Poll: Power creep in 3.5, how significant?

[EyeontheMountain]

With a boatload of new feats, skill uses, spells, and base classes that can be dipped into, yes a non-core is more versatile than a core, and more powerful.

Core is simple, and most feats give small bonuses to the character's power. Even power attack in core is not bad, it is when you add on 2-3 more feats, leap attack?) that it gets ridiculous. I do wish Natural SPell were not core though, the boost it gives druids in core is way way too much.

 

[MerricB]

It's worth noting that although PH2 significantly increases the power of high-level fighters, this is not power creep, but rather a adjustment to make them more comparable at high levels with other characters.

It is power creep when the most powerful character type becomes more powerful.

I think there is some power creep with the supplements, but it is not extensive.

Cheers!

 

[James Jacobs]

There is indeed power creep, and it can't be helped with each new book. It's not really a factor of new feats/spells/classes being "broken" (although there are certainly some that are), as much as it is the simple fact that each new book allows a player to further specialize his character. To pick an arbitrary number, of the various options in the Player's Handbook, say 50% of them are great for your character. That means the other 50% are sub-optimal. By adding additional non-core books to the mix, you widen the number of optimal choices for your character, and reduce the amount of sub-optimal choices you're forced to make.

Taken individually, in other words, the elements aren't necessarilly power creep. But the fact that each book adds so many new choices means that as a whole, a character built with all the books rather than just the core books is going to be stronger.

 

[Destil]

My three main issues:

1) There's broken stuff out there, but core has that as well (pollymorph, shapechange). Once you fix that you're left with points #2 & 3.

2) There's some power creep that is a good thing because it's improving underpowered options in core (more high level fighter feats in PHB II for instance).

3) Divine spellcasters. Am I right in that there's still no rule in the books that prevents a cleric from suddenly having access to every spell they put in a book? There is the unusal spell research option for divine casters in (or there was in 3.0), but has it ever been stated that this is required? Because if not then a cleric / druid becomes much better with every book they buy. Wizards are limited by only getting 2 spells / level for free and need research or to find scrolls or spellbooks. Sorcerers and bards (and psionic users) are limited in total spells known. But the cleric, druid and artifactor (because of UMD this is the class by far most likely to break in half when you allow more sources) become very problmatic if you allow new spells wholesale.

 

[Gundark]

I think there is some power creep with the supplements, but it is not extensive.

QFT

 

[Psion]

I went with choice #2, significant.

I might have gone with #3 before the publication of Bo9S.

 

[3catcircus]

Only a few books really are a problem.

Serpent kingdoms, for instance, is simply awful.

I don't mind the "power creep" introduced by the warblade and company, as I think the fighter as originally designed was too weak.

How do you figure Serpent Kingdoms is awful? The fact that every feat and prestige class has a prerequisite that eliminates them from being used by almost every PC of a "standard" race? Serpent Kingdoms is intended to be a DM-only book, for the most part. Players have no business using anything in it when creating or leveling their character.

Since it isn't a player book, I'd argue that it is one of the *best* books because it (given that each new book is an escalation in the arms race), levels the playing field somewhat.

 

[Thurbane]

I'm all for extra options; but the more sources of feats, races, classes, prestige classes, spells etc. that there are available, the more likely that they can be combined in unforeseen and potentially unbalanced ways. :\

IMG, the DM (whoever it is at the time) has the right to veto anything he feels detrimental or unbalancing to the overall game, and all of the players are happy to abide by this...

 

[Starglim]

There has been noticeable power creep in PCs from numerous introduced abilities and even more so in published monsters and challenges. Some books and specific additions are particularly significant and well recognised, but the problem is sufficiently widespread that it's likely to be difficult for any DM to control unless he's strict on a core-only policy.

 

[DragonLancer]

Voted for option #1. Theres a significant power creep once you start adding the non-core books from WotC. It's only understandable but the designers could have done better to balance them out.