Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CuRoi" data-source="post: 5634800" data-attributes="member: 98032">Isnt this something that has been going on for years anyway? Not saying it is a terrible idea, but how necessary is it? I've never sat down at a 1e-3.5e table and not had a DM give some sort of house rule or some way of controlling (or expanding) power levels in a game based on the individual tastes.   I run a "basic" 3.5 game where I just use the 3 core books. Anything from outside of that undergoes close scrutiny and possible adjustment for the power level of the game. Sure, I've had people actually say "you can't do that, anything from WotC is already balanced" to which I reply they may need to find a different game cause I just can't agree with them. I suppose I could even run a 3.5 game where I said Feats were out of the picture to sort of mimic earlier editions (probably need to make some serious changes to the Fighter class though...) Anyway, I also always evaluate monsters and encounters based on the party abilities as well using things like CR as simple guidelines. It's all just part of being the DM.  So, this is basically a way to monetize house rules? Just don't really get it. I have to agree too that balancing all of these modules would be precarious at best.  Also for this (from the article)"R&D would need to keep a close watch on those modules to stop them from proliferating" I'll definitely believe THAT when I see it if this system comes to fruition. They'll be printing as many of these "modules" as fast they can sell them.</blockquote>

Verification