Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Upcoming BBoC...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7086995" data-attributes="member: 12731"><p>Okay, I'll try a more blunt approach:</p><p></p><p>The +1 rule works if the choices are roughly similar in scope.</p><p></p><p>If one of the +1 sources contain much more crunch to a much deeper level, other sources have their opportunity cost significantly increased.</p><p></p><p>Playing a swashbuckler or goliath used to mean you sacrifice sources Y and Z of similar stature. But if playing a goliath suddenly means you can't use any number of new things, including entirely new classes, lots of items, perhaps entirely new concepts and overlays, this cost suddenly becomes stratospheric. </p><p></p><p>All the while playing a Mystic, say (assuming that's one of the additions to the new book) only means you can't choose between a relatively minor set of choices you really don't need.</p><p></p><p>I'm not saying this will happen. I'm not arguing to remove the +1 rule.</p><p></p><p>I'm trying to explain to you why the poster expressed concern. Just repeating the rule and it's original justification is beside this point.</p><p></p><p>Each source needs to contain very roughly a comparable amount of stuff. Perhaps if they amend the rule to treat the new book as three distinct sources, and then make the rule +2 instead?</p><p></p><p>(so that any given character* can at best use two thirds of the new book)</p><p></p><p>* again assuming AL play</p><p></p><p>Sent from my C6603 using <a href="http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93205" target="_blank">EN World mobile app</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7086995, member: 12731"] Okay, I'll try a more blunt approach: The +1 rule works if the choices are roughly similar in scope. If one of the +1 sources contain much more crunch to a much deeper level, other sources have their opportunity cost significantly increased. Playing a swashbuckler or goliath used to mean you sacrifice sources Y and Z of similar stature. But if playing a goliath suddenly means you can't use any number of new things, including entirely new classes, lots of items, perhaps entirely new concepts and overlays, this cost suddenly becomes stratospheric. All the while playing a Mystic, say (assuming that's one of the additions to the new book) only means you can't choose between a relatively minor set of choices you really don't need. I'm not saying this will happen. I'm not arguing to remove the +1 rule. I'm trying to explain to you why the poster expressed concern. Just repeating the rule and it's original justification is beside this point. Each source needs to contain very roughly a comparable amount of stuff. Perhaps if they amend the rule to treat the new book as three distinct sources, and then make the rule +2 instead? (so that any given character* can at best use two thirds of the new book) * again assuming AL play Sent from my C6603 using [URL=http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93205]EN World mobile app[/URL] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Upcoming BBoC...
Top