based on wisdom, using the spells known/spells per day chart of a favored soul.

    -- Favored soul spell save DCs are based on charisma--no more dual casting abilities for them.

    -- Melee characters are encouraged to use the Tome of Battle in creating their characters or use re-balanced versions of classes (subject to approval; there are dozens floating around and I'm open-minded about them). This is not required, but if a character finds themselves falling behind, I am not responsible for the consequences.

    -- I will gladly give optimization advice to any who aren't adept in such matters. Possibly unbidden, but always when asked.

    Thoughts?
    The barring the full caster classes might not go over well with the players and will probably draw more flak than encouraging ToB. If you want that to be their justification for not adventuring, you need to make it mechanical so it doesn't feel ENTIRELY like a GM fiat. (unless, of course, your players are the sort who can be understanding, then no problem) i.e. wizards/clerics have their responsibilities that really does tie them down to their respective institutions.

    i.e. a tower whose entire structure is supported by magic and requires that mages come in everyday and pour a certain number of their arcane powers into it. (represented by having them expend spell slots) this means that most days, their spell cache is already drained and they really wouldn't be all that useful except as guides or source of knowledge.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    ocato's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Muncie, Indiana
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    If you are SADing characters, the spirit shaman needs it too.
    Being a jerk to people on the internet does not make you cool.

    Avatar by Kalirush

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    NC

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Proven_Paradox View Post
    (Yes, another thread about houserules. And yes I expect it will devolve into a flamefest regarding the Tome of Battle in one page, but I hope to gain useful feedback before that happens.)

    <snit>

    -- Wizards, (cloistered) clerics, archivists, and artificers exist. However, adventuring characters of these classes do NOT exist: they're too busy studying in their towers/churches/libraries/laboratories to adventure, and as such are not available as player characters. They may be encountered as allies, enemies, or other. They (rarely) may join the party temporarily, but afterwards they will return to their respective hide-outs.
    This is the only rule which makes me...wary. Even then I don't have anything against banning the class. It's just I've had some...experiences with a DM using NPCs significantly more powerful than the PCs. I prefer to avoid those types of campaigns now. Have you considered simply banning them altogether?
    -
    I laugh at myself first, before anyone else can.
    -- Paraphrased from Elsa Maxwell
    -
    The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you.
    -- Paul Graham in Keep Your Identity Small

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raum View Post
    This is the only rule which makes me...wary. Even then I don't have anything against banning the class. It's just I've had some...experiences with a DM using NPCs significantly more powerful than the PCs. I prefer to avoid those types of campaigns now. Have you considered simply banning them altogether?
    well, if you really must think of it that way, can't you really say the same for any monster the GM uses?

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Yamanashi, Japan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    If you have any players that want to play anti-undead PCs, then you just put them out of luck by taking away the cleric (and the ability to turn undead effectively). You could fix this by upping the power of the paladin, but that would take quite a bit of homebrew.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    NC

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by elliott20 View Post
    well, if you really must think of it that way, can't you really say the same for any monster the GM uses?
    Perhaps you'd have to see it to believe, I'll simply say she owned Reading, Short Line, Pennsylvania, and B&O.

    As I said above, it's simply something which makes me 'wary'. It's not necessarily a game killer.
    -
    I laugh at myself first, before anyone else can.
    -- Paraphrased from Elsa Maxwell
    -
    The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you.
    -- Paul Graham in Keep Your Identity Small

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Proven_Paradox's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Riffington View Post
    If you need to make the Favored Soul SAD, I'd consider making it Wis-based rather than Cha-based. Mainly since all arcanists will need Cha.

    Actually the Sorcerer buff I like best is to give them 4 skill points/level and add a few social skills to the class skill list. They're certainly *powerful* enough as is, but adding a bit more versatility is nice.
    That's something I would be open to, I think. [edit] And by "that" I mean both suggestions.

    Quote Originally Posted by elliott20 View Post
    The barring the full caster classes might not go over well with the players and will probably draw more flak than encouraging ToB. If you want that to be their justification for not adventuring, you need to make it mechanical so it doesn't feel ENTIRELY like a GM fiat. (unless, of course, your players are the sort who can be understanding, then no problem) i.e. wizards/clerics have their responsibilities that really does tie them down to their respective institutions.

    i.e. a tower whose entire structure is supported by magic and requires that mages come in everyday and pour a certain number of their arcane powers into it. (represented by having them expend spell slots) this means that most days, their spell cache is already drained and they really wouldn't be all that useful except as guides or source of knowledge.
    Nitpick: I'm not barring full-casters. I'm barring PREPARED full-casters. A subtle but important difference.

    Frankly, I'm okay with it feeling like GM fiat. There are plenty of examples of wizardly types who gain power by remaining at all times in their labs or libraries studying, and if a player really stirs a stink about that, I'd cite that as further justification. Plus, to me, making their lairs supported by their presence also feels like GM fiat--perfectly acceptable, but none-the-less GM fiat.

    Quote Originally Posted by ocato View Post
    If you are SADing characters, the spirit shaman needs it too.
    Heheh, sprit shaman needs more than that... Regardless, it's a class I don't see in play often, so I didn't mention it. But if a player wanted to run one, I'd do at least that and may make a couple of other tweaks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raum View Post
    This is the only rule which makes me...wary. Even then I don't have anything against banning the class. It's just I've had some...experiences with a DM using NPCs significantly more powerful than the PCs. I prefer to avoid those types of campaigns now. Have you considered simply banning them altogether?
    The "joins the PCs" bit would be extremely rare, and the caster in question probably wouldn't be the best suited to battle anyway. At the same time, I want to leave myself the option of throwing a wizard enemy at the players. I use the same justification for me being allowed to use a wizard while the players can't as I do for me being allowed to use a dragon while the players can't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bassikpoet View Post
    If you have any players that want to play anti-undead PCs, then you just put them out of luck by taking away the cleric (and the ability to turn undead effectively). You could fix this by upping the power of the paladin, but that would take quite a bit of homebrew.
    Paladin re-writes would be among the re-writes I mention in the fifth point--there are a lot of them: I have two that I use regularly and really enjoy. Among their capabilities is improved turning abilities. There're also several ways for favored souls (and possibly druids) to get turn undead, and if a player goes that route I would probably allow their divien caster levels stack with the PrC levels for turning strength; using turn undead to -actually- turn undead is usually a rather weak tactic anyway.
    Last edited by Proven_Paradox; 2008-10-22 at 10:35 PM.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Frosty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Good to see you active again Paradox! Does it man we'll be continuing play soon?
    NS2...it's time to evolve again.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Proven_Paradox's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
    Good to see you active again Paradox! Does it man we'll be continuing play soon?
    God, I wish. I just had a slight lull that's billowed into full-blown procrastination at the moment. Right now, I'm trying to settle things so that Talmirah can start going sometime in mid-November. No promises.
    Last edited by Proven_Paradox; 2008-10-22 at 10:37 PM.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Hal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Baltimore
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by _Puppetmaster_ View Post
    I like them. But if your going to make the favored soul go SAD, you should probably buff the sorcerer up wth some class features mirroring the favored soul to make the arcane and divine spontaneous casters more even.
    Well, Favored Soul fluff gives them divine-like properties. You could give the Sorcerer fey or dragon like properties along the same lines.
    Halbert's Cubicle - Wherein I write about gaming and . . . you know . . . stuff.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    well, paradox, none of your houserules I think would break the game for me, per se. So, just saying it MIGHT be a problem with players who want to play prepared casters.

    I do think people have a point with the SADs though. I wonder what you'd do to change up the paladin and the other half-casters.

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Frosty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Proven_Paradox View Post
    God, I wish. I just had a slight lull that's billowed into full-blown procrastination at the moment. Right now, I'm trying to settle things so that Talmirah can start going sometime in mid-November. No promises.
    I also hope sometime we could do a high level game, like level 15 or 17. I wanna play a Tank-sader sometime.
    NS2...it's time to evolve again.

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Proven_Paradox's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by elliott20 View Post
    well, paradox, none of your houserules I think would break the game for me, per se. So, just saying it MIGHT be a problem with players who want to play prepared casters.

    I do think people have a point with the SADs though. I wonder what you'd do to change up the paladin and the other half-casters.
    If by "half-casters" you count casters focused in a specific type of magic, like bard, beguiler, dread necromancer, and so on, they generally get class features that help them catch up in usefulness; I generally don't consider them to be in need of change.

    If by "half-casters" you mean classes like ranger, paladin, and others that are melee characters with a side of gimped casting, I think most archetypes represented by those in core are better represented by ToB classes--or at least make up a lot of ground with an appropriate dip level or two. Also, they would fall under the "use re-balanced version" clause of point five. Paladins, for example, get to choose between this or this.
    Last edited by Proven_Paradox; 2008-10-22 at 10:50 PM.

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    oooh fax_celeste's paladin. now that's some yummy goodness right there!

    but yeah, I personally think going ToB is just an easier option. I wonder how well crusader synergizes with paladin though...

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Banned
     
    Zeful's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hal View Post
    Well, Favored Soul fluff gives them divine-like properties. You could give the Sorcerer fey or dragon like properties along the same lines.
    This is a bad idea. There is very little dragon fluff to the Sorcerer. There is one line, which is then handwaved away as "boasts" in the next sentence. Making an entire class' powers based from exceptional heritage makes other classes with greater heritage seem silly (how is a half-dragon fighter weaker than a Sorcerer with forced draconic heritage? After all he's got much more dragon in him, he should be able to everything the sorcerer can and more).

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2008

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    I'd react with joy, since the Favored Soul no longer suffers from mad and I like spontaneous divine casting. Or really any spontaneous casting. As such, your rules don't really negatively effect anything I'd be itching to play. Of course, this means I'm biased, but I do think they look pretty solid, and I'd likely enjoy a game with those houserules.

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Extradimensional pocket...with the lint.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    I'd play what I think is probably the best design in 3.x mechanics: the Factotum. Since that's the case, it wouldn't break the game for me. Then again, I can see how it would piss off several people I know.
    Johannes factotum of the Bard Defense League

    "A witty saying proves nothing." -Voltaire

    "Jack of all trades, master of none, though ofttimes better than master of one."

    The main question that any DM should ask before making a house-rule or exception is, "Is it balanced?"

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    monty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fresno (yes, THAT Fresno)
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    This is a bad idea. There is very little dragon fluff to the Sorcerer. There is one line, which is then handwaved away as "boasts" in the next sentence. Making an entire class' powers based from exceptional heritage makes other classes with greater heritage seem silly (how is a half-dragon fighter weaker than a Sorcerer with forced draconic heritage? After all he's got much more dragon in him, he should be able to everything the sorcerer can and more).
    You could also ask why the 36 HD great wyrm white dragon is only as good as the 13 HD sorcerer. That's just the way it works.
    My characters:
    Spoiler
    Show
    Sarah, human gestalt druid/totemist
    Adrian, human rogue
    Calypso, half-nymph human gestalt druid/miscellaneous


  24. - Top - End - #24
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    DC area
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    I Like most of them, though I'm not sure about the Druid, and that's mostly about the spell list. My only big worry for the game would be that you don't have a good way to have access to the morning after spells. Besides that, what about Psionics?

    Oh, and for the sorcerer, why not give him wizard bonus feat progression+1 at first level with the following choices added: Draconic, Fey, Fiendish, Celestial and Infernal heritage feats+Eschew Materials. If you don't want to give them a free first level feat, give them Eschew Materials.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Devil

    Join Date
    Jun 2005

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Proven_Paradox View Post
    -- Wizards, (cloistered) clerics, archivists, and artificers exist. However, adventuring characters of these classes do NOT exist: they're too busy studying in their towers/churches/libraries/laboratories to adventure, and as such are not available as player characters. They may be encountered as allies, enemies, or other. They (rarely) may join the party temporarily, but afterwards they will return to their respective hide-outs.
    Powerful spellcasters who are powerful spellcasters because they spend time practicing spellcasting and studying magic instead of killing monsters? The magic-item-making specialists explicitly put into an NPC role? The people equipped to live comfortable lives and hold positions of power within society actually functioning within society, and rarely running off on weird "quests", because they have better things to do?

    What are you trying to do, create a D&D setting that actually makes sense?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Proven_Paradox View Post
    That... is actually a decent point, but I'm not convinced that having access to a superior spell list isn't enough of a class feature to make up for that. Others thoughts on this?
    Is familiar progression enough to make up for not taking a full casting prestige class?

    Sorcerer needs actual class features if you want to make taking its later levels worth it. Assuming you're allowing prestige classes.
    Spoiler
    Show

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Hal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Baltimore
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    This is a bad idea. There is very little dragon fluff to the Sorcerer. There is one line, which is then handwaved away as "boasts" in the next sentence. Making an entire class' powers based from exceptional heritage makes other classes with greater heritage seem silly (how is a half-dragon fighter weaker than a Sorcerer with forced draconic heritage? After all he's got much more dragon in him, he should be able to everything the sorcerer can and more).
    Okay, so I'm not talking about turning him into a great wyrm at 20. Grab some of the Dragon Disciple class features and make them part of the sorcerer's progression. Focus on the Fey angle, there are feats that work with it.
    Halbert's Cubicle - Wherein I write about gaming and . . . you know . . . stuff.

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Colossus in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    These rules are fine. Banning Clerics, Archivists, Wizards and Artificers would probably be cleaner, but this works too. Although I agree that the Sorcerer needs class features: Draconic Heritage and bonus Draconic feats seems logical enough. I'd probably just use the Pathfinder Sorcerer - it has flavourful abilities (and gets to choose its bloodline!) and doesn't totally suck all the way to 20.

    Also, it's kinda dumb that players assume they should get access to every class in PHB. I mean, WoTC has screwed up a ton of things - why should every game be plagued by WoTC's failures, like most PHB classes?
    Campaign Journal: Uncovering the Lost World - A Player's Diary in Low-Magic D&D (Latest Update: 8.3.2014)
    Being Bane: A Guide to Barbarians Cracking Small Men - Ever Been Angry?! Then this is for you!
    SRD Averages - An aggregation of all the key stats of all the monster entries on SRD arranged by CR.

  28. - Top - End - #28
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    How's about psions? Are they considered spontaneous enough to escape your wrath? Erudites?

    Also, the change to Druid casting seems a bit harsh. What about giving them something like the Spirit Shaman, so that they can still get the benefit of their less-frequently-used spells at a day's notice?

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tengu_temp's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Quote Originally Posted by Devils_Advocate View Post
    What are you trying to do, create a D&D setting that actually makes sense?!
    Preposterous, ain't it?

    Those houserules look mighty fine to me. They do away with roughly 50% of cheese in DND.

    Siela Tempo by the talented Kasanip. Tengu by myself.
    Spoiler
    Show





  30. - Top - End - #30
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: How would you react to these houserules?

    Seems a bit over the top to me. I always have problems when entire classes are banned, not for setting reasons but just because the DM has a problem with them.

    "DMM with a bag full of nightsticks is overpowered"
    --> "Lets ban clerics" .. huh? overgeneralize much?

    Its also not terribly consistent. A sorceror can just as easily be broken with incantatrix for example as a wizard. Granted he'll be less over-the-top broken than the wizard as he doesnt benefit from the int synergy as much. But he'll still be far-far-far more powerfull than any wizard/druid/cleric/archivist that chooses to play a non-op build.

    Instead of just banning things in broad strokes, just discuss with your players beforehand what they plan to do (like you intend to do for druids). If nobody even mentions nighsticks or god knows what else you have problems with, then dont worry about it. No need making problems of things before its nessecary to do so.

    I find it especially weird that you ban half the caster classes and then heavily recommend (to the point of nigh-insisting) on ToB. Now dont get me wrong, I'm not saying ToB is overpowered. I think its a fine book that performed miracles for the melee archetype in dnd. I just think its weird to ban a bunch of full casters and insisting on making your melee players .. well .. casters (initiators .. tometo tomato).

    Anyhow, just My2c

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •