Got inspired by the Is banned race post.Is there any class that you have banned from your game?and why?
For me there are 2:
any and all versoin of the paladin that not LG,that why they made the blackguard for.
And gestalt characters,multiclassing may lead to abuse,gestalt pretty much garanty it.
|
I try to run "Core" classes, whenever possible. Minus the Monk. If I feel like playing a game that allows "Complete" classes, I have a rule that Asian-themed classes are out. To me, DnD has 'felt' like a fantasy medieval european roleplaying game, and I don't allow Asian-themed classes because of such. That's not to say I've always banned them. I give the players a break once in a while :)
|
|
We haven't outright officially banned any classes, but I ask people not to play Psionics or Incarnum type classes, simply because I don't want to deal with them. Actually, I don't really have to ask, as I am the only one who has read either set of rules, and nobody has expressed an interest in either. (Although we did have a few Psionicists back in 2e, using the Will & the Way supplement from Athas, and they were pretty fun.)
After three decades of bad experiences, we also discourage Paladins, since they have never, ever failed to end in a TPK through inter-party conflict. Assassins, Necromancers, Clerics of Loviator and even a Death Master have proven to be easy to deal with, even in otherwise good parties, but put a Paladin in a group with an entirely Lawful Good party and they'll end up fighting to the death because *somebody* failed to observe the Paladin's code of conduct...
I know there are decent Paladin players out there, but I haven't been blessed to play with one yet.
The Paladin - Cavaliers back when Unearthed Arcana came out were the worst! All the joy of a Paladin, and twice as many reasons that he'll attack his teammates!
Otherwise, I'm usually the one *encouraging* people to play something different, like an Eldritch Weaver or a Duskblade or a Psychic.
|
No, I've never banned any class from my games.
I would even accept some Arcana Evolved, Advanced PHB, retooled Iron Heroes classes, and much more in my games if that's really what a player wanted. That wasn't that hard to do.
What I was always asking for was consistency in character concepts, though. As to the origins of the character, the class, and how the character came to be that class. If the background made sense to the world, I would accept it.
|
Got inspired by the Is banned race post.Is there any class that you have banned from your game?and why?
For me there are 2:
any and all versoin of the paladin that not LG,that why they made the blackguard for.And gestalt characters,multiclassing may lead to abuse,gestalt pretty much garanty it.
Those are both optional rules you mentioned, and are not classes in and of themselves.
I personally allow characters to play pretty much any class they want, from almost any source they want. I've always liked the CG paladin.
Abuse can only really happen if you let it. The DM controls what the players face, so if they find a way to easily beat most types, send some things that counter their skills. I am using Gestalt rules in my upcoming campaign.
I probably don't run into as many abuse problems because I don't create adventures that far ahead; most of it is made up on the spot, so I always know how strong the party is at any given moment. Of course I make the general outline, but things such as monsters I usually throw at the party by my whim.
|
|
I banned all core classes not in the PHB except on a case by case basis. All Wotc prestige classes not in the core or the 1st 4 complete guides were banned as well. 3PP prestige classes were allowed after passing a DM review.
Basically I felt that Wotc was falling prey to what I call "Sembiedaosis". I describe this condition as 'the maladay where a game designer believes that power creep is a feature rather than a problem'.
Enough variety exists in the sources i allowed that my players could pursue almost any character option they desired that fit into my campaign world (sorry no ninja, samurai, mecha pilots, or cyborgs - this was western fantasy).
EDIT: sembiedaosis refers to Kevin Sembieda of Palladium games. Every single Rifts supplement he released upped the power levels. This resulted in his BBEGs the Coalition, being outclassed by backwoods dweebs after a couple of years. He actually had to release an 'update' book for them to rebalance them after all the power creep. Its sort of a running joke among my friends and I. Sort of a geeky Moore's Law
|
I kinda asked somebody not to do psionics, cause I was rusty at dm'ing and I didn't want them to blow my mind or nothing.
Now I regret it. I feel like a puss wad.
I kinda...don't like ninjas either, all that "secret ninja mission" crap wears on me.
How does any of this adventure fit my "secret ninja life" is a question I NEVER want to answer ever again. Or this "secret ninja life" backstory I have to keep straight much less invent.
Be one of them Lone Wolf Wanderin' ninjas, not a ninja servitor guy in this pseudo-Europe place. Now there's some ninjas there too.
Unless I do a ninja game.
In a pseudo-Japan place, where effin ninjas belong!!!
No triceratops men or deinonychus men ninjas either!
Well I hope that the gestalt thing work in your game.
I'm basically with Set -- I haven't banned anything so far, but I would highly discourage something that didn't fit well with the other members of the party. Like an evil character in a party of paladins, or a super-optimized character in a party of unoptimized characters.
I like psionics, but my players aren't into it.
|
|
One trick to help keep some Paladins from going for a TPK is to have them under Gaes by one of their priests as a means to teach them that while they must honor their code, they cannot force people to do what they do not want to do.
Alternatively, if you have an obnoxious paladin player, take a good friend of yours aside and ask if he'll make a sacrifice and play a Blackguard who has been soul-bound to the Paladin, and then both have been sent forth on the same quest by their respective Good and Evil churches towards a similar goal against a common enemy. One cannot kill the other without failing his own mission.
Either those, or do like I am and make Paladins a prestige class, so that Paladinhood is earned, not automatic.
The only classes I've banned are certain prestige classes, especially from AEG's Mercenaries splatbook. Those things are so overpowered it's not even funny. The skirmisher has powers that allow a character to make a full move and a full attack action in the same round, with automatic criticals. No thank you.
Granted I love Dragon Magazine but I banned the Dvati from the Dragon Compendium....
too many rules for me.. and ( I thought ) a bit of a cheezy concept.
|
|
Everything from the Bo9S and the PH2 (they just feel broken to me) plus the spellthief from the Complete Adventurer, for the same reason. I must stress that I banned also some spells from the PH2 for balance reasons (Celerity first).
Also, I usually strongly discourage players from choosing asian-related classes (wu-jen, samurai, ninja) from various splatbooks unless they come up with a great background that justifies their presence in foreign lands.
|
|
my DM banned me from playing anything Monk/x, Cleric/x and Artificer/x (we used to play alot of Eberron, now that it's gotten pretty stupid/cheesy we've come to Pathfinder), and any kind of Paladin that's not LG (he's actually banned LG Paladins and uses the alt rules from Dragon issue 310), and pretty much hates it any time I multiclass without a huge backstory. He did ban me at one point from playing just an ordinary Fighter and once he made me an aristocrat character, my stats were all 11 and I was only allowed to advance as an Aristocrat or Expert, I pwn'd a dragon, he cried, honest.(I don't make ordinary anything).
He really hates me playing Rogue's and Wizards more than anything, I tend to mess up his finely tuned storylines by doing something completely unexpected. I'm actually banned from ever having the feats Enlarge Spell, Sudden Quicken, Sudden Silence, Master Linguist, Skill Focus: Bluff, Diplomacy and Sense Motive, and the Spells Fabricate and Mass Invisibility.
For me, it pretty much depends on the setting. Before starting a campaign, I usually go through the setting and create a list of allowable races, base classes, and (often) prestige classes, including any modifications and variants, that fit in the setting. I also write down any changes to how the core rules work in the setting at this time. This is then given to the players (minus any DM-only information) before they create their characters.
I usually disallow psionics or "Asian" classes, unless they are central to the setting. I've always been kind of meh on psionics in 3.x (especially with Spell Points as an option) and "Asian" classes can usually be easily run as core classes or multiclassed core classes (ninja=rogue or rogue/monk, samurai=fighter, etc.). The 3.5 shugenja from Complete Divine I sometimes use (with minor changes) as a generic elementalist.
|
|
Factotum.
On the subject of "giving a god the finger" how about the keychain assortment of holy symbols? Or the big finger to the wizard with a spellbook and years of study? Or to the rogue who learned his trade the hard way? Or the swashbuckler who gets very little besides +Int bonus to damage? The list goes on.
No factotums, they violate my brain.
... but put a Paladin in a group with an entirely Lawful Good party and they'll end up fighting to the death because *somebody* failed to observe the Paladin's code of conduct...
I know there are decent Paladin players out there, but I haven't been blessed to play with one yet.
The key is to remember that guilt is your best weapon. And when someone does something really bad, you report them to your superiors (read: DM) and let them tell you what to do.
|
|
my DM banned me from playing anything Monk/x, Cleric/x and Artificer/x (we used to play alot of Eberron, now that it's gotten pretty stupid/cheesy we've come to Pathfinder), and any kind of Paladin that's not LG (he's actually banned LG Paladins and uses the alt rules from Dragon issue 310), and pretty much hates it any time I multiclass without a huge backstory. He did ban me at one point from playing just an ordinary Fighter and once he made me an aristocrat character, my stats were all 11 and I was only allowed to advance as an Aristocrat or Expert, I pwn'd a dragon, he cried, honest.(I don't make ordinary anything).
He really hates me playing Rogue's and Wizards more than anything, I tend to mess up his finely tuned storylines by doing something completely unexpected. I'm actually banned from ever having the feats Enlarge Spell, Sudden Quicken, Sudden Silence, Master Linguist, Skill Focus: Bluff, Diplomacy and Sense Motive, and the Spells Fabricate and Mass Invisibility.
You belong here.
Banned classes? For my campaign, Bard is banned. Why? It's never made any sense to me why a bard would be traveling around having adventures instead of going from town to town telling stories/making money.
Banned classes? For my campaign, Bard is banned. Why? It's never made any sense to me why a bard would be traveling around having adventures instead of going from town to town telling stories/making money.
Think of him as an embedded journalist. What better way to get the story/song than to be in the midst of it. Sure, you're going to lie and exaggerate anyway but at least you'll have a base to start from.
I usually allow most classes from most sources but there are a few classes and prestige class that bother me and I either discourage them or outright ban them.
One prestige class I usually always strongly discourage is the Frenzied Berserker. Anything from the Forgotten realms Guides too; some of those classes are ridiculous.
|
|
Banned classes? For my campaign, Bard is banned. Why? It's never made any sense to me why a bard would be traveling around having adventures instead of going from town to town telling stories/making money.
that's sort of like an old dm i had who hated wizards because he could never get why a wizard would go out adventuring. bards are the games jack of all trades of the game, the ultimate explorers, you need to experience life, experience the world, they throw spells, fight when they need to, have loads of charisma, they're entertainers, diplomats, spies, and honestly i don't think i could understand why a bard would want to stay put anywhere for long when there's an entire world out there to explore, and make tons of gold.
Any class from the forgoten realms.
you gotta remember than forgotten realms prc's are designed specifically for that setting, most if not all of them outside the realms would be way over powered, or not make much sense.
Barbarians
They are a culture, not a class.
Banned classes? For my campaign, Bard is banned. Why? It's never made any sense to me why a bard would be traveling around having adventures instead of going from town to town telling stories/making money.Think of him as an embedded journalist. What better way to get the story/song than to be in the midst of it. Sure, you're going to lie and exaggerate anyway but at least you'll have a base to start from.
"Brave, brave Sir Robin
Set forth from Camelot.He was not afraid to die,
Brave, brave Sir Robin." :P
Barbarians
They are a culture, not a class.
If you make a "normal" (rather than "frenzied") berserker class variant/feat chain/prestige class, this can work.
|
|
I have banned the following, for very different reasons:
Paladin: For a long time, I had a few players who would take this class, and then not play it as LG. When I threatened loss of powers, they'd state they'd just kill the party, leave the game and spread rumours about me. I kicked the main offender out, and banned the class for a year. Granted, it was more of the player's fault, but it was a knee jerk reaction that worked.
Incarnum: I never bought the book, nor liked it. So I banned it from play.
Marshals. They completely messed up how the minor and major auras should have worked (minor auras are way too powerful). In Living Greyhawk, my PC ended up with a unicorn cohort. I gave it a level of marshal for fun. With a 30 Cha, that could have been a +10 to initiative if I had really wanted to be cheesy (instead, I gave it the master of tactics aura and let my TWF improved crit [rapier] sneak attacking rogue/templar mutt do silly damage when flanking the BBEG. At least this way my PC still had to get into danger to use the marshal's bonus).
I also ban Occult Slayers because they do not have an "ex-Occult Slayer" write up. I tend to ban anything that has restrictions in the fluff text but no rules to back those up. Too many players argue, "but the class doesn't say my PC can't accept healing/buffs from my cleric friend! My PC hates all mortal spellcasters, except him!" despite that being what the class is all about.
I also ban almost everything that bumps initiative. When we gave the Bonehearts all the LG legal spells that could bump their initiatives from the SpC and other sources, it was just silly. I think Cranzer ended up with a +26 initiative, and we didn't even give him a Marshall mook.
Complete Warrior Samurai.
Because it's SOOO horrifically under powered and I can do a better job with straight fighter. Especially the slightly powered up (read basically more feats) version of Fighter I now use.
About 50% of all PrC are not allowed, mostly because many of them pass my Too Stupid or World-Specific barriers. In particular anything that forces me to have an organisation or mcguffin goes right out. Class and PrC are metagame concepts as far as I'm concerned.
(I can't say banned because that would imply that I didn't cherry pick what I do allow from the splats in the first place. Rolemaster upbringing - it is entirely impossible to allow whole books from RM2 and I simply follow the same line of reasoning to all other games.)
Banned classes? For my campaign, Bard is banned. Why? It's never made any sense to me why a bard would be traveling around having adventures instead of going from town to town telling stories/making money.Think of him as an embedded journalist. What better way to get the story/song than to be in the midst of it. Sure, you're going to lie and exaggerate anyway but at least you'll have a base to start from.
Oh I definitely get that aspect of it. But the Bard's implementation makes no sense. A bulk of his/her powers come from performing? How logical is it to be performing while in the midst of combat? Or have your companions be able to hear you and get inspired?
Anything from the Bo9S. Anything that belongs/originates from Oriental Adventures. Anything that looks like a 4E playtest (warlock).
About 50% of all PrC are not allowed, mostly because many of them pass my Too Stupid or World-Specific barriers. In particular anything that forces me to have an organisation or mcguffin goes right out. Class and PrC are metagame concepts as far as I'm concerned.
This too. WotC was particularly horrible at this. They just pumped out terrible PrCs left and right for no other reason then to sell books.
|
|
Back in the 1E days, the bard was essentially the prototype for prestige classes - you had to qualify for it by gaining levels in other classes first.
I've toyed with the idea of using the UA rules that make Bards, Paladins, and Rangers prestige classes; it seems to make more sense that way. I'm just not sure how well it comes off in terms of game mechanics.
As for banned classes: Samurai and Ninja (waay too Eastern), I don't care for Knights, as they seem to be redundant, and Dragon Shamans, as they seem just plain silly.
Druids, unless they are willing to accept a much more restricted version of wildshape (like the shapeshift variant, or only 2 or 3 animals at each HD).
Druids, unless they are willing to accept a much more restricted version of wildshape (like the shapeshift variant, or only 2 or 3 animals at each HD).
I like the PHBII druid variant. It spells out exactly what they get as far as attack and so forth. Otherwise the druid can be quite abusive.
I've toyed with the idea of using the UA rules that make Bards, Paladins, and Rangers prestige classes; it seems to make more sense that way. I'm just not sure how well it comes off in terms of game mechanics.
I've seen one PrC Bard in play and they ended up being more powerful than a normal Bard by far. Maybe it was the player but having the bard sing the first round then start Balefule polymorphing or disentigrating everything seemed out of place. They didn't feel as well rounded as a normal Bard does.
Oh I definitely get that aspect of it. But the Bard's implementation makes no sense. A bulk of his/her powers come from performing? How logical is it to be performing while in the midst of combat? Or have your companions be able to hear you and get inspired?
I'd like to come up with a glib and inspired answer right now, but all I can think of are the ork rocker boyz from Warhammer 40k...
Oh I definitely get that aspect of it. But the Bard's implementation makes no sense. A bulk of his/her powers come from performing? How logical is it to be performing while in the midst of combat? Or have your companions be able to hear you and get inspired?I'd like to come up with a glib and inspired answer right now, but all I can think of are the ork rocker boyz from Warhammer 40k...
LOL... When I think of Bard, I think of the "Rock Star" archetype from Shadowrun 1.0.
I've toyed with the idea of using the UA rules that make Bards, Paladins, and Rangers prestige classes; it seems to make more sense that way. I'm just not sure how well it comes off in terms of game mechanics.
Quite well, actually.
The requirements are relatively simple to attain by 5th level (with minimal multiclassing, if any), so the character doesn't have to be ultra-specialized to qualify. In all cases, the Prestige Bard, Paladin, and Ranger have trade-offs from the base PHB versions: The Prestige Bard is not as powerful in Bardic Music and loses full caster level, but gains full access to the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list and possibly higher level spells; the Prestige Paladin loses full BAB and one Smite per day, but gains improved spellcasting and possibly better ability at Turn Undead; the Prestige Ranger loses full BAB and one Favored Enemy, but gains improved spellcasting and a better Animal Companion, as well as possibly better armor (if a cleric with the Animal Domain).
Got inspired by the Is banned race post.Is there any class that you have banned from your game?and why?
For me there are 2:
any and all versoin of the paladin that not LG,that why they made the blackguard for.And gestalt characters,multiclassing may lead to abuse,gestalt pretty much garanty it.
Curious that the options you mention aren't "classes" in the traditional sense.
I generally ban psionics (although I'm thinking of running Dreamscarred Press' Third Dawn all-psionics-no-magic campaign setting if they ever get it done). I also generally ban "oriental" themed classes from the Complete books (wu jen, shujenga, etc.), although I'm generally fine with the ninja class if players want to strip the "oriental" themes from it and become a ghostly assassin-type.
I also ban druids, generally. They're too powerful. Technically, they are available in my campaigns as a prestige class requiring +3 base Fort save and 6 ranks in Knowledge (nature), but no one has yet taken me up on that.
I've seen one PrC Bard in play and they ended up being more powerful than a normal Bard by far. Maybe it was the player but having the bard sing the first round then start Balefule polymorphing or disentigrating everything seemed out of place. They didn't feel as well rounded as a normal Bard does.
I've toyed with the idea of using the UA rules that make Bards, Paladins, and Rangers prestige classes; it seems to make more sense that way. I'm just not sure how well it comes off in terms of game mechanics.
That ends up being just how every bard/sublime chord I've seen (which is 3 or 4) ends up looking like. They play like sorcerers, but better.
A bulk of his/her powers come from performing? How logical is it to be performing while in the midst of combat? Or have your companions be able to hear you and get inspired?
This all depends on which specific Perform skill you're using and how you describe it.
Granted, even though music can be a powerful motivator, the "traditional" troubadour-like musician/singer variety of bard is not a great fit for the typical adventuring party. Closer is the bard of Celtic history/myth as a warrior/loremaster/spellcaster who was also a trained musician (which was the inspiration for the 1st Ed. AD&D bard). An even better fit is the bard who uses inspirational chants, poetry, and speeches (Perform (Oratory)) or dazzling weapon maneuvers (Perform (Weapon-drill).
Gestalt isn't a class, and if you're going to use it, it's only fair that ALL players use it. It's a nice solution for groups with few players. YMMV.
I ban monks and druids.
The former because they don't fit the feel of the game.I would probably not allow Samurai, ninjas and wu-jen for the same reason, although there isn't anything particularly Asian about wu-jen, aside from the name.
The latter because they are WAY too complicated in play, and I never quite understood why they would adventure rather than protect their chosen forest, or whatever.
So, while druids exist as NPCs, monks never do.
I also only allow the 4 core splatbooks, so I tend to avoid a lot of the really broken stuff like whatever is in Book of Exalted Might, Incarnum, Bo9S, et al.
