races of destiny --has D&D 3.5 jumped the shark?

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Well, that gets us up to two. I'll take a guess and suggest that MM2, Fiend Folio, and the other (3.0?3.5) Arms and Equipment Guide also didn't have prestige classes (I don't have these books so I don't know for sure).

Any others? Out of all the WOTC supplements, are there only five without an obligatory prestige class?

Stronghold Builder's Guide
Book of Challenges
Enemies and Allies

A real list of blockbusters... Mere chance these are on the list as well?

 

[JoeGKushner]

Stronghold Builder's Guide
Book of Challenges
Enemies and Allies

A real list of blockbusters... Mere chance these are on the list as well?

Don't forget the Hero Builder's Handbook.

Heck, let's throw in the screen and character sheets! Or the map books man, the man books!

And I hate to say it, but either the Fiend Folio or MMII (I suspect the former) has PrCs in them. Fiends of Corruption, Fiends of Possession, etc...

 

[Turjan]

Slight nitpick: Urban = from a city; Urbi = City.

Every year the Pope issues a bill called Urbi et Orbi, i.e. The City and The World.

If you nitpick, then: Urbi = for the city (or similar cases); Urbs = city

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

wow

6 pages of responses...

OK, I apologise to anyone who thinks that 'jumping the shark' is a tired, wornout phrase. I heard it for the first time a few months ago. In any case, it certainly accomplished its purpose -- plenty of people read this thread.

On the subject of railroading -- yes, I know what railroading is. And the setup Andy Collins presents does railroad the players.

It assumes a priori that the critter has successfully become familiar with the PCs tactics. That's not fair to the PCs, because in practice doing so would have entailed risk on the part of the critter.

For example, if the critter attempted to charm one of the pcs friends to get this information, it runs the risk of the friend making it's saving throw, or of someone seeing the charm attempt, or of the PCs seeing the new magical aura (of the charm spell) on the friend, or of the charm spell wearing off, or of the friend causually mentioning the critter's interest in the lives of the PCs to them.

But the encounter assumes none of this happens.

Encounters like this are bad because they give players a disincentive to be careful. Why should players be paranoid, take measures to protect themselves, etcetera if the DM is just going to hand-wave them away for the sake of his narrative?

But, back to the subject.

In my opinion, D&D doesn't need any new monsters, or any new races. There are already far more than any of us can use.

I think WoTC should shift its focus to providing support for a campaign world. Why isn't the energy spent writing up human-like-guys-with-glowing-runes-revolving-around-their-heads instead spent making decent maps of the city of Sharn? I would much rather see WoTC produce a sourcebook on the railroads of Ebberon than something like 'Races of Destiny'.

We don't need more monsters. We need more detail on the ones we have.
We don't need more campaign settings. We need more detail on the ones we have.
We don't need more prestige classes. Instead of a new prestige class, why doesn't WoTC create a short adventure which a rogue has to complete to take the first level in the ShadowDancer prestige class, for example?

Ken McKinney

 

[JoeGKushner]

We don't need more monsters. We need more detail on the ones we have.
We don't need more campaign settings. We need more detail on the ones we have.
We don't need more prestige classes. Instead of a new prestige class, why doesn't WoTC create a short adventure which a rogue has to complete to take the first level in the ShadowDancer prestige class, for example?

Ken McKinney

Why should WoTC handle this? Mongoose has their Slayer's Guides, Goodman Games has their Complete Guide To series, and of course we have Dragon Magazine and it's Ecology of.

I hear what you're saying, but apparently more people prefer crunch.

 

[MerricB]

On the subject of railroading -- yes, I know what railroading is. And the setup Andy Collins presents does railroad the players.

No, you most definitely do not.

How you get the idea that because the illumian has researched the party's tactics with NPCs makes the encounter railroading is beyond me. By your criteria, every single adventure ever created is railroaded (including your own), because you've made assumptions about what the NPCs have done. It should always contain risk - thus the NPCs should always be defeated before the PCs even meet them.

And, if you have a paranoid party who keep their tactics secret, why on earth can't you change that one line of the encounter?

Heck, just change it to a few divination spells if the idea of charming NPCs offends you so much.

 

[Desdichado]

In my opinion, D&D doesn't need any new monsters, or any new races. There are already far more than any of us can use.

I need more. Just because there's a lot out there doesn't mean I want to use all of it. The more stuff that's released, the better chance that more things I actually will want to use will come out of it.

We don't need more monsters. We need more detail on the ones we have.
We don't need more campaign settings. We need more detail on the ones we have.
We don't need more prestige classes. Instead of a new prestige class, why doesn't WoTC create a short adventure which a rogue has to complete to take the first level in the ShadowDancer prestige class, for example?

Because, who would want that? Sorry, but just about the only things I'm in the market for these days are more monsters, more campaign settings, and to a lesser extent, more prestige classes. I need new ideas and mechanics to implement those ideas. I don't need adventures (and if I do, I'd rather get Dungeon anyway), or fluff, or detail on Eberron railways. The kinds of products you describe I wouldn't buy. Apparently I'm not alone according to WotC market research. That's why they're making what they are and not what they're not.

 

[Voodoo]

6 pages of responses...

In my opinion, D&D doesn't need any new monsters, or any new races. There are already far more than any of us can use.

I think WoTC should shift its focus to providing support for a campaign world. Why isn't the energy spent writing up human-like-guys-with-glowing-runes-revolving-around-their-heads instead spent making decent maps of the city of Sharn? I would much rather see WoTC produce a sourcebook on the railroads of Ebberon than something like 'Races of Destiny'.

We don't need more monsters. We need more detail on the ones we have.
We don't need more campaign settings. We need more detail on the ones we have.
We don't need more prestige classes. Instead of a new prestige class, why doesn't WoTC create a short adventure which a rogue has to complete to take the first level in the ShadowDancer prestige class, for example?

Ken McKinney

But surely there are enough stories that can be crafted just using humans? Who needs elves, dragons or goblins? OK maybe this is overstaing the case, but when I get a new book I look through it and new creatues give me ideas for adventures. I don't think i'll ever use all of them but I like to have them there to inspire me. If you don't want more monsters dont buy the MM3.

As for campaign settings theres FR and Eberron (seeing as Greyhawk isn't really supported). Both of which are supported quite well i feel, FR has over a dozen s3rd/3.5 sourcebooks.

As for WoTC producing specialised solo adventures for individual PrCs, this just doesn't seem well thought out. As a seperate product its market is so small it just wouldn'y be viable. A whole book of such adventures could possibly work, but I again doubt theres the market. Solo adventure mid-campaign are fine if you can meet up midweek, but if you play one evening a week the other players are going to get really bored as a entire session (or more) doesn't involve them. Even if these short adventures were for the party and the character looking to take the PrC then you have new problems, the rogue may not want to alert the entire party that he's becoming a guild thief. Whats more if you have a party of 5th level characters all wanting to do there PrC adventure either it will involve months of solo adventures or some players are going to be annoyed that since they have leveled once or more, compleating the rest of the partys adventures, they cannot enter their PrC at they level they wanted to. Taking into account that that PrC powers are ballanced by the level they can be entered at, there characters will also suffer in game balance.

 

[Uder]

First of all, these illumians (or whatever) just sound ridiculous. A race like humans, but with glowing runes revolving around their head? who needs that?

I'm not really fond of all the races that have appeared lately that basically "look like humans, act like humans, but have twinked stats for the class you want to play." It's not just WotC either.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I need more. Just because there's a lot out there doesn't mean I want to use all of it. The more stuff that's released, the better chance that more things I actually will want to use will come out of it.

I need new ideas and mechanics to implement those ideas.

Not a me too post but... See, I agree with Joshua here. I may not use anything from this book. But I like having the option of using it should I chose to do so.

Heck, should publishers have stopped making fantasy races after Mythic Races by Fantasy Flight? Should monsters stop after Creature Collection III?

The more options the GM and players have, the richer the game world can be.

At the opposite end of the spectrum, I full respect people who want only limited options and want more details on those options. I'm really enjoying the Black Company and it's lower magic base, humancentric world and may use many ideas from it in my game.

But those are all tools that GMs have to make for their own games. It's not going to be spoon fed to you and if it was, most people wouldn't want it. As the market indicates, people want game mechanics. Maybe that will change but until it does...