I played a great DnD game ... with only the 3 core books!

[GlassJaw]

After playing in a bunch of 3.x campaigns since its inception, I just started running the Dungeon Adventure Path for a group of 3.x newbs. Since everyone is pretty new, we are sticking to core material only and boy, I'm having a blast. It's really great to just get back to good old fashioned gaming and not having to worry about the power creep and a slew of ridiculous PrC's.

 

[The Shaman]

I just cannot manage almost 1,000 feats and the spells and PrCs that come with them. I can't imagine that the players care, either. Once the game becomes too unwieldy, it's time to start using the chainsaw to prune.

Well-said.

My 3.0 campaign used a little bit of everything under the sun, and while I was blessed with good roleplayers who weren't interested in trying for the u1t1ma73-1337 character, I really went a little nuts trying to incorporate dozens of PrCs, each with its own reason for being in the campaign-setting.

For my 3.5 campaign, I did away with everything except a few base classes from the Complete... books and a couple of variants from UA. The big thing is emphasizing class combos over prestige classes - I think I have just three or four PrCs permissible in the game, and those have extremely strict entry requirements such that they are all but exclusive to NPCs.

My games tend to focus on character and story, and when the mechanics start getting in the way, it's time for ol' Occam's chainsaw to get to work.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I know that we have had a good session when the clock says it is past my bed-time and people beg me to stay up - "just another 1/2hr"

Anyway, we use the 3 core, bits of the BoVD/CW and the odd bit here and there. No PrCs.

 

[the Jester]

As a dm, I selectively use stuff from everywhere. It has to pass my test first- will it hurt my game, mechanically or in terms of flavor? If the answer's no, I'll prolly let it in if someone inquires.

However, I've run lots of core rules only games and they can be great. You really don't need anything other than the PH to play a great game of dnd.

 

[JoeGKushner]

People like options but with more options come more decesions so time is consumed in the debate as to what to take.

It's like having a good tryant to keep the people in line. Less can indeed be more.

 

[Henry]

It can best be put: people like a challenge, but not all the time. If you've had no challenge for a while, adding one gets people fired up. It's the change-up of the matter.

Therefore, for every two or three games you have where everyone gets to use almost every book under the sun, follow it with a game where they play left-handed one-armed slaves with an ox-cart and a dream of freedom and a regenerated arm. Or more realistically, a game with restrictions of certain types.

Remember that Doctor Seuss wrote some of his best books under obtuse restrictions!

 

[Von Ether]

In the "throw armies at us game," the book creep started simple, anything with the DnD or Scarred Lands logo on it. The players never cracked open a Scarred Lands book, but they quickly put anti-feats from a Kingdoms of Kalamar book to use and the WarCraft RPG Tauren was a staple for two players. Since we started with 3.0, the majority of fighters had at least one level of paladin before finding another PrC.

In fact I was the "weird" on in the group. I picked paladin and stuck with it for the longest time. ... until the Exalted Deeds came out. LOL!

And then when the GM allowed AEG's book of Feats in the game, it all went down hill from there.

 

[Wolf72]

good thread!

I like the idea of two campaigns ... one that is more core rules only (well except for the DM!) and maybe another that is more open ... everyone needs a change of pace.

personally I like the limited option ... I remember everyone arguing over who got the +1 sword ... at 3rd lvl ... from my 1e days.