Setting guide changes: Permit Complete Warrior?

[Emiricol]

I think as long as we have the setting guide revision going on we can discuss this now Two items to discuss...

#1) I'd like to change our wording from including Sword & Fist etc to be including "official 3.5 WotC class books".

#2) I hate the old class books and would love to just ditch official support for Sword & Fist and so on. If we still want to include Sword & Fist and so on, we could say "official 3.0 and 3.5 class books" in #1 above.

 

[Silverglass]

I think as long as we have the setting guide revision going on we can discuss this now Two items to discuss...

#1) I'd like to change our wording from including Sword & Fist etc to be including "official 3.5 WotC class books".

#2) I hate the old class books and would love to just ditch official support for Sword & Fist and so on. If we still want to include Sword & Fist and so on, we could say "official 3.0 and 3.5 class books" in #1 above.

Well as we have officially "moved" to 3.5 the simple fact is that the splat books such as Sword and Fist are no longer compatible.

Although I haven't got them yet (I'm saving up to buy and take them to Tunisia with me in the summer) from what I have heard Complete Warrior and Complete Divine do in general take the nerf stick to some of the previously broken things (the new Monkey Grip is fine, no more TWF with greataxes).

But they do seem to have added some new broken PrC's so we need to emphasis that the "officially added" parts of the books do not include the PrC's and they still need case by case approval.

So when we say "official 3.5 WotC class books" we need to be specific about excluding the automatic introduction of all PrC's and also to exclude the Miniatures Handbook from blanket inclusion because there are things in it that are only balanced in a miniatures game and have terrible synergies with a normal campaign.

 

[Emiricol]

I agree with the miniature handbook. I have no problem with the PrC provision, since all our PrCs are custom (or customized) anyway.

 

[DMEntropy]

I agree with the plan to include Complete Warrior without the PrC's. For the most part I am finding myself thinking one of two things when I look at the PrC's in the splat books. Either a "not in MY campaign" reaction comes out or "that is just stupid", not much in between.

 

[Northman]

There are so many books now, I think we either try to keep the official game to a few books, or open the floodgates and just allow them all. If we do that then our policy of a DM centered environment is more important. Players need to be more careful about having DMs go over their characters before they play. There's more chance of offensive material in their PC.

I would just be for saying that all 3.5 books are approved, and then come up with a banned list, like Monkey Grip. Prestige classes may be an exception since we want them to be flavored up first and fit into our world.

What do you think of making it that easy?

 

[Emiricol]

I'm fine with just saying that all *WotC* 3.5 books are approved, with the exception of the miniature handbook which I feel isn't focused on the RPG aspect, but rather, bringing a bit of D&D into the minatures game, and therefore suffers as an acceptable 3.5 source for D&D.

 

[Emiricol]

EDIT: Actually, I think I like your first idea better. We can just add Complete books as they come out, and scrutinize the rest before adding. So only the Complete books would default to being approved sources.

 

[Northman]

That means that most of us need to buy most books to be able to evaluate them. I'm not really up for that. I've cut back on my D&D buying these days.

On a side note, I love the Miniatures Handbook. I guess I see it differently. I'm always looking at new books to see what new ideas they come up with. I think there's lots of good ones in there. I don't care about the second half of the book that goes into miniatures rules. But if you don't like certain feats or spells or whatever from that book, then you put that on your game posts. "Material from the Minatures book not allowed."

I just don't know that we have to make it all that complicated.

 

[Emiricol]

Good point. I'm ok with the idea then. If no one disagrees, it can go in the guidelines after the setting guide is updated

 

[DMEntropy]

Sounds like a good plan to me.