I ban a certain human race.
I ban evil alignments unless I'm running a game for evil players.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I ban whips in my games.
So far just Antagonize IIRC.
I ban Kender, and any references to them.
I also ban Beavis and Butthead impressions, with my fist, if needed.
I also ban bearded dwarven women.
So if I were to show up at our table with a bearded half-Dwarf/half-Gnome woman who is named Beeves McButhedd and has the attitude to go with a name, how big would you say the stroke would be?
|
I ban Kender, and any references to them.
I also ban Beavis and Butthead impressions, with my fist, if needed.
I also ban bearded dwarven women.So if I were to show up at our table with a bearded half-Dwarf/half-Gnome woman who is named Beeves McButhedd and has the attitude to go with a name, how big would you say the stroke would be?
Kender are not Gnomes.
Likely, I would just walk away.
If you started actually making Beavis and Butthead impressions, I might punch you.
This actually happened once, in Highschool, after I warned the individual.
Then again, I got into a lot of fights in Highschool.
Yeah yeah, you know what I meant.
|
I ban smartphones and laptops.I ban Kender, and any references to them.
I also ban Beavis and Butthead impressions
I also ban bearded dwarven women.
This may be the first time I agree with anything BBT has posted.
Then again, I got into a lot of fights in Highschool.
This is Jack's utter lack of surprise...
I don't have to ban anything. None of my players have anything more than the CRB and APG.
They don't have the internet?
Not everyone makes use of the PRD or SRD, BBT.
I don't ban anything outright. I restrict access to classes, races, and equipment based on culture and region the character is starting in. If a player can explain in a detailed and reasonable background as to how it came to be without breaking the flavor of the campaign then all is good.
No Katana, Monk, or Kitsune in a Medieval France and England campaign based on King Richards Crusade and Robin Hood unless you can come up with a detailed and reasonable background that fits in the campaign background.
|
Not everyone makes use of the PRD or SRD, BBT.They don't have the internet?
That part is fun to read out loud.
Concerning special snowflakes: I allow it if you're ok with getting very familiar with mobs of pitchfork and torch wielding townsfolk. In other words, your specialness only magnifies people's fear of the strange, and you will have to work extra hard to earn trust, which is a big theme in my world.
Numerous reasons.
1)They are incomplete and flawed.
2)They detract from table-time better spent actually playing the game.
3)They paraphrase text far too much. (Specifically the SRD)
4)They sometimes do not provide the source of the information. That matters to some GM's and players.
5)They enable players to gaslight GM's and make it easier for them to do so. Once again detracting from table-time better used to actually play.
If I can come up with five reasons not to use them in just one minute, then you can be sure that there are many, many others that I simply did not think of during that time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I ban 3rd Party material (Though I really love psionics, the balance issues between official and 3rd party published material forces me to draw the line).
I draw this same line against Campaign Setting material (aka splatbooks) as a general rule, though I make exceptions for a few things for role playing/story/flavor reasons. The settings books just don't receive as much (if any?) play testing nor does the main design team have the final say (or they have it, but don't exert it?) on the power level of the material. The difference between Rules hardcovers and settings books has become very apparent to me as of late based on this quote by Jason Bulmahn compared to this quote by James Jacobs.
Note that I love the Pathfinder campaign settings guides for what they bring to the world. However, some of the guys in our group can't resist optimizing and with various settings guides available, the optimizer(s) with loads of system mastery and time spent on their characters mechanical build ended up leaving behind the role players / those who didn't have the same level of system mastery. Thus, a general disallowance for inter party balance reasons is best.
As for the Core Rulebooks (Core, APG, UM, UC, ARG, UE, etc.), our group bans the following:
• Gunslingers - settings reasons & targeting touch AC
• Summoners - time at the table & complicated Eidolon rules
• Feeblemind spell
• Antagonize feat
• Paragon Surge spell
• Evil alignments
It's a setting-by-setting thing.
The game I'm running atm has basically everything allowed. One of my players was about to play with Invisible Stalker as a race before deciding he wanted more class levels.
In the game I'm working on soon, Gunslingers, Halflings, and Half-Elves are banned because they simply are not present in the setting, and Alchemists are banned because they do not play nice with the tweaked magic system.
I definitely wouldn't ban anything universally, and D20pfsrd is my default source for things, so that opens a lot of options. I want my players to have fun, which often means playing a character idea they have. My group rarely attempts to break things too hard, so I don't need to worry about power levels often.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Numerous reasons.
1)They are incomplete and flawed.
2)They detract from table-time better spent actually playing the game.
3)They paraphrase text far too much. (Specifically the SRD)
4)They sometimes do not provide the source of the information. That matters to some GM's and players.
5)They enable players to gaslight GM's and make it easier for them to do so. Once again detracting from table-time better used to actually play.If I can come up with five reasons not to use them in just one minute, then you can be sure that there are many, many others that I simply did not think of during that time.
1) So are the books, and that's why FAQs and errata exist.
2) You can print the relevant information, and actually spend less time with just books.
3) It could be said the overuse of text detracts from the core meaning.
4) Ban anything without a listed source.
5) DM have access to the same info. Also, see #2.
In the end, most of your upsets involve looking up things during play, which can be factor, whether in a book or not.
Any tool is flawed if you use it wrong. You could ask why hammers make terrible screwdrivers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I remember that time I used d20pfsrd to persuade my GM that he was dangerously insane and get him institutionalized.
1) Gunslingers (my group just hates the concept)
2) Synth Summoners
3) ALL pit spells (many are save or die)
As a player I recently took Leadership for the first time and I'm really hating tracking two character sheets. I'm going to suggest we add leadership to the banned list.
I don't ban anything out right. I tend house rule things that I find don't work well though.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
8. 1 GM bans more than one sneak attack in a round unless you dual wield then you can get 2, however the others don't.
It's important to make sure rogues don't become overpowered.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was more a ninja issue. Also as far as I can tell it has never been stated as a rule in a book or in official errata if it is once or more than once. Leads to huge arguments.
Which page of the rulebook says you get Str to damage on more than one attack per round?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I run a "Core Rules+" game.
Everything in Core is allowed.
I allow feats and archetypes from the APG, subject to GM approval.
Additional base classes allowed are:
Cavalier, Inquisitor, Magus, Oracle, and Witch.
There are no "magic marts" that sell magic items, aside from potions and scrolls. If the PCs want to buy a magic item, they need to craft it themselves or hire an NPC crafter and commission it as a custom order.
No spell from non-Core sources are available by default (i.e. at start or when leveling up). Each individual non-Core spell has to be found as treasure (in a spellbook, scroll, holy text), taught by an NPC that knows it, or discovered by independent spell research.
I will also consider additional stuff from non-Core sources individually on a case-by-case basis.
(I don't allow the summoner because summoner, and I don't allow the alchemist class because I have been using an NPC alchemist class for years that has a totally different flavor. I'm just not a fan of the "Dr Jekyll/Mr. Hyde" approach to the official alchemist class.)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
8. 1 GM bans more than one sneak attack in a round unless you dual wield then you can get 2, however the others don't.
Who nerfs the weakest class?
Rogue/Ninja is the bottom before NPC classes, in power.
That's like taking the eyeglasses away from the small, skinny nerdy kid on the dodgeball team, because improving his poor eyesight might give him an "unfair advantage".
I only out-and-out ban two things:
1. Synthesist.
2. Strix
I love the idea of the vivisectionist enough that, if a player wanted to play one, I'd have a sit down and try and rework the archetype to a place that will work.
3rd party stuff is *tentatively* allowed for my experienced players. Any 3rd party content is going to involve a conversation at least 10 minutes long explaining to me how the character concept can't work at all or nearly as well with the official material and convincing me that it won't break the game. I reserve the right to just say no on any occasion.
It was more a ninja issue. Also as far as I can tell it has never been stated as a rule in a book or in official errata if it is once or more than once. Leads to huge arguments.Which page of the rulebook says you get Str to damage on more than one attack per round?
For flanking I think it should be usable as many times as you can swing, but for stealth-based sneak attacks I can understand the argument. If you sneak up on a guy and then swing a sword at him, he will probably turn around and see you before you get the second swing in.
8. 1 GM bans more than one sneak attack in a round unless you dual wield then you can get 2, however the others don't.Who nerfs the weakest class?
Rogue/Ninja is the bottom before NPC classes, in power.
That's like taking the eyeglasses away from the small, skinny nerdy kid on the dodgeball team, because improving his poor eyesight might give him an "unfair advantage".
Many houserules (including a few of my own) are made in direct response to individual scenarios that arise in specific games, so it's hard to pass judgement on other groups. (Though I agree that the Rogue does not need any balance adjustments in the downward direction.) In the case of our group, some of the optimizer(s) will go WAY overboard with specific builds that outclass the rest of the group in specific areas resulting in fellow players crying foul. Crane Style + Crane Wing at second level caused this a while back, though we haven't yet laid down a ban on it. Instead we have a gentleman's agreement against accessing Crane Wing before 5th level.
I'm surprised that my comment regarding the differences in hardcover rules book and settings guides didn't result in more discussion (and some hatred, lol). I expected that to be somewhat controversial... Maybe I'm not the only one who feels this way?
Edit
For flanking I think it should be usable as many times as you can swing, but for stealth-based sneak attacks I can understand the argument. If you sneak up on a guy and then swing a sword at him, he will probably turn around and see you before you get the second swing in.It was more a ninja issue. Also as far as I can tell it has never been stated as a rule in a book or in official errata if it is once or more than once. Leads to huge arguments.Which page of the rulebook says you get Str to damage on more than one attack per round?
This is actually exactly what the rules say, so if this is how you feel, then no house rules are needed.
For flanking I think it should be usable as many times as you can swing, but for stealth-based sneak attacks I can understand the argument. If you sneak up on a guy and then swing a sword at him, he will probably turn around and see you before you get the second swing in.It was more a ninja issue. Also as far as I can tell it has never been stated as a rule in a book or in official errata if it is once or more than once. Leads to huge arguments.Which page of the rulebook says you get Str to damage on more than one attack per round?
It already functions that way. Attacking automatically breaks stealth. If they are no longer using stealth and do not meet other prerequistes to obtain sneak attack then they no longer qualify for sneak attack.
I'm surprised that my comment regarding the differences in hardcover rules book and settings guides didn't result in more discussion (and some hatred, lol). I expected that to be somewhat controversial... Maybe I'm not the only one who feels this way?
I agree with you completely. The developers have outright stated that companion books and similar are not play tested as much or as carefully considered for balance as the "core" rule books are. I ban them wholesale, with the caveat that you may ask permission for specific things to be allowed and I will give consideration. If it poses a problem later on I also reserve the right to revoke permission.
1) Gunslingers are restricted (they typically don't fit the settings/games we're playing in - but when they do, I allow them)
2) Summoners banned outright.
3) Non-core races restricted (I need a good reason beyond "it's cool" or "I want to" or besides "I need it to set up this combo!")
4) No 3rd party material unless I'm the one introducing it.
5) Only one PC with Leadership per campaign - I maintain the right to crack down on that if the player who has it tries to derail things.
Humm,
I forgot also:
Blood Money, and Emergency Force Sphere.
I'm loathe to ban stuff. I try to keep as many options as possible, but nevertheless...
1 - Master Summoner
2 - Synthesist (not that hard to challenge, actually, the difficulty lies in challenging them without stomping martial classes. It's just not worth the effort. The somewhat confusing and poorly written class features don't help either)
3 - Leadership (It slows down the game too much, but I occasionally allow it for the purpose of getting fantastic mounts)
4 - Paragon Surge (well, actually, just the Extra Arcana loophole)
5 - Blood Money
6 - Antagonize
Arcanist will soon enter the list too.
The rest I can probably deal with, but I reserve the right to review my decision if I find something to be too unbalanced or disrupting.
I do have an extensive collection of house-rules, though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Creating a functional banlist is pretty time consuming. I have one in 3.5 combined with some small houserules.
I have't played and researched pathfinder enough to create a good banlist. This is what I have so far. Most of it is subject to change and beyond that, it has relative not absolute power. If somebody has a concept he really loves and is ready to work with me bans may be ignored.
BANNED
Core
Leadership
Item creation
Manyshot*
Advanced Players Guide
Zen archer*
Guide ranger archetype*
Dazing spell
Persistent spell
Point Blank Master*
Ultimate magic
Synthetist, Master Summoner, Vivisectionist
Empyreal and Sage wildblooded bloodlines
Eldrich heritage
Euphoric Tranquility
Ultimate combat
Oath of vengeance
Antagonize (unsure about wether the errata fixed it)
Snap shot line*
Litany of Righteousness
Double barrled pistol (maybe)
Falcatas threat range never increases (so no improved critical etc.)
ARG
Paragon Surge
Samsarans mystic past life
Wild caller (maybe, not sure)
Scared witch doctor
*Archery stuff, I am undecided about the power of archery in pathfinder. I prolly would like to see it in my games before deciding what to do with it.
Other sources
By default all are banned.
Maybe I will allow sth through discussion.
A few exceptions:
Agile enchantment
Juju oracle
Spellscared oracle
Hellcat invisibility
more to come...
Also I haven't looked carefully at the spells, so I might have missed many gems there.
Note that I do have a few houserules to go with this ban list. So things might be different than one would expect.
Pretty much allow anything Core / available on the PRD (meaning Paizo's, not d20pfsrd and others). Will allow some Paizo world stuff on a case-by-case basis.
Other than that, banned the Summoner class, and had the Gunslinger banned. Recently unbanned Gunslinger with modified firearm rules (instead of touch AC, they can target flat-footed in first range category, no advanced firearms, some changes on reloading rules / ammo, anda few other minor things to make it flow better and remove some of the cheese).
I guess the only thing I 'ban' is things around non-consumable magic items as I have houseruled them out of the game in my home game with a set of rules that replace the 'required' +x bonuses with things you get to choose from as you level and make it so magic items are rare and unique with no direct gold value (think priceless art items, you might find a buyer, but its not a straight forward or simple exchange) and none of them grant flat +x bonuses.
I've tried different types of bans in different games over the years.
Currently I'm trying to run long-range campaigns, 1st to 20th level, that last several years, with 60 to 90 game sessions. What matters most to me is knowing pretty much the full rule set at the beginning of the campaign and not changing it during the campaign.
My current campaign started in 2010 and uses the Core Rulebook plus house rules. Everything else is banned by default. But every time their characters gain a level, I allow each player to bring in one feat or spell from another Paizo book. These feats or spells are specific to that character, so NPCs and monsters and other characters don't have them.
Other campaigns have allowed everything as it's published. This can lead to serious imbalances between characters, particularly if someone's character dies and that person designs a powerful replacement using newer rules. The surviving characters might have been built on rules two or three years old, with fewer feats, spells, and classes. So in effect you end up punishing people for having their characters survive. Allowing some rebuild flexibility for surviving characters helps get around this, and there's some built-in advantages like better magic and treasure for survivors.
No matter what you ban or allow, the DM needs to read, imagine, and feel free to design encounters using everything allowed. It can be both challenging and fun to keep your game's rule set evolving as you play.