Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Greg K" data-source="post: 1847098" data-attributes="member: 5038">Gez, I should have been more clear in my initial post (Heck, with the pain meds I was on when I typed the post, I am surprised that the post was much more coherent than I would have expected).Anyway, I should have wrote that my problems were:1. Lack of system changing alternatives.  Yes, UA and the DMG give some real alternatives to changing the system, but outside of these books such options such as replacing major aspects of the system are not given.  Examples of what I mean include Green Ronin's Skill and Feat system for Psychic Powers or  Unearthed Arcana's introduction of Armor as DR, replacing HP with WP/VP) that can really define a campaign.   Is it too much for a book called *Complete* Arcane to examine new magic systems like a skill and feat system or variations on the alternative spell point system (e.g., Defiling Magic or  dealing with extraplanar creatures as was presented in Second edition's PO: Spell and Magic) which can be used to redefine how magic works in a campaign?2)  The overuse of PrCs (which are listed as totally optional in the DMG) as a first resort in supplements while ignoring class variants via customizing the character which is right in the PHB (p.94/3.0 and p.110/3.5).  Many of the character concepts being introduced as Prc's are concepts that can be done with a few slight tweaks to a base class, a new specialist wizard by creating a new spell list ( e.g., the artificer, elementalist, force mage, geometer, mentalist, shadow mage, song mage, dimensional mage, forcemage, were all handled this way in PO: spells and Magic) or the occassional new base class.  UA did a good job of introducing several class variants for different classes on a single page,  compared to how many pages are wasted on PrCs in the various pages of the various splat books.  I would rather see PrCs as the last resort not the first one.3.  The non PrC, feat, spell material in the generic books has, imo, not been as useful as similar as their 2e counterparts on the subject.  Complete Warrior being an exception.  Based on the previews of Complete Arcane, it is shaping up to be in the former group despite Rich Baker being the author of PO: Spells and Magic which was an excellent book.4. I think most of the designers, with a few exceptions, provide more interesting work on DND products that are for Dragon Magazine, 3rd party products, and their own websites than they do for the official generic books. My same preference goes for many of the designers work on 2e related products.   It has been a while since I read MoP at a friend's store.  I know I thought most of it was a waste of space (and I tend to like Jeff Grub's stuff for previous editions), but I don't recall anything introduced that was more than a minor flavor change rather than a major change to the system (e.g., UA's introduction of Armor as DR, replacing HP with WP/VP, or the use of a spell point system).Since I wasn't clear in my inital post regardnig the type of changes I wanted, I will just give you my thoughts on what I would have preferred in the products you mentioned.DDG was a product that I thought was pretty much a waste of paper.  I didn't want a book on deity stats.  I wanted a book on building faiths, pantheons, unique clerics (e.g., cloistered clerics and divine defenders from UA), suggestions for tailoring spell lists for a cleric of a particuliar deity, and notes regarding vestments, etc for a particuliar deities clerics.  I found the 2e Complete Priest's Handbook, Faiths and Avatar's, and Priests and Pantheons much more useful and interesting than DDG (or either Defenders of the Faith and Complete Divine for that matter).As for both versions of the Psionic's Handbook they are banned from our gaming table.  I liked Bruce's work on several 2e products, but I thought the Psi Handbooks were disappointing.  I think that the Skill and Feat system developed by WOTC for Star Wars, but introduced into the DND system by Green Ronin for their Psychic Handbook was not only a much more system changing alternative to DND, the result was I think,  a much stronger and more interesting product.Finally, for Rokugan, another product that I found disappointing despite my like for many of James wyatt's articles for Dragon.  I liked the Sohei, Shaman, and for the most part the Samurai, but nothing else about the product was that good, imo.  I found the Martial Arts Mastery to be disappointing as were most of the MA feats.  I much would have preferred the introduction of the Brawling, Combat MA, and Defensive MA feats from d20 Modern and then having something similiar to RPG Objects Blood and Fist martial arts system.</blockquote>

Verification