|
Simple as the thread title, I'd like to see what you guys allow for use at your tables.
Personally I only allow Pathfinder Core material that comes from Paizo, & the stuff from TOS. As of right now, nothing from 3.5 is available to either myself or the players mostly to keep it simple. I am considering the purchase of a few things from SGG but I was wondering what you guys use.
3.5 is dead to me. That's what my players hear if they ask about 3.5 material.
I allow corebook only with some splat stuff from Paizo, with my approval.
I made a mistake and made up some house rules without thinking them through. With that being said mostly use Core. Any thing outside of core is on my discretion. We are just about finished with second darkness and then I get a two to three year break as others GM. The info available for their games is only Core with few house rules. We do allow Adventurer's Armory and Seeker of Secrets, and some other Paizo supplements.
Just my 2 cp.
Nothing is disallowed without cause. Everything's fair game until there's reason to the contrary.
I don't allow anything on a whole book basis (aside from the core) but rather everything is a case by case basis. I've allowed several 3.5 base classes (a psion and a favored soul). However, besides the basics (changing HD to match up with BAB, fixing skill lists), I haven't bothered adding any new special abilities to them. Anything outside the core also has to come from books I own (so no Spell Compendium, for example). So far it's all worked out okay.
Usually I prefer PCs to stick to the core and possibly other pathfinder material, though. Especially spellcasters sticking to core spells (these were some of the biggest changes from 3.X).
For most games Just core and often the core setting book {Or some of it} if I am using a published setting. few games I have allowed a few non core items but always I review them first.
The most open game I run has core+ ECS, races and magic of eberron, the five nations,XPH ,magic of the incarnum and some of monte cooks book of experimental might{some feats}
For me this is a vastly open game.
At my table I allow Pathfinder core and Psionics book without limitation. Everything else has to be approved on a case by case basis with me. Although if I tend to use it in the game, I also tend to allow it for PCs except in game breaking situations/combo's that I see.
Most of the gang I game with don't know much beyond the 3.5 (or maybe 3.0) player's handbook. They usually come to my place, flip through my books (and I have a lot), and find something they like. Then we make it work. Whether or not that means by the book, well, that's pretty much case-by-case...
My Group is using Core + Stuff printed by Paizo. Although it hasnt come up yet im expecting the 3.5 paizo stuff would need to be discussed first.
Secondly the people likely to Dm (current dm andlikely future one) have expressed a dislike for Traits and Guns.
I allow all 3.5 books(except Tome of Magic, and the Incarnum book), but not necessarily the entire book. Feats are normally ok, but PrC's have to be ok'd. Magic items have to be ok'd also.
*I don't allow the books above because I don't know the subsystems well enough. Luckily nobody else does either so it is not an issue anyway.
Anything so long as it's "converted" with my approval.
The edition gap makes a fantastic bottleneck for shedding some of the more imbalanced and silly 3.5 material, but I could never leave it all behind. A good idea is good irrespective of edition.
Current 3.5e game, I allow PHB, Spell Compendium, and... Well, my players never actually bring books, so anything else I allow is my own fault.
I have an archivist in the party so he uses Heroes of Horror for his class. (I initially created him as an NPC but gave him over to a friend to play who had no familiarity with D&D when he joined the game.)
Since archivists and wizards learn spells from scrolls, I allow them to look up spells in any book that I've given them spells from (they have to take their level-up spells from PHB or Spell Compendium), with the caveat that the newest 3.5e version of the spell always trumps older published versions. (This affected the archivist's player because he did buy Complete Divine and a number of its spells are nerfed in Spell Compendium.)
========================================================================
For my Pathfinder sidegame, I just use the Core Rulebook right now for spells. Will also be allowing Advanced Player's Guide and any spells from the upcoming Campaign Setting revision. Any others by my introduction only.
I'll be allowing traits in this PRPG game also. I can't remember if my two players picked traits or not, but if they did, they have them. If they didn't and I allow any joining players to pick traits, then I'll allow them to pick traits at the same time. (Knowing my brother, he probably didn't want to pick traits because it just means more work for him before he can start.)
========================================================================
For my upcoming Masque of the Red Death game (using Masque of the Red Death 3.5e classes (including expanded skill lists) but PRPG rules in place of 3.5 rules), I'll be trying to keep things simple so Masque of the Red Death 3.5e book, Ravenloft 3.5e setting books (Masque of the Red Death being a Ravenloft meet Gothic Earth setting), and the Pathfinder RPG product line.
========================================================================
I will, however, be using GameMastery Plot Twist Cards, and Critical Hit and Critical Fumble decks in all three campaigns. (The 3.5e campaign is almost over.)
|
I would rather risk sounding draconian then to let the game go to the min-max. IMO the rules are there to guide the story not to be the content. Application to the discussion you ask? The more you let material in, the more esoteric the rules the harder it is for the GM to wrangle that varmint that is the rouge game/gamer.
My group currently only uses the core book and any player options relevant to the current campaign.
Having seen the increase in complexity caused by 3.5 splat books in the past, we are reluctant to head down the same route again.
I just converted from 3.5 to PRPG completely, but I keep a few minor houserules that still make sense.
Basically core books form the basis, I plan to weigh 3.5 stuff and on a case by case allow or modify it to fit in, so I would not exactly say I will disallow anything, even upcoming APG will not be allowed in the campaign without weighing the new options carefully and certain things from the core I will disallow or modify as well if I think it poorly thought out or dislike the flavor. (paladin being a major one)
Not much has changed in that perspective, just that I use PFRPG as core from which I base my judgement calls on, 3.5 core is dead, but splat might be usable.
|
|
I normally allow the use of any book I own a physical copy of (which is pretty much the entire 3.x library). However, depending on the group, I'll often say something like: "Everyone can use the core books, Complete X series, Races of Y series, and two other books of their choice."
Though in some cases I require players to 'OK' stuff with me before hand. This tends to include anything from third-party books that I own and a small chunk of official books.
But then, I also keep a small list of books (and various other things from a number of otherwise free-to-use books) that I do own that are likely to get shot down if anyone asks to use material from them, too.
|
|
I use:
Anything by Paizo
Anything for Pathfinder by Super Genius
Anything for Pathfinder by Rite Publishing
Anything for Pathfinder by the Reality Deviants
Anything for Pathfinder from Kobold Quarterly
Anything for Pathfinder by Alluria publishing
Some of A Fistful of Denerii (Feats, some of the classes)
Some of Tome of Secrets from Adamant Publishing (Mostly Ocupations and some classes)
These are the 'as of right' stuff. I make a list of what's allowed from each. At the moment it's a LOT of long linst.
Anything else from any source I've got (which is quite a lot) is on a cass by case basis, but I usually allow it as my players don't tend to go for broken exploits.
I allow *anything* that a PC can get into my hands and that makse sense for my game/game world/whatever at the time.
Very simple - I just ask for a description, fluff and mechanics of what X is supposed to do to the game. Most likely, in context, it's feats my PC's want. I just ask for a feat description furnished to me (since 9/10 I do NOT have the source myself) and I'll just look it over. Costs me a little effort, shows genuine interest on the PC's side if they're willing to type it all out or whatever for me, procure said book and bring it to me, etc, etc, and if I don't want it in game, I can explain fully *what* about the X thing is I'm not a fan of and that I do not want in my game world.
Honestly, I'm more of a "Yes, let's try this out" GM than I am about "Screw that!!! Only CORE in my game ya' munchkin, bastich!!!"
So, I really can't think of many times when I've said No to pc's on the stuff they want to try out.
Off hand, the *only* thing I can think of is saying no to some 4e race that someone wanted to convert to 3.x/PF standards and I didn't want to be bothered by attempting to integrate said race into my game world at all.
Pathfinder core plus whatever gets integrated into my current campaign.
Mark L. Chance | Spes Magna Games
|
|
I only run PFS games at the moment, but am looking at what I'll allow when my turn comes to sit in the Big Chair full-time. Pretty much anything from Paizo is fine, with the notable exception of the Reactionary Trait. (Sorry, but when 90% of the PCs at a table, including mine, take the same exact trait, it's probably too powerful.)
There are a couple of PRPG specific 3PPs I am looking at, but nothing for sure yet.
WotC 3.5 material may be allowed on a case by case basis, but most likely, not.
In my current campaigns, not counting house rules (which are generally campaign-specific)
I allow anything not golarion-specific from Paizo.
I allow anything else from Paizo n a case-by-case. (We don't use traits, for example, though you can take two traits for a feat slot)
I allow anything from Super Genius Games, no restriction.
I allow a lot of Rite Publishing stuff, including a lot of spells from their spell compilations and magic item books (but not all of them... they're feel for power balance and mine dont match perfectly), and some of their racial stuff (Wyrd, In the Company of Giants).
I have allowed a few feats from LPJ UNdeFEATed line case-by-case, but honestly I outlaw more than I allow.
I allow 4 Winds material on a case-by-case basis. (Luven Lightfinger's Gear and Treasure Shop gets more use from me than anything else of theirs, and they can be hit-or-miss, but when they hit they often hit big).
I'll look at any d20 source if a player wants me to consider it, but again I turn down more of that than I accept. For example, I have a player workng to create a tomb raider class from various version of the Star Wars scoundrel, and so far I don't like it for a fantasy Pathfinder game. But I'm happy for him to keep working on it.
Pathfinder RPG Core rulebook, and when it comes out the Advanced Players Guide.
I have no "rule" change house rules, only character creation ones, ie. point buy, hp, gold, etc.
-- david
Papa.DRB
Core Rulebook and Adventurer's Armory only. The only exceptions so far being halflings and bachelor's snuff. And probably allowing most of the APG when it arrives.
The only book definitely out of the question for all 5 DM's in my group though is the Magic Item Compendium. We've grown to have a universal hatred of that book.
When pathfinder came out there was a renewal of interest in third party books but that interest has pretty much died as we've generally been disappointed with most of them, and people are now hesitant to purchase them.
|
Nothing is disallowed without cause. Everything's fair game until there's reason to the contrary.
Anything, while reserving the right to ban anything.
I'll allow pretty much any concept (Player in my next game is going to play a green dragon - I have to work out a class progression for him).
For mechanics, ANY PF stuff I haven't banned, core or not. I don't allow the PF core version of the monk, for example. All things I haven't previously allowed need approval.Used to allow everything, but had a player spend all session with her head in the Magic Item Compendium. Now every session is dice and sheets only.
I don't let players reference books at the table (I don't care if they look at books if they aren't slowing down the game), but if it comes to their turn and they start looking in the book to decide what spell to use, I give them 10 seconds to decide.
Know what your spells do. If you want clarification, CnP YOUR spells into a word document and print them.Will allow pretty much any FR or Golarion content unless I foresee problems with the mechanic.
Anything goes at my table. but the truth is most of my players are too new to want to use much. I bring up something from an old 3.5 and sometimes for an even older 2nd edition.
I let the player look stuff up like feats and spells sometimes rules when they (meaning my resident rules lawyer who dose not know the rule very well) think I did something wrong.
I like having a very wide range of options for my player but so far they not gone to far way from the core books but I may have to rain them in when they start reading more books
We use the Core Rulebook and Aventurer's Armory and I'm planning to allow basically everything from the APG when it comes out shortly. Outside of that, any 3.0/3.5 material is reviewed on a case-by-case basis and goes through a short playtest before it is given the green light. So far the only things that I can think of off-hand that my players have requested were the Practiced Spellcaster and Short Haft feats, which are fairly benign.
Having witnessed our previous 3.5 campaigns fly fairly far off the rails with exotic prestige classes, feats, races, and (particularly) magic items, I am trying to keep our current Pathfinder campaign under a bit tighter control.
-Brooks
Pathfinder core, Ptolus campaign setting material, and pretty much anything from Malhavoc Press I'll let in as-is (converted for 3.p, o'course).
I allow any 3.5 stuff on a case-by-case basis. Frex, I just had a player put together a rogue with a large jovar, Monkey Grip, and Vital Strike. Cheesy? Absolutely. But it's not broken (unlike his abjurant champion he wanted to make who could shoot his AC into the high 40s at level 10), so I'll allow it.
We allow pretty much anything for most campaigns. On occasion we will run something core only, or Dragonlance + Core only, or something like that. But for the most part, we count on players to self moderate.
That said, we haven't seen much of tome of battle or incarnum.
I allow pretty much anything in my games, even the juicy feats from the Ultimate Feats book unless I feel something is just over the top unbalanced.
|
|
I am seeing a LOT of hate for the Magic Item Compendium. I am wondering why this is? I have use a number of items from the book and my players know they are welcome to use/make/look for most of the things in the book with a few exceptions. The main one being the Augmentation Crystals... those are WAYYYY too inexpensive.
Do you guys care to expound on that bit?
Pretty much every splatbook ever released for 3.5 has some completely broken stuff in there, with spell compendium and magic item compendium being some of the worst offenders. In our group we therefore disallow anything not in 3.5 core (PHB1, DMG1).
However, if someone wants to use a class, PrC or spell for another source, he can post it on the mailinglist and the part of the group interested in mechanics will discuss it and vote. Democracy in action...works pretty well, because some players are much more interested in CO and powergaming than the DM, and he can be sure that whatever the group allows does not break the game.
"Core", as a term, has often been hotly debated, with wild interpretations by various people as to what should be core or canon, so I get very literal on this.
As a ref, this is what I allow:
3.x: PHB, DMG, MM.
PF: Core Rulebook, Bestiary.
All other books are libri non grata - any influences stemming from them must have approval before they can be used in play.
I am seeing a LOT of hate for the Magic Item Compendium. I am wondering why this is? I have use a number of items from the book and my players know they are welcome to use/make/look for most of the things in the book with a few exceptions. The main one being the Augmentation Crystals... those are WAYYYY too inexpensive.
Do you guys care to expound on that bit?
Exactly. The Magic Item Compendium had magic items that were really powerful for -ridiculously- cheap. Weapon and Armor Crystals, I'm looking at you...
|
|
Exactly. The Magic Item Compendium had magic items that were really powerful for -ridiculously- cheap. Weapon and Armor Crystals, I'm looking at you...I am seeing a LOT of hate for the Magic Item Compendium. I am wondering why this is? I have use a number of items from the book and my players know they are welcome to use/make/look for most of the things in the book with a few exceptions. The main one being the Augmentation Crystals... those are WAYYYY too inexpensive.
Do you guys care to expound on that bit?
In our last 3.5 campaign we had banned the Augment Crystals and Magic Item Sets, but the rest of the book didn't seem bad.
If you own it then you can use it. I want people to play with their toys. If something turns out to be too powerful then the enemies will eventually develop a means of countering it (I use a lot of intelligent enemies). My players also know that if they can use it so can I. For this reason I've never had a player use Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic or any wild magic/necromancy books.
I find it pretty disappointing to see so many people harshly restricting what their players can use. If you buy a book and want to use it, but can't because your DM doesn't take the time to understand it then you won't want to buy more books.
Can't expect Pathfinder to thrive as a game if you don't let your players spend money on it.
I find it pretty disappointing to see so many people harshly restricting what their players can use. If you buy a book and want to use it, but can't because your DM doesn't take the time to understand it then you won't want to buy more books.
I personally publish, in my houserules, what books will and won't be acceptable - in whole - before the game even begins, therefore any purchases that happen after the start of the campaign are done purely for the enjoyment of the player. No guilt on me for their voluntary purchases.
You're also suggesting a single ref should be obligated to match the buying power and the time devotion (in reading and digesting disparate splatbooks) of 2-5 players. As a working professional with limited free time, this isn't acceptable to me.
Additionally, players playing in a campaign don't sign an exclusive contract limiting them to just that one group - they're more than welcome to seek out other gaming groups to utilize their books, if they feel so slighted.
While I like Pathfinder and Paizo, I'm not in the business of furthering their business, that is until they start paying me some sort of commission or royalty check. :)