Is 3.5e beginning to suffer from rules bloat?

[Aus_Snow]

Yes, it did. My side point was, if it was going to be so "hard wired" to Complete Arcane then I feel it should have been heavily marketed as a sequel to Complete Arcane. I feel not enough was done to point out that much of the book required CA to be useful.

Oh.

As it happens, I agree (that the marketing should have indicated that).

Or, they could have gone with the flow, and simply called it "Complete Arcane II". That would have been a dead give away, I imagine.

 

[Stalker0]

I will say, that the actual new rules categories are few, and normally very well done.

1) Swift, Immediate actions: Pretty simple to use in general, gives a nice new variety of spells.
2) Skill tricks. 2 skill points, once per encounter, rock and roll. Its quick, clean, and easy, and provides a little more fun for the skill user.
3) Reserve feats. Have a certain spell ready, do a certain thing unlimited per day. So very simple.
4) Tactical Feats. Just a feat with a few more things it can do.
5) Divine/Wild Feats. A feat with a cost.

That's about it. Everything else is just another option.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

"Beginning" to suffer from rules bloat?

 

[delericho]

Yes and no.

In terms of the actual rules, the game is still pretty light. Relatively few games seem to use all the new subsystems (psionics, incarnum, Tome of Magic, Tome of Battle, Weapons of Legacy...) simultaneously, so that tends not to be an issue.

There is certainlyan options bloat going on, and has been for a long time. Here, though, the major issue is not the number of feats, PrCs, classes, spells and magic items... it's the lack of organisation of the same. And here, books like the Spell Compendium and Magic Item Compendium are hugely helpful. Hopefully, WotC will do a Feats Compendium soon.

I would advocate a Class Compendium as well, but that's rendered problematic because a lot of the classes are tied heavily to the subsystems introduced in the books they feature in (Psion, Crusader), and because PrCs make up such a huge part of so many books. Perhaps an online database is the way forward?

Other than that, I have two pieces of advice for helping with rules and options bloat:

1) At the start of the campaign, the group should decide which subsystems will be used. So, they might choose to use Psionics, or Incarnum, both, or neither. It may be best if this list does not change later.

2) If the full range of options are to be available (subject to the subsystems selected above), then character advancement should be done between game sessions. There are too many options for Bill to level up his character during the game... it might well take him an hour to find the perfect feat, PrC or spell. It's not fair for him to hold up the game for the other four people while he does this (and if there are four PCs all needing levelled up, and each player takes an hour, and if the books need to be shared... yes, I have lost one entire session this way.)

 

[Eytan Bernstein]

I'll agree with the general sentiment here, with a caveat. I think we are moving a bit towards the latter 2E "rules bloat."

Yes, the extra rules are all optional (as are the core rules, but there is "optional" and there is "optional"). However, more and more WotC books are adding in parts of those optional rules into books that aren't tied to that rule set.

It's obvious that Complete Psionic will refer to the Expanded Psionics Handbook. Maybe even the Complete Mage should reference the Complete Arcane (although I think the marketing didn't sell it as such). However, it's happening elsewhere. Eyes of the Lich Queen uses the Tome of Battle (incorrectly I might add). A "pseudo core book," Magic Item Compendium, references a gazillion rules sets (incarnum, psionics, Tome of Magic, Eberron).

While it doesn't make those rules less optional, it makes them feel less optional, If I pick up the MIC and see a reference to incarnum, I want to know what its talking about. Why are there no rules covering it in the book? When this happens it seems that a rules is "core" and I'm missing it somehow.

We all see complaints from the other end of the spectrum. People get angry if there isn't rules support for new systems in subsequent products. If you don't want to use incarnum, the tomes, dragon magic, or other new systems, nothing is stopping you from simply excluding them from your campaign. Other people who do use these systems get frustrated, however, if nothing new is made to keep them fresh an in line with the rest of the game.

Part of the problem is inter-group pressure. Some people feel pressured to cave in to player requests to play anything and everything. As a game designer, I tend to allow almost everything because it's my job to keep up with new things, but for people who just want to have fun, they should set a comfort level for material and stick to it.

Companies must continue to put out books because if they don't, they will collapse. WotC puts out books that consumers buy, so if something is popular, they continue to make it. That said, you only need to use what appeals to you and your group. You don't need to use any of the other things, you don't have to allow new feats for PHB classes, you don't have to allow players to select items from the MIC. It's all completely in the hands of the DM. I understand that all of the new options mean that people who do like to keep up with this stuff have more work to do, but that's a necessary part of any pursuit that is continuing to expand.

 

[Presto2112]

I think "Rules Bloat" is easily remedied. Just limit the books.

We just stuck to the one core magic system for one thing. That certainly helped.

And I don't consider feat and spell additions as "new rules". They're more like addenda to existing rules. Making sure that players have word-for-word copies of any feats that do not appear in the PHB helps a little.

As cool as some rules might be (ie. Skill tricks), sometimes it just isn't worth the hassle.

 

[Obergnom]

I do think there is an options bloat for sure. Creating a player character or a really good npc can take ages.

That said, rules bloat? Not so much. Maybe they should write a bold Optional above every extra rule though...

oh, with one thing there is a rules bloat: Skills. That is ridiculous. I do not know how many of you know crystalkeep. They have got archives for feats, spells, prcl and skill uses. Open the skill uses pdf... it has about 70 pages. 70! There goes half of the rules compendium

 

[amethal]

My current character is

a binder (from Tome of Magic)
with an apprentice feat (DMG 2)
and some luck feats (Complete Scoundrel)
some unusual magic items (Magic Items Compendium)
some skill tricks (Complete Scoundrel again)

I am using all the vestiges I can find (Dragon Magic, WotC website, the issue of Dragon which had Kas and Primus)
including the psionic ones (WotC website, Expanded Psionics Handbook)

It looks like a nightmare of rules bloat, but none of this is the DMs problem. Its up to me to keep track of it all, not the DM.

Of course, its different where the DM doesn't trust his players, but lots of things about the game become different under those circumstances.

And I wouldn't recommend the above character to a novice player. My first 3rd edition character was an Elf sorcerer with nothing that wasn't in the Players Handbook, and I'd happily play another one. However, I like having the options available for when I feel like trying them out.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

No. It's suffering from gamers with poor impulse control and little common sense.

Allowance for rules bloat is optional and depends on the group. There are some people who love all of the options and there are people who don't. The only people who seem to have a problem with rules bloat are the ones who don't like the options or the way that they are implemented.

So those people should find away to streamline their game or play another game, but trying to rally the troops against a game that a fair amount of people here like and still play seems antagonistic and a little passive aggressive at best.

And the C&C or True 20 pimping starts in 3...2...1...

 

[Jedi_Solo]

I will agree with what others have above:

Rules bloat? Not so much.

Options bloat? Yes.

And while the term "bloat" makes it sound negative - I like the multitude of options I have. I like having new classes, PrCs and feats so I, for one, don't have a problem with this "Options Bloat".