d20 bubble bust?- High Prices, too many books

[Umbran]

So I was referring to the cheese that is Complete Divine, which seems to really enhance Divine casters, while offering no detriments for the benefits, such as feats that use "turning" power.....

Let us review for a moment...

You said, "...although after Complete Divine, it seems that WOTC has decided balance does not sell books either."

I remarked that one product does not constitute a trend.

You then said, "It's not just one product. Complete Warrior was also a trend upward in power."

(So, we now establish that you are not only talking about Complete Divine. You are also talking about Complete Warrior.)

I remarked, in agreement with Psion, that I don't see CW as an upward trend. That, if anything, compared with the similar 3e material, CW is more balanced, a move towards lesser power rather than the upward move you claim to see in the book.

Now, I haven't seen Complete Divine. For all I know, it is a powermonger's cheeze-fest. But even if it is, alone it does not represent a trend. The 3.5e rules and CW seem to me to indicate a general move towards slightly lower power. CD would then stand alone as a higher-power product. One errant data point does not a trend make.

 

[Psion]

To clarify, it's not so much that I think that the books lower power across the board eitehr. Rather, I think that BU's jumping to the conclusion that its deliberate decision to release a line of power up book is off; the fact that lots of reduction in power is going on should show that no such intentional pattern exists.

Now I would be the first to agree that WotC is getting a bit scattershot in their power criteria, and I think that it is perfectly possible that many things introduced may be of a higher power level because of an apparent looser standard by R&D, resultant inconsistency in designer standards of power, and some not well thought out mechanics with heinous results (hulking hurler, anyone?)

I hardly think it's worth complaining about, though. I do think they should be more consistent. But what is overpowered, I can nerf.

I tire of incessant complaints of power creep, though. Yes, some things in there are likely to trip some DMs warning alarms (though which ones it trips will vary widely). The solution: don't use what doesn't work in your games.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

It is because there is SO much out there and SO much coming out that I am considering shelving D&D 3.X and going back to 1E/2E. I have all those books and no new ones are coming out. No new rules/abilities/PrCs to throw everything out of whack.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

In any event, I would buy from a publisher with the balls to drop PrCs and buck the trend.

I see I may have already gotten you to purchase, but Grim Tales has no prestige classes, no advanced classes-- just the six core classes and lots and lots of talent trees and feats.

Don't knock talents, by the way-- they are essential for helping the various classes carve out their own niche. There are some things you can do with talents that you can't (or shouldn't) do with feats. In fact you'll note that for Grim Tales, some feats became talents (Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical, among others).

I'd also like to point out, in the context of this thread, that Grim Tales uses lots and lots of Open Content from other sources. Some of it was good enough to use as is. Some of it (due to feedback from players) needed tweaking. I don't know if my "solutions" to firearms and vehicles, for example, are better than what was out there, but I certainly did not tackle any piece of the Grim Tales "rules project" from a capricious need to do things "my way."


Wulf

 

[buzz]

My entire group except me. They refuse to DM because "it's too much work".

But do they buy the PHB and then never buy anything else?

 

[Umbran]

Now I would be the first to agree that WotC is getting a bit scattershot in their power criteria...

Is getting? Off the top of my head, I don't see much evidence that they've been anything other than scattershot since the release of 3e.

And maybe that isn't such a bad thing. Gamers don't all have the same tastes. So perhaps having some natural variation in products is reasonable, or at least a selling point. If everything WotC ever made was within a tightly controlled power range, folks who like higher (or lower) power games would tend to avoid them.

 

[Psion]

Is getting? Off the top of my head, I don't see much evidence that they've been anything other than scattershot since the release of 3e.

Oh, I do.

After R&D went into place (which, unfortunately, was after Sword & Fist) and before the "big name diaspora" from WotC, it felt like the power levels were a lot more even. And the 3.5 core books themselves seem fine. Smaller, newer titles seem to be a lot more variable in their power.

And maybe that isn't such a bad thing. Gamers don't all have the same tastes.

That's a good point, perhaps. As long as the gamers are mature enough to be selective.

 

[Psion]

Psion, I just followed the link in your sig to the Pact System Doc and noticed this section of its legal notice:

(snip)

This Permission to Reference is aimed at the compatibility provisions of the OGL Section 7, but a similar permission statement could be used by publishers to allow (and benefit from) a direct citation system under the OGL.

By specifying an abbreviation that can be used for his trademark, Mr. Peterson seems to have been inspired of Wizard's own steps towards encouraging citation without infringing on trademark (i.e., allowing the use of MM or Core Rulebook III).

That's not the only nice treatment of OGL material Mr. Peterson managed. In his second world book he also points out what came from where, making tracking sources convenient. The only document that is more convenient is ToH, in which each creature is its own document.

 

[mmadsen]

There are some things you can do with talents that you can't (or shouldn't) do with feats.

Like what?

What's the difference between a class with a bonus-feat list and a class with a talent tree?

 

[barsoomcore]

What's the difference between a class with a bonus-feat list and a class with a talent tree?

To get the abilities of a talent tree, you MUST take the class that gets that talent tree. To get the abilities of a feat, you only have to meet the pre-requisites of the feat. Which will most likely not include a particular class.