The Best & Worst of 3rd Edition: WotC Player Supplements (Winners Announced)

[Reynard]

Hero Builder's Guidebook I did NOT LIKE 43.52%

I don't know why this book gets so much flak, other than the fact that it isn't crunchy. As far as introducing new and old players alike to the concepts core to D&D 3E characters, it is perfect -- and it underscores that there is more to the PC than his stats from the very get go.

 

[Imaro]

I don't know why this book gets so much flak, other than the fact that it isn't crunchy. As far as introducing new and old players alike to the concepts core to D&D 3E characters, it is perfect -- and it underscores that there is more to the PC than his stats from the very get go.

Yeah, I agree with your sentiments. I found it a great resource for new players I was introducing to the game. Two reasons I think it gets as much flak as it does is because...

1. Most D&D players really have been playing the game for a long time and don't necessarily need something like this.

2. It's value does depreciate even for new players as they become more familiar with the game.

The counterpoint I think to the above...is that it was a relaively cheap buy.

 

[Creamsteak]

I seem to have disliked most of the recent products. After Complete Divine/Arcane/Warrior/Adventurer, I was pretty much satisfied with my player-based supplements. I "wanted" to like the races series, but only Stone and Eberron really worked for me. I really wanted to like Wild/Destiny/Dragon, but just can't.

Complete Psionics shouldn't have disappointed me, but it did. That was amazing.

I'm somewhat saddened that none of the "series" were 100% hits with me. Of the terrain books, I didn't like the Deserts. Of the monster books (starting with the excellent Draconomicon) I was pleased I guess, but I havn't seen all of them.

 

[TerraDave]

The Adventures and Locations poll is here:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=216185

 

[jaerdaph]

Thanks! These threads of yours are pretty fun.

Yeah, Dave - these are great.

 

[Mistwell]

Why do people like Complete Scoundrel? I found it nearly useless...

 

[TerraDave]

Inspired by a comment by creamstake in a nother poll, I am doing a different ranking this time.

This is by the % of voters who liked a product that voted for that product. Top and bottom five in bold.

Player's Handbook II I LIKED 0.8881988
Complete Arcane I LIKED 0.8680556
Complete Adventurer I LIKED 0.8484848
Complete Warrior I LIKED 0.8322148
Complete Mage I LIKED 0.7886179
Tome and Blood: A Guidebook to Wizards and Sorcerers I LIKED 0.7391304
Heroes of Horror I LIKED 0.7238095
Complete Scoundrel I LIKED 0.6696429
Complete Divine I LIKED 0.6086957
Sword and Fist: A Guidebook to Monks and Fighters I LIKED 0.575
Masters of the Wild: A Guidebook to Barbarians, Druids, and Rangers I LIKED 0.559633
Heroes of Battle I LIKED 0.5568182
Savage Species I LIKED 0.5390625
Races of Stone I LIKED 0.5135135
Stronghold Builder's Guidebook I LIKED 0.5102041
Planar Handbook I LIKED 0.5046729
Defenders of the Faith: A Guidebook to Clerics and Paladins I LIKED 0.490566
Song and Silence: A Guidebook to Bards and Rogues I LIKED 0.4774775
Complete Champion I LIKED 0.4526316
Races of the Wild I LIKED 0.4245283
Races of the Dragon I LIKED 0.38
Complete Psionic I LIKED 0.3425926
Races of Destiny I LIKED 0.254386
Hero Builder's Guidebook I LIKED 0.1666667

 

[Shade]

Why do people like Complete Scoundrel? I found it nearly useless...

Skill tricks alone made it worth the price of admission.

 

[RangerWickett]

Skill tricks alone made it worth the price of admission.

You mean those things GMs should let their players do anyway because they're cool, even if the rules don't support them?

 

[Shade]

You mean those things GMs should let their players do anyway because they're cool, even if the rules don't support them?

Yep. Sometimes having the rule to lean on can persuade the less innovative/receptive DM.