All these Classes to choose from...... Oh My!

[Sunderstone]

There are only two dragon-based core classes, the Dragon Shaman (PHB2) and the Dragonfire Adept (Dragon Magic).

Are you turned off by them creating as many dragon-based core classes as you think are appropriate?

Its all the Dragon Something classes, including the PrCs. I wasnt specifically targeting the Core classes when it comes to dragons. As Thanatos stated, it's the Dragon craze and I hope it passes soon as well.

 

[Sunderstone]

When I open that window and look outside, I don't wanna see a damn dragon in the sky every time.

I dont hate dragons at all, but sightings or combat with one is very rare in my games. I want these encounters to remain rare and keep the legendary feel when they do encounter them. This keeps the encounter memorable and the party's fear factor pretty high when they meet one.
I also love "souping them up" with stuff from the Dragonomicon .

 

[Aus_Snow]

it's the Dragon craze and I hope it passes soon as well.

*sigh*

I posted it once. I'll post it just once more. It is the Year of Dragons at WotC (this year). I wasn't alluding to anything, I was being literal. Behold: this time with linky.

So in other words, there is a reason and yes, it will pass. Quite soon, in fact. :\

 

[Emirikol]

I dont mind an occasional new core class but it has to be balanced and still leave something to running an older core class.

I've not seen anything more powerful than a fighter or barbarian until the book of 9 swords came out. When it comes to balance, fighters, barbarians and clerics beat ANYTHING on the regular market so don't sweat it.

My players have had fun 'not' playing those three classes. The same old boring, toe to toe combats of D&D of old got us down so we've tried some new things.

You have to gauge your DM however. Make your character fit to the DM (who cares what the world and campaign are 'supposed' to be about!). If it's a high-combat DM, face the facts. There's no such thing as 'campaigns or worlds.' DM's determine exactly what type of game it is. You could have an elvish-culture campaign set in the woods of Celene in Greyhawk and if your DM is a combat-mentality DM (like me),every session's going to be about killing orcs. What's the point of going outside the norm in that case?

You need to cater to the other players a little too. Talk THEM into making something more interesting. Have a campaign where everyone plays a non-standard class (or at least multiclasses to something else). See what the DM does then?

jh

 

[Kurashu]

Isn't that all but the swashbuckler? What's wrong with it?

I think it is. But I have nothing against them, I just haven't found a good place for them yet. I'm thinking of maybe placing them on either the zombie infested island and being the 'minute men' while clerics and paladins are called in. Or maybe as guards in the elf/gnome region. Iunno. I'm pretty loose with stuff, as long as it isn't overtly broken (Ur-Preist for example) I'm generaly fine with it.

However, only two of my two of my five players have non-core classes (goliath ninja and githzerai warlock). I thought they were interesting combinations. I think the only way the githzerai to become any more untouchable would be levels in monk or ninja (AC of 32 from Dex, Armor of Bracers, Ring and the Gith PLA).

Edit: I also allow XPH classes, but they are very limited. Mainly because the dwarves and Thorrincral have done a good job keeping secret what lies beyond the region of Kilm and into the Tipota Desert. However, I'm allowing one player to play a soulknife/psion gestalt. Which reminds me that I still need to get some key information to him about that.

 

[Alceste]

I dont hate dragons at all, but sightings or combat with one is very rare in my games. I want these encounters to remain rare and keep the legendary feel when they do encounter them. This keeps the encounter memorable and the party's fear factor pretty high when they meet one.
I also love "souping them up" with stuff from the Dragonomicon .

We rotate running, so I get to play with the monster books once in awhile to. I will agree that there have been way too many dragon based classes recently.

We are pretty generous in allowing classes from the complete books/phb2, but really do people take any. In fact our current campaign has none of them. Feats/spells from the complete books get a lot of use. That is the real reason to buy the complete books.

The book of nine swords on the other hand is pretty popular (despite us nerfing the warblade) as is the xphb/complete psionic.

 

[Agent Oracle]

Eh. PHBII has the highest ban ratio of any of the books for me as far as classes go.

Actually, I've seen all four of the classes from the PHBII in play, and they actually are pretty perfectly balanced.

THe powergamer wanted to play a Dragon Shaman. He quickly learned that it has no particular advantages over any other class.

I played a Knight. I enjoyed it immensely, but was no more effective in combat than a barbarian or a paladin.

A Player tried a duskblade, and got some good hits in, but those didn't rise above anyone else in the game.

And the Thespian played the beguiler. And she played her with a vengeance. Both in and out of combat, she was devastating, but always in a way that agreed with everyone else.

Frankly, I like it as a supplement. it's the best polished one in my opinion.

 

[Sunderstone]

We are pretty generous in allowing classes from the complete books/phb2, but really do people take any. In fact our current campaign has none of them. Feats/spells from the complete books get a lot of use. That is the real reason to buy the complete books.

Fair enough, I have told my players that I will look over anything they want to run as long as the group has a hardcopy of the book. One of my players at the time was considering the Complete Divine, if he buys one ill decide then.

The book of nine swords on the other hand is pretty popular (despite us nerfing the warblade) as is the xphb/complete psionic.

Exactly what Im trying to avoid, I dont want to have to nerf anything or even spend time figuring out what needs nerfing or how it needs nerfing. Id rather avoid the book.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Exactly what Im trying to avoid, I dont want to have to nerf anything or even spend time figuring out what needs nerfing or how it needs nerfing. Id rather avoid the book.

Well, as much as I like the first four Complete Books - including Complete Divine which some say is the most potentially broken - I will also say that no book has stirred up the "What in the world was WotC thinking when they wrote that?!?" as much as Bo9S. It has a lot of "Huh" type material. I'll admit that alot of it seems broken because it reads broken but isn't in real play. But it does have alot of that kind of stuff in it.

XPH on the other hand is a solid book. I put the XPH up there with PHB II and Draconomicon. If I had to chose between those three books I'd need a long time to think about it. All solid and solidly useful.

 

[Sunderstone]

XPH on the other hand is a solid book. I put the XPH up there with PHB II and Draconomicon. If I had to chose between those three books I'd need a long time to think about it. All solid and solidly useful.

I should have been clearer in my last post and shouldnt have lumped the XPH in the same sentence as the Bo9S. I like the XPH alot and I wish one of my players would get interested in Psionics so I could see one in action. All three of the above books you mentioned are excellent.