Yep...
fusangite said:
In my view, any rule, class, monster, feat, etc. is going to be a function of the world in which the game is set. In my campaigns, it would be unprecedented for all the core classes to be available, never mind all the other materials people could drag into the game. My general policy is that if a player comes to me with something described in a non-core book, I review the particular prestige class, rule or whatever it is and determine if it will be compatible with the specific world in which my game is running. The answer is "no" about 70% of the time.
My approach is very similar. In my most recent campaign, I allowed only core PHB classes, the monk and the paladin were pseudo-PrCs, stirrups didn't exist and most high medieval arms and armor where unknown (greatsword, plate armors, heavy lance, etc). Players were free to request additions/changes, but understood that I wouldn't approve things that didn't fit within the flavor of the campaign. My requirements were: Bring me the source and make a case for it (beyond "I think it is neato").
I didn't have many requests, but actually approved about 75% of the ones I did get, including revising the Sorcerer's PC to the Monte Cook version from Eldritch Might I.
I think limitations on a campaign are perfectly fine. In the 23 years I have been involved with D&D, I have never felt that campaign limitations limited my enjoyment of the game (as either a player or GM), provided:
(1) They are understood ahead of time by both the players and GM. As long as there is agreement and buy-in by all parties from the outset, there shouldn't be an issue. If a player isn't comfortable with restrictions on a campaign, that's fine...different strokes for different folks - they probably should find a different game to play in. As a GM, however, I feel no compunction to approve that latest twinked out half-dragon shadowdancer/assassin/archmage PrC because a player thinks its "kewl" and that his/her enjoyment and/or PC development will be stunted if they can't have access to it.
(2) Requests are treated evenly (no favoring one players).
(3) Requests are given a fair hearing (no automatic "no").
With the veritable explosion of version 3.x material, a very busy life, limited review/prep/playing time and no desire to load my shelves with gaming books that I will never use or only pull 1 or 2 items from (like I did in the 2E days), designing a campaign with limitations works for me and the players that have chosen to be a part of my campaign. Again, not for everyone - but reasonable with the caveats above.
~ Old One
