Savage Species- is there something wrong with me!?

[Yeoman]

And as for my 2 cents, Savage Species is already a great asset to my group. We had been looking for a way to integrate monsters into a party from level 1 on, and the monster classes do that trick well. The section on rituals is also a nice asset for a different group I'm in, that likes things like that. I've already got a guy asking to play a janni, and he'd be starting at 3rd or 4th and now I can work him in with no problem.

Just out of curiousity, what monsters from the book do you consider too exotic, or over the top, if you don't mind me asking?

 

[Arnwyn]

*shrug* As other posters have noted, it's simply giving more tools for DMs and players to use. If people want to play such things, then why not make a book that helps them out (and, of course, makes money)?

That said, there's no way I'm ever getting this book. I went through it and it's laugh-out-loud bad for my group and our particular play style. I, personally, am indeed disconnected from what (the majority of?) gamers want nowadays - and have been for quite a while. Seeing what books are being produced sometimes - I say thank god I am disconnected. *shudder*

 

[Sagan Darkside]

I am 26 and I feel old. It feels like WOTC is turning DnD into another round of Magic. How could they ever have thought that the races in Savage Species would be something that a GM would allow players to use!?

Err, I am 26, and I find the book very useful. There are many monsters in there I would allow people to play- and I am the dm.

What GM in their right mind would ever allow an air elemental PC!

In 2nd edition I played an air elemental lord trapped in a human body- it would have been great to have rules to use.

Am I too old and disconnected from what people really want these day? It certainly feels like it. That book is great for munchkins, but I want something that could be useful for mature groups.

Gee- it is a shame I am not as mature as you, but perhaps I just actually read the book?

Useful for munchkins? Have you seen most of the ECL's suggested? Any munchkin worth his salt is not going to waste their time on it.

The monster classes could be abused if a person could multiclass with them before finishing them up, but they can't. So- it is not a problem.

I did not like the PrC's in the book (since they just seemed to be an "ulta" version of the monster.

It is a good tool book- I recommend it to dm's. You don't need to use it for players- you can use it to make more detailed monster opponents.

SD

 

[megamania]

I only got the book yesterday and haven't fully read it yet but I see few problems with it. It's more of it's not what you expected. This dosen't make it wrong or bad.

Using your example of an air elemental. Would your players ever what to do such a campaign? Travel to the plane of air? Play Darksun where elemental and creature versions are common?

Use the book as it was ment to be used. Don't dis it because it dosen't fit into your current understanding of your campaign.

 

[jester47]

BelenUmeria

Read the book cover to cover. Don't just flip through it. You obviously missed the part about making monster classes which is pretty easy for most of the standard races. Look at page 12. Table 2-2. Look at page 16, Table 2-3. Then read 25 - 28 and apply those techniques to the races you want classes for.

The most important part of this book is the first 28 pages, Chapters 1-3. If you do not read those pages, you will not understand the value of the book, which IMO is considerable.

I highly suggest that everyone not make assumptions and read the first 3 chapters. And knowing how gamers look at gaming books, I am pretty sure most skip the front.

Aaron.

 

[DonAdam]

The 1st level Hound Archon, for its level, is the most unbelievably broken class I've ever seen in a published product. Compare it to the Hengeyokai in OA.

Now flip over to the Pixie. You get ALOT of powers in 5 levels. Now go to the thread on the Wizards board where they are discussing this. They're adding more.

Having looked at the Pixie, go over to the Nixie. Tell me, with a straight face, that there's only a 1 level difference between these two. The nixie is pathetic, while the pixie may as well start applying for divine powers in any non-hack&slash group.

I'm reminded of when S&F came out. Everyone complained about the Mercurial Greatsword (like everything else). The author's response? "Some weapon has to be the best."

No it doesn't. The very idea of game balance is that nothing is the best, just different or best at one particular thing. The SS classes leave that idea of game balance naked and feeling used on the side of the road curled up in the fetal position. The book isn't even balanced with itself, much less the core rules.

 

[Sagan Darkside]

90% of GMs out there will never allow a player to use the book.

Was there a poll I missed?

It seems to me that from a lot of the postings in this topic- that you would be wrong.

SD

 

[bwgwl]

in this thread:
http://boards.wizards.com/rpg/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=231;t=000010

thanks muchly.

 

[jester47]

The more I play role playing games the more I come to the belief that game balance has no place in them as the situations are not finaite like one finds in board games or card games. I play to the status quo ("you want to go attack Smaug at 1st level? Ok, be my guest, you might get lucky...") and every character starts off at the lowest level possible (monster class or ECL). So when you loose your 13th level fighter your next character is yes, level 1, and must fit the versimilitude of the camapign. However there are demons and dragons and yaunti and such that the players can take on in higher level campaigns. It all works out when you DONT cater to character level, at least in my XP.

Aaron.

 

[Piratecat]

All I know is that I want my flumph monk, and I want him NOW.