Is D&D getting too powerful?

[Mordane76]

...It has just gotten more and more video-game-like over the years. Less LotR, more Gauntlet or Diablo.

This statement right here is where I think the "too powerful argument" comes from. I feel the exact same way -- when I want to hack countless hordes and take their stuff, I feel like I should be playing a video game, or a specifically stated hack-n-slash dungeon crawl. When I want to game, I feel like there should be something more... tangible and real in the motivations, beyond just killing it and taking its stuff.

Originally posted by DocMoriartty
...Munchkin to me in simply 1 dimensional characters.

I must partially disagree with your definition of "munchkin," but I do agree with the sentiment -- I don't like characters like this either. However, the rules allow for this sort of advancement; some would argue they even encourage it. Sometimes players just don't know better; I have a few in my group like this, who are fairly new to the whole shing-dig, or are new to the "character beyond the numbers" idea. I went through it too when I was new to the whole concept, and I think a lot of gamers just grow out of this style with the proper coaching.



I think another facet of the whole "power" argument comes from different stylistic approaches. For some, 3E is fine -- it does what they want it to do right out of the box. For others, the advancement is too fast for our tastes, and hence it feels like an arms race with the players, where special abilities and magical items are constantly escalating demands of the DM to challenge the players.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I have to agree with the sentiment expressed about prestige classes. I let a player play a Fate Spinner (T&B) before. It wasn't overpowered or anything like that, but then I thought...

Why the hell am I letting him be a fate spinner!?

There wasn't a need for it! I'm going to be as picky with prestige classes as I am with monsters, from now on.

 

[Hammerhead]

You people are funny.

 

[s/LaSH]

I think anyone who wants to can run it low-powered with the core rulebooks. Who says XP has to be explained by the DM? I don't explain it - I don't even award it. I award levels, and only when I want to.

I also find it disappointing that the core three rulebooks don't supply any way for a necromancer to reliably raise a million-strong army of undead, or create a flying mountain. Both of which are things mages should be able to do, but can't. Bah. Too powerful? It can handle underpowered, but it's nowhere close to overpowered.

(Yes, I realise the ELH could probably help there, but that's no excuse. I've got an entire homebrew system, 90 pages worth, which can levitate mountains or raise legions of undead, provided you're good enough. If only they'd developed a better spellcasting system...)

 

[Felon]

I have to agree with the sentiment expressed about prestige classes. I let a player play a Fate Spinner (T&B) before. It wasn't overpowered or anything like that, but then I thought...

Why the hell am I letting him be a fate spinner!?

There wasn't a need for it! I'm going to be as picky with prestige classes as I am with monsters, from now on.

LOL...yeah, why should you as the DM allow a player to play a prestige class--one that you don't actually have a problem with--just because he might enjoy it? There isn't a NEED for players to have a rich gaming experience after all...

Fewer options, more rigid structure...just what D&D should get back to

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Fewer options, more rigid structure...just what D&D should get back to

Actually, the idea of Prestige Classes is to add depth and detail to a campaign world. The first question a DM could ask himself when considering a Prestige Class is What does this add to the campaign world? If the answer isn't suitable, then no more consideration need be given to the matter, nor should any explaination other than "it doesn't fit the campaign" be required.

After all, Prestige Classes are an option, just as you indicate. However, like it or not, the bottom line is that they are a DM's option. A DM may very well let his players take any Prestige Class they like, but that's the decision he's made, not one that the players can make for him (unless, of course, they bully him into it, in which case I pity the DM for having such gawd awful friends and thank the stars for the wonderful players I've aquired over the years).

 

[Mouseferatu]

Absolutely. D&D does not do a good job at supporting elaborate plots, complex mysteries, arduous journeys, taut suspense, or moral shades of grey.

Funny. Those are almost all I run. I don't like dungeon crawls or hack-n-slash games all that much.

And I use D&D to do it.

And it works fine, with only a very few selected tweaks.

It's not hard to cut down the amount of magic. You make magic items rarer, you make spells harder to find, and you just lower the CR of your foes by 1 or 2. So long as you pay attention to what you're doing, and don't choose opponents that require massive amounts of magic to overcome, it works just fine.

 

[Technik4]

Prestige Classes

Prestige Classes are a DM option thing. But look at this, lets say I play in a FR campaign. I have made it a point to own every FR book that has come out, partly because of a completist mentality, partly because I think they are well written books. If I feel that I want to make a character aspire to a certain type of prestige class, what right does my DM have telling me no?

I'm not taking this from a bully perspective, I'm just wondering "why not?". If I make a mage from Cormyr, make a point of keeping in contact with some wizards back home, and want to take Cormyr Battlemage, what defense does the DM have in saying "no"?

In this way, I think that while prcs are described as "DM option", they really aren't. They are an interesting specialization aspect that sells books.

Technik

 

[Valiantheart]

*sigh* D20 Modern seems superior on so many levels to 3E D&D. You have your attack bonuses balanced with defense levels. Alignment that is actually a roleplaying tool instead of a restriction. A balanced class and weapon system. Lots of feats. And the emphasis on Advanced Classes actually make sense instead of the power gaming aspects of D&D PrCs.

Wish I could find somebody who played it

 

[Felon]

Actually, the idea of Prestige Classes is to add depth and detail to a campaign world.

That's one idea behind them. Another is to expand player options beyond the core classes.

The first question a DM could ask himself when considering a Prestige Class is What does this add to the campaign world? If the answer isn't suitable, then no more consideration need be given to the matter, nor should any explaination other than "it doesn't fit the campaign" be required.[/B]

Right, a DM's only considerations should be his narcissistic involvement with his campaign world. No thought should be given to the enjoyment of the players. If they ask if they can explore some new options, just give them a smug, officious look as you continue to drone on reading boxed text.

Now, THAT is some old-school DMing skillz there lol.