Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="wayne62682" data-source="post: 3345682" data-attributes="member: 40455">The biggest problem I have is that some of the optional rules are good, and others suck, but it feels &quot;wrong&quot; (to me at least, but I have issues) to use some and not all.&nbsp; For example:&nbsp; With that Armored Spellcaster variant rule in Complete Mage (the one that lets you ignore ASF in light armor for spells equal to Fighter level +1) there's no need for PrCs like the Spellsword or Eldritch Knight, and I could make a perfectly viable fighter/mage character just with Fighter/Wizard or Fighter/Sorcerer; but a &quot;Core Only&quot; game won't allow that option, thus I can't make the fighter/mage (or at least not the kind I'm thinking of that wears some form of armor and still effectively casts spells), and a game that allows splatbooks but not Complete Mage is just forcing me to take a plethora of PrCs since the option that would remove the need for said PrCs isn't allowed.&nbsp; It's a weird kind of domino effect.I realize it's possible to present that option to the DM and have any reasonably sane DM consider it (and probably allow it), but there are the jerks out there who are too lazy to look at anything non-core or feel slighted if a player asks about using something from a splatbook.&nbsp; In short, the game has become far too convoluted.&nbsp; You limit it way too much if you play Core only (in my opinion) because there are good options in other books (I personally would like to see 4E or whatever incorporate character options into the Core rules for variety, and also triple the number of them), but it's ridiculous to allow everything out there.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="wayne62682, post: 3345682, member: 40455"] The biggest problem I have is that some of the optional rules are good, and others suck, but it feels "wrong" (to me at least, but I have issues) to use some and not all. For example: With that Armored Spellcaster variant rule in Complete Mage (the one that lets you ignore ASF in light armor for spells equal to Fighter level +1) there's no need for PrCs like the Spellsword or Eldritch Knight, and I could make a perfectly viable fighter/mage character just with Fighter/Wizard or Fighter/Sorcerer; but a "Core Only" game won't allow that option, thus I can't make the fighter/mage (or at least not the kind I'm thinking of that wears some form of armor and still effectively casts spells), and a game that allows splatbooks but not Complete Mage is just forcing me to take a plethora of PrCs since the option that would remove the need for said PrCs isn't allowed. It's a weird kind of domino effect. I realize it's possible to present that option to the DM and have any reasonably sane DM consider it (and probably allow it), but there are the jerks out there who are too lazy to look at anything non-core or feel slighted if a player asks about using something from a splatbook. In short, the game has become far too convoluted. You limit it way too much if you play Core only (in my opinion) because there are good options in other books (I personally would like to see 4E or whatever incorporate character options into the Core rules for variety, and also triple the number of them), but it's ridiculous to allow everything out there. [/QUOTE]

Verification