New Crunch: I done had enough of this stuff!!!
- Thread starter Halivar
- Start date
wayne62682
First Post
IMO I fail to see the problem.. I always hear this rubbish about new supplements doing this or that when I love them. If a new book comes out and I have a new character idea, why shouldn't I switch and play something I want that will let me have fun? Because it's stronger/better in some way than my old one? Granted, I do not do this often (gamed with someone who did once, it was quite annoying) but this seems to be more anti-sourcebook than anti-players changing characters.
Sourcebooks are good. They give players more options to make a character that fits the concept than resort to jury-rigging something using the PHB classes. I personally dislike to play Core only games anymore simply because it kills any creativity I have when making a character. Roleplaying aside, in a game like D&D you can't just SAY your character is an elemental wizard, for example, you need rules to back it up.
Sourcebooks are good. They give players more options to make a character that fits the concept than resort to jury-rigging something using the PHB classes. I personally dislike to play Core only games anymore simply because it kills any creativity I have when making a character. Roleplaying aside, in a game like D&D you can't just SAY your character is an elemental wizard, for example, you need rules to back it up.
Chimera
First Post
Halivar said:
My response to that nonsense;
"No, he doesn't. Like just about everyone in the world, he has an ounce of self-esteem. Maybe he even thinks he's the uber-****.
You're not simply having your character "walk off" and creating a new one every time you get a wild hair up your butt. If you want to work with me to create and introduce a new character, I'm willing to work with you. But half of that is playing this character to a place and time where you can reasonable 'retire' him into NPC status."
To everyone at the table "We don't do this here. You don't simply create and drop characters on a whim whenever you feel like it. Not in my game, not in any game that I play in. If you can't live with that, then thanks for playing and good luck with your next gaming group."
Particle_Man
Explorer
And then apparently with that group you are left with exactly one player as the rest walk off for real. 
I'd say with PHB II retraining rules, this should allow the "crunch" guys to reform their characters and the party to keep its continuity. Best of both worlds.
I'd say with PHB II retraining rules, this should allow the "crunch" guys to reform their characters and the party to keep its continuity. Best of both worlds.
Halivar,
I didn't have the "walk-off" problem, but some of the "solutions" advertised here were just as problematic.... continually adding on to a PC to power them up is symptomatic of a lot of 3.x games... especially now with 3.5 and all those d20 supplements flying around. As a DM I had to outlaw most material except for core, then I had to redefine "core" as players argued anything with a WOTC logo counted, and I still had half-dragon mages for pcs....
This is why I moved away from the whole 3.x path and embraced Castles & Crusades. The basic focus difference here is simple: older D&D and C&C=slower progression and WHO the characters are, 3.x and much "d20" logo material = fast progression and WHAT your character can do. Your players there are so fixated on the latter that they get caught up in the endless class, feats, templates and other junk that they never care WHO the character is, just what they can do, and that's why they get bored and want to change up.
I know, I know... people around these parts call me crazy and say 3.5 is balanced, it was 2e that was overpowered, etc... but there is something here no one wants to admit - WOTC (and this is bandied about ad nauseum on the 4e threads) is in this to SELL books... the game is indeed designed to progress characters rapidly so that DM's and players have to buy supplements to "improve" the characters or "balance" the encounters. Unless you markedly change the nature of XP and progression, characters almost always seem to go up a level per session early on, then it slows just a bit as you reach higher levels (at which point characters are adding prestige classes and templates to up the power quotient).
So Halivar, I invite you to turn from the Dark Side....
Check out other systems, including C&C, and find some players who aren't powergamers. Most of the posts here have no sympathy because they agree - and that's all cool, but it's not what you want obviously.
I do agree with the DM's responsibility here - although I find it interesting in context of the numerous other threads that argue for "DMless" D&D, giving Players more power over the game, or essentially all the DM should be is a "facilitator."
Sincerely,
John
I didn't have the "walk-off" problem, but some of the "solutions" advertised here were just as problematic.... continually adding on to a PC to power them up is symptomatic of a lot of 3.x games... especially now with 3.5 and all those d20 supplements flying around. As a DM I had to outlaw most material except for core, then I had to redefine "core" as players argued anything with a WOTC logo counted, and I still had half-dragon mages for pcs....
This is why I moved away from the whole 3.x path and embraced Castles & Crusades. The basic focus difference here is simple: older D&D and C&C=slower progression and WHO the characters are, 3.x and much "d20" logo material = fast progression and WHAT your character can do. Your players there are so fixated on the latter that they get caught up in the endless class, feats, templates and other junk that they never care WHO the character is, just what they can do, and that's why they get bored and want to change up.
I know, I know... people around these parts call me crazy and say 3.5 is balanced, it was 2e that was overpowered, etc... but there is something here no one wants to admit - WOTC (and this is bandied about ad nauseum on the 4e threads) is in this to SELL books... the game is indeed designed to progress characters rapidly so that DM's and players have to buy supplements to "improve" the characters or "balance" the encounters. Unless you markedly change the nature of XP and progression, characters almost always seem to go up a level per session early on, then it slows just a bit as you reach higher levels (at which point characters are adding prestige classes and templates to up the power quotient).
So Halivar, I invite you to turn from the Dark Side....
Check out other systems, including C&C, and find some players who aren't powergamers. Most of the posts here have no sympathy because they agree - and that's all cool, but it's not what you want obviously.
I do agree with the DM's responsibility here - although I find it interesting in context of the numerous other threads that argue for "DMless" D&D, giving Players more power over the game, or essentially all the DM should be is a "facilitator."
Sincerely,
John
bento
Explorer
I can see a couple of problems with class-hopping in MHO.
1) While players often read a new class and think its great, they don't fully comprehend all the rules that the new class feats bring. Does you game come to a halt when the player and DM have to read the class description a couple of times to be sure what they are doing is by the rules?
2) This constant addition of new characters totally disrupts any type of storyline in game. You can't build a world around a group of characters if they keep changing all the time.
Since you're just a player, take your complaints to your DM and see what their POV on this is. They may not care and then its up to you to continue or not. If the DM has a concern about this, one possible solution is penalizing players when they hit the "re-set" button, perhaps having their new character be one level less than everyone else.
If players stop character-hopping but still want to take new classes, suggest they multi-class then next time they obtain a level?
Good luck.
1) While players often read a new class and think its great, they don't fully comprehend all the rules that the new class feats bring. Does you game come to a halt when the player and DM have to read the class description a couple of times to be sure what they are doing is by the rules?
2) This constant addition of new characters totally disrupts any type of storyline in game. You can't build a world around a group of characters if they keep changing all the time.
Since you're just a player, take your complaints to your DM and see what their POV on this is. They may not care and then its up to you to continue or not. If the DM has a concern about this, one possible solution is penalizing players when they hit the "re-set" button, perhaps having their new character be one level less than everyone else.
If players stop character-hopping but still want to take new classes, suggest they multi-class then next time they obtain a level?
Good luck.
Agent Oracle
First Post
Yeah, it's your group. I've NEVER had a player walk-off. I've never even seen a player suicide.
Three things you could implement to reduce the walk offs:
1. DM must approve all new characters before their inclusion.
2. New characters must have a backstory with a number of pages equivalent to their level. (Times new roman, 12 point font. Single spaced.)
3. New characters resulting from walkoffs come back at previous character's level - 1.
Really, if they want to play "New" crunch, tell them to multiclass into it.
Three things you could implement to reduce the walk offs:
1. DM must approve all new characters before their inclusion.
2. New characters must have a backstory with a number of pages equivalent to their level. (Times new roman, 12 point font. Single spaced.)
3. New characters resulting from walkoffs come back at previous character's level - 1.
Really, if they want to play "New" crunch, tell them to multiclass into it.
I wish. But it's also the DM's fault for deciding to DM for powergamers, and for encouraging the quitting by allowing it. And what kind of boring characters must they have been playing if they could be enticed away from them so easily?Halivar said:
And yes, replacement characters should be at least a level less than the rest of the party.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
