Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kaomera" data-source="post: 3199259" data-attributes="member: 38357">Well, ok. I think I'm not going to try and mess with any house-rules here, just try and convince them to think things through a bit more. I may now have a bit more ammunition when it comes time to convince them that "this cool class that's in the new book that I haven't even really read yet" might be something to avoid... I could also go through each and every book and ban very specific stuff, but like I said I think that's unfair to anyone who doesn't share exactly my views of the game (which is pretty much everyone).Part of the idea was that these rules where supposed to add a certain appeal back to the core classes. I think a lot of my players take odd classes and/or combos just to be different from the average NPC. Possibly I should be more upfront about exactly what classes the NPCs have. I can see it being hard to be "just another Fighter" if you think every NPC Warrior has PC class levels. And that just gets worse when you grab random feats to try and make the character different.In the end I may actually have to ask one or two players to leave the game, which I really don't want to do. Unfortunately I really don't think it's ok for them to build characters that can't do what they want hem to, and then get upset at other players who can do that stuff better. The Dragon Shaman is the real problem right now, I think he really thought the character was going to be the party's #1 combat badass, and a top-line skill-monkey, and I think he expects his breath weapon (he's just turned ECL 6th and has the half-vampire template +2 LA) to keep up with the Wizard and DfA in terms of damage-dealing...</blockquote>

Verification