Spell Compendium and other limitations

[MarauderX]

With the proliferation of spells, feats, classes and PrCs, have other DMs ruled out whole books simply because they are new or generally overpowered? The more I read of books like Spell Compendium, Book of Nine Swords and the PHB II, I am wondering if it is worth the review.

I find that I need to review each aspect separately, and that rarely can a whole book be added to a campaign. Do you find it easier to toss out whole books so that players know some limitations? I am hesitant to do so, as I like options, but the amount of material produced makes for waaay more options for the PCs than the DM that doesn't wish to take time out researching and using it for the BBEGs.

Wizards will keep going with more available content... will you add it all to your campaign?

 

[blargney the second]

Wizards will keep going with more available content... will you add it all to your campaign?

Yup.

 

[Blue]

I started the campaign with a set number of books - core and complete. I have let the new complete books in (since we're playing with complete), and spell compendium makes things easier not harder, but all the new books, no.

On the other hand, I play in an FR game where the DM lets everything except psionics and other campaign settings it. It's a clusterfreak.

Cheers,
=Blue(23)

 

[Corsair]

On the other hand, there is no way you'll ever be USING everything from every book. With four players, at most you'll have 4 or 5 prestige classes, a couple dozen feats, and some spells to review.

If a new book comes out, you don't need to pass judgment on it until one of your players wants something from it. And even then, you only need to approve the one PrC or feat that he wants at that time. You needn't allow the whole book sight unseen.

 

[the Jester]

As a dm, I review everything on a case by case basis.

I will never simply allow everything in from a given company or book based on the simple fact that "it must be okay because it's official" or anything like that, but I also don't ban things simply because they're from weird sources. Like I said, it all needs review.

Now, from what I've seen, Bo9S makes the baseline fighter obsolete, so I don't use it. On the other hand, the feats from PH2 make high-level baseline fighters more viable, so I let them in. And so forth.

 

[Psion]

I allow new materials in on a case-by-case basis. There are certain thing I am NOT looking for. New base classes are a hard sell for me, as are new magic systems. I just feel like there is a finite limit of those with keeping the campaign consistent.

Feats, PrCs, spells, and magic items are easier to add without compromising the internal consistency of the game, but I still try to only pull those elements in where they fit.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm allowing a lot of new stuff from WotC. Here is my "ban" list

* Forgotten Realms Specific Stuff (its an Eberron game)
* Incarnum (don't own the book)
* Tome of Magic/Tome of Battle (no new magic sets)
* Unearthed Arcana (this is RAW D&D)

A couple of banned feats (disciple of the sun), classes (erudite), and PrCs (frenzied beserker) later, I have a fully functional D&D game.

 

[delericho]

For any given campaign, I produce a list indicating which supplements are allowed (and, if necessary, which parts of those supplements are allowed). Anything else is banned, and if a new book is published while the campaign is running, it remains banned until the campaign winds up and we do something else instead.

When compiling the 'allowed' list, I consider a number of factors, including stated player preference, the nature of the campaign, and so forth. I absolutely will not allow the use of a book I don't personally own (since I own far more books than any of my players, that's not currently an issue, but even if that were not the case the rule would be the same).

As far as spells (in particular) are concerned, I have ruled that the only spells that exist are the ones in the PHB and the Spell Compendium (and, occasionally, the Complete Book of Eldritch Might). That one is out of a desire for simplicity... and also to cut down on the number of books I have to carry to a game session. I plan on doing the same with Magic Items when that compendium becomes available, and will do similar things with other areas as new compendia are published.

 

[theredrobedwizard]

My players understand that I'm a better powergamer/munchkin than they are, so they rarely go fishing through books to find super-powered combos. There's a quite spoken truce between DM and PCs; if they don't overly powergame, neither will I.

That being said, there's only one thing I've banned at this point from all games I run - the Favored Soul. I use the Mystic from Dragonlance instead; it goes along with the dichotomy of Wizard/Sorcerer.

-TRRW

 

[MarauderX]

On the other hand, there is no way you'll ever be USING everything from every book. With four players, at most you'll have 4 or 5 prestige classes, a couple dozen feats, and some spells to review.

If a new book comes out, you don't need to pass judgment on it until one of your players wants something from it. And even then, you only need to approve the one PrC or feat that he wants at that time. You needn't allow the whole book sight unseen.

When characters die and new ones are brought in at high levels there is a lot of material that can come into play. Currently I'm running two concurrently - one at 19th level, the second at 2nd level. Players are already planning out their PCs for upper levels based on what is allowed and what is not.

I've been doing it case-by-case as it comes up, as I like variety as much as the next DM. I'm mildly concerned that some things may contradict others or that the line is so fine that it's hard to draw between one item and the next. It's not that I'm inundated with requests, it's that I seek consistancy in the game and my homebrew campaign world.