Ahhh Unimaginative players

[silvertable81]

The Imagination is a terrible thing to waste.
I had a Half-Orc Mage, using some extra Skill Points I had laying around, I maxed out Profession;Cook at first level. It just so happened that the dice were good to me when cooking (and pretty much only when cooking for the first couple episodes). A Half Orc getting a roll of Cooking at 27, was enough for me to create my own PrC. I love that character more than just about any other.
He also used Animate Rope to pull off a Hill-Giant's belt, dropping his pants.

 

[Snoweel]

I've gotta disagree with you on all this. I actually have to ban my players from using some of our many resources (MoP, PsiHB, any FR stuff) because I feel like more rules interferes with imaginative play. I call the players unimaginative because they're into rules and forming a character mechanically. I'm trying to immerse them in the adventure and the world, and it's hard to be immersed when you have to keep on referring to the rules from the thirteen books you used to make your character.

I'm all for growth in the d20 market, I just don't think you need anything other than the three core books to have the most IMAGINATIVE game possible.

My take.

I agree with this so strongly I might have to ask for your hand in marriage.

I strongly dislike Prestige Classes. Hell, I'm not too keen on multiclassing.

New arcane spells are ok. PC's learning new divine spells that weren't available when the campaign started isn't good.

And too many different types of monsters makes it feel like the PC's are adventuring in a zoo.

Like you, I try to use ONLY the 3 core books when I game. (Even though I've got almost all the WotC stuff, and Rokugan).

 

[Allanon]

Although it is something everyone should decide for themselves, I as both player and DM feel that giving PC's acces to more (that means limited, selected by the DM) options like prestige classes, spells and feats that you can enhance everyone's game. The problem with most prestige classes is that when you let players take them when THEY want, they either become overpowered or out of place in you're campaign. But something like a Shifter or a Hunter of the Dead shouldn't just be a addon. Player's should have to work, campaign to get them, or get them as a reward for good playing. The basic rulebooks are a good enough start, the prestige classes and extra spells and feats should be used as addon's to flavor a campaing and give society's and for example a Knight's order a diferent flavor and feel.

Just my 2 Eurocents

(Entire post should be read als IMHO)

 

[Guilt Puppy]

Chiming in:

Definitely with the people who are saying more rules != more imagination.

It's not to say that rules inhibit imagination, in a general sense... But I can't say that they facilitate, or even relate to it, either. When I see a Rgr1/Wiz10/Crazy PrC of Doom 4/Assassin 2/Oozemaster 1, casting Inexplicable Spell Which Causes Constitution Damage or something, and using a whole bunch of feats which seem to be entirely based on rules mechanics without actually making sense in the game world, the thing that comes to mind isn't "wow, what an imaginative player!"

As far as I'm concerned, player imagination shows up in three places:

- Character concept / role-playing. I'm sorry, but the books aren't going to help you there -- just get in the way. IMO Prestige Classes totally negate this: They're these very strict, comfy archetypes which aren't built to be played in any more than one way. Which is fine: There's nothing wrong with wanting to play the archetypal Assassin, or Tomb Raider, or whatever. It can be lots of fun, and Prestige Classes are good for that kind of fun. I just wouldn't call it imaginative.

Further, extra rules screw with this even more by shifting you toward metagame thinking: With all the PrC's, you think more about "hey, look at how powerful a Ftr4/Mnk2/Duelist6/Guy Who Throws his own Head at You8 would be!" then "hmm, I wonder which classes would make the most sense for this grizzled old ex-gladiator pirate on a quest to destroy tyrrany?"

In short, when I ask for a character concept, and hear a list of classes (or class abbreviations, even worse), and weapons and feats, it doesn't strike me as at all imaginative. Which, again, isn't itself a bad thing, it just isn't "imaginative."

- Improvisation / in-game creativity: Again, rules won't help you here. In fact, they'll hurt: Having more spells means having more specific situations covered, having more game mechanics for certain situations convinces you to rely on those techniques rather than coming up with new ones (see the players who sit in the corner during combat making Open Lock checks when the key to the door was on a guard they took out earlier.) They don't outright stop you from being imaginative, and you can even use new rules imaginatively, but you can do the same with existing ones.

- Character design / metagame creativity: Which is to say, making a character that uses the game rules in a unique and interesting way. Again, I don't think more options really inhibits this, but I can't say it helps either. There are plenty of clever things you can do with the core rule books: Really, all that happens as you add things is that the clever things become more and more unbalancing. And, to a certain extent, less clever: It's pretty obvious that sticking a whole bunch of classes which get AC bonuses together will give you a really high AC bonus, and if you stop with that, you're totally missing stuff like a Barbarian who has Power Attack to use when raging, and Expertise to use when not (yes, not superbly imaginative, but I never claimed to be good at metagame creativity )

...

Anyway, all this is not at all to say "new rules suck!" or even "new rules are unimaginative!". Being imaginative really isn't all that important... Just trying to make the point that there really isn't much of a relationship between the two.