The Tyranny of Choice

[Fishbone]

I like non-core stuff, thats what I've played for years, but I'd like to get back to the roots, know what I mean? It is just a real headache for a player, and especially the DM, at some point. Also, I'm burnt out on templates and silliness and party composition that looks like Monster Manuals 1-3, the environment books and a bunch of race books were put in The Party Blender(tm) and set to frappe.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I like non-core stuff, thats what I've played for years, but I'd like to get back to the roots, know what I mean? It is just a real headache for a player, and especially the DM, at some point. Also, I'm burnt out on templates and silliness and party composition that looks like Monster Manuals 1-3, the environment books and a bunch of race books were put in The Party Blender(tm) and set to frappe.

There's nothing wrong with a core-only game, for simplicity's sake, or just for changing the feel of things.

But do it for those reasons, not because choice is somehow inherently bad.

 

[an_idol_mind]

I think a core game is a great starting point. If you're overwhelmed by the choices in front of you, the core serves as a good way to pare down your choices to something managable. It's easy enough to build up from there, picking and choosing supplements as they seem to fit with your concept.

 

[TheGM]

I guess my wanting a core only game could be considered a bit of an overcorrection.

Nope. That's what I do. I'm harsh about it too. You want it for the zing-babs and the power-ups. Try ROLE PLAYING the type of character you want instead of thinking every single possible mutation needs a class.

My son, OTOH, loves the variety (he's 19, a regular here though he does not frequent this forum). He thinks I'm a stick-in-the-mud, and outright snorted when I moved almost all of my gaming worlds to C&C to get out of the "rat race" and stop having to tell Timmy why he didn't need a half demon berserker...

So to each his own. It has driven some of us completely away, but as long as people are finding a game they enjoy, I think it's all good.

Don.

 

[Pants]

I guess my wanting a core only game could be considered a bit of an overcorrection.

It's however you want to have fun.

Core only or every damn book out there. A Core only game would be great, there's still plenty of stuff I haven't done with just the PHB! But... with a Core only game... where would I get all those Kenku Beguilers and Elven Duskblade/Arcane Archers from?

 

[Psion]

In a way I agree. I disdain point buy systems for this reason and the glut of 20 level classes is insane to me.

But, I find that by choosing the set of options to draw from, the DM can both set the tone for the game and make its scope manageable.

 

[Cadfan]

Nope. That's what I do. I'm harsh about it too. You want it for the zing-babs and the power-ups. Try ROLE PLAYING the type of character you want instead of thinking every single possible mutation needs a class.

Excellent reasoning. "I do not like having so many choices. It confuses me. Therefore, YOU must play a core only character."

 

[Nightfall]

In a way I agree. I disdain point buy systems for this reason and the glut of 20 level classes is insane to me.

But, I find that by choosing the set of options to draw from, the DM can both set the tone for the game and make its scope manageable.

That and the fact it's better for the Dm and players to have choices than to just say "No you can't step out of this box!"

 

[Reynard]

But, I find that by choosing the set of options to draw from, the DM can both set the tone for the game and make its scope manageable.

I am going through base class selection right now for my Abyscor campaign setting (see sig link) and I like the fact that I have a large number (31 in just the books I own, plus variants) of base classes to choose from to create a list of PC classes. The addition of classes like the Scout, Knight and Swashbuckler ehlps since I am going for a more sword-and-sorcery approach, and since I am thinking about using sorcerors and other arcane spontaneous casters as 'the villains' I like having a ferw more arcanists available to choose from.

What I think becomes problematic is the tendency to go "all or nothing (core)" i.e. "Bob's playing a scout, why can't I play a ninja?"

 

[Storyteller01]

We follow the KISS rule in our campaign. Think about the benefits, and see if you really gain anything or if you can't get the same benefit from roleplaying. Most of the time, the players go for the basic rules.