Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ycore Rixle" data-source="post: 4522538" data-attributes="member: 675">Good idea.1. Psionics are fine. If a player wants them in, and I'm DMing, I make sure that they have a logical place in the campaign world. As a player, I don't care much whether another player at the table has a psionic character or not. Psionics can be fun, or they might not be. In and of themselves, they're no big deal.2. I wrote it. Sort of. Rich Baker did most of the mechanics. My name's on the cover, but one of the reasons why I don't write for Wizards any more is because what I wrote often didn't appear the way I wrote it when the final book came out. So let's just say this: I think the ToB had a great goal (and this was explicit in the design doc and discussion), viz, to make fighters and melee'ers more fun and more on par with wizards and CoDzilla in combat (but see #3 and #4 below). The goal was never to make combat the focus of a campaign, and the goal was never to make fighters similar to casters. I'm basically ok with per-encounter powers as long as their limitations are rationally explained (using up ki, your stories and poems get tiresome instead of inspiring, you get winded so that your rage becomes an exhaustion penalty). For a better idea of what I would have done with ToB if I were on my own, see the combat portions of Spellbound Kingdoms (in my sig, coming out next summer).3. Fighters rock and could be very effective in 3e, even without ToB or PHBII. But they could have rocked even harder and been even more interesting than they were.4. Wizard and CoDzilla were absolutely not overpowered to the point of game disruption. If by some quirk of Radiant Servants and super scroll-scribery your wizards and CoDzillas were overpowered, then that's the beauty of the DM. Make some new feats, hand out some fancy swords, send in a bunch of roper/hydra/golem/grappler monsters. Lots of ways to avoid game disruption.5. I played a ton of 3e and 3.5e as written. No house rules at all.6. Most of my groups play casually, but fairly intensely. That is, we play casually but we're lifelong D&D players and we love the game. A few min/maxers have been in my groups now and then, but that works out just fine too. Again, the DM's job is to make sure everyone is challenged. The rules' job is to help the DM do his job.7. Well, I wrote an Eberron book too (Explorer's Handbook), so yeah, I like Eberron. A lot. I was glad they finally made an attempt to do a world somewhat logically based on the D&D rules. Was it a perfect success? No, not even close. But it was fun. Could it have been better? Yes.8. I DM a weekly 4e group and a bi-weekly (or tri-weekly) 3e group.</blockquote>

Verification