| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nah. It's the constant infusion of fiddly bits that keep things from going stale.
If you play a lot in fast moving campaigns, everyone gets to try lots of things and then the large proliferation of possibilities is great.
If (like me) you play less often in kinda slow moving campaigns, each person might only get 2 pc's in a year. Then there are almost too many possibilities. You can reduce the possibilities, as you mentioned, that is a perfectly fine choice that some/many groups make. Or you can leave all the possibilites out there and many things just never get tried out.
It also tends to mean no one gets to know the system/rules as well because it is growing faster than it is getting tried. We are constantly finding we have done some odd rule or situational thing wrong because we were not familiar enough with something that doesn't happen often.
2 PCs a year? How about 1 PC every 2-5 years?
I gotta agree with this guy. I'm still playing my first Pathfinder character
I think that following the Advanced Race Guide, we'll see a significant drop in new feats. While I don't count options as "bloat", I do understand players getting overwhelmed with choices. Almost all of my immediate group is like this and prefer to choose from a narrow list of options tailored to their character. I've played in games where we'd spend whole sessions deciding skill, feat, and class choices. While this approach might not suit some, leveling up is the fastest I've seen it.
Answering the question: only if the players often have trouble choosing character options.
For a GM there are two was to deal with it.
1. Limit it to a handful of books you know well. If someone asks don't be afraid to say no if you are unsure.
2. Don't be afraid to use those options yourself.
Core Rulebook, and APG are standard. Any other sources (or parts of sources) need to be agreed upon by everyone at the table, including myself (the GM).
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If there is never a new feat, class, arch-type, race, option or what ever introduced from this point forward I would be forever greatful. Paizo markets the best FRPG stuff I've gamed with in my 30+ years of RPG gaming but enough is enough. Every new facet added to the over all gem that has been PFRPG to this point risks weakening the shine on the system. I would much rather see the focus shift from mechanic choices to additional Game world content via AP's, Modules, Companions etc. Golarion is a vast world and each new location the Paizo staff chooses to enlighten us about is a far bigger contribution to the overall PFRPG than an endless tide of bloat.
Basically for me, if something is outside the core rules, it requires approval from the dm. And not just a request to use it from the player, but an explanation of what the player intends to do with it and how it will interact with the character as a whole. Then then as dm I look at the option (feat, spell, class, whatever) in that context and decide whether or not to allow it in. I do allow quite a bit into my games, but the important part is that I see it ahead of time and talk it over at least a bit with the player. That way there are no surprises, and I only need to know new material in as much as the players actually choose it (instead of needing to know everything).
For PC's its not a big deal. No ones really had to change their build because of something new.
For the world I've just done the newer stuff is rarer type deal. For example, alchemists and summoners haven't been fully integrated into the world, so they're a bit rarer than most spellcasters.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
|
There are two 3.5 books (the Spell Compendium & the Magic Item Compendium) I allow at my table but beyond that it's pretty much Paizo only and if it doesn't appear on the PRD I review it on a case by case basis.
On my own PCs my exact choices depend on the GM's rules but I typically put together a reference packet for all of my feats and spells not easily referenced from the PRD and sometimes even those.
|
I gotta agree with this guy. I'm still playing my first Pathfinder character2 PCs a year? How about 1 PC every 2-5 years?
WHAT? I have over 19 dead already... lol we been playing PF abouot 3 years now.
As a DM I allow all PF books + 3rd party stuff and in majority of my games 3.5 content. We are all veteran players and everyone tires of the vanilla characters so all the content makes for interesting builds.
I on the hand I play mostly in games with just Core/Adv/UM/UC with very little 3rd party allowed or 3.5.
I do get a 'bloaty' feeling from having too many books. My main issue is that the more options there are, the more limited resources a character must spend to be on the top of their game, leaving fewer resources left over for neat other stuff outside their focus. Power creep. It's an inevitability of an expanding system this complex.
the dm and players at my table welcome bloat. pathfinder pace is perfect compared with other version and systems.
... Answering the question: only if the players often have trouble choosing character options.
I think that is actually part of the 'problem'. We have one player especially that sees something new in a book, has to try it, makes a character around it before he really understands it, then is unsatisfied because it wasn't as awesome as he imagined.
It is nice to have the options. It isn't always nice to use them.
In my group, Core and the APG are automatically allowed. Options from other sources require approval. Our DM has implemented one house rule regarding item creation: the creator has to equal or exceed the item's caster level in order to craft the item. This has reduced the potential bloat from player made items.
I felt far more bloat in 3.0/3.5 than I do in Pathfinder. Pathfinder seems like a walk in the park compared to 3.X (and 2nd ed. Lord, I remember being in college and hauling milk crates FULL of books to everything so that my players would have access to anything they might need).
As for how my group deals with new books that change things we kind of look at how they were played to see if maybe we need to make some back end changes to let a player use something cool that is in the new book.
I allow the core rulebook and the APG. Anything beyond that is up to my discretion. I do this because of past 3.5 campaigns that got broken with the bloat.
For my campaign it's CRB plus oracle plus mystery spells from the APG. I looked through the spells and feats from AGP and none seem that interesting to open the book up to the campaign.
CRB has more than enough for slow pr heavy campaigns at low and mid levels.
I've never worried about it. After all as GM I can do anything they can, and sometimes they find some really fascinating combinations.
If a player does start using a really broken combination (they are out there), I usually just ask them to switch it up a bit. The same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over is really just dull.
It would be like if I threw nothing but gibbering orbs at them. Sure, it would be difficult for them, but it would get really dull really fast.
In my group, Core and the APG are automatically allowed. Options from other sources require approval. Our DM has implemented one house rule regarding item creation: the creator has to equal or exceed the item's caster level in order to craft the item. This has reduced the potential bloat from player made items.
Just out of curiosity, how do you guys deal with basically never being able to craft metamagic rods till level 17, since all of them (even lesser ones) are CL17+?
/me runs away from yet another crafting argument.
In my group, Core and the APG are automatically allowed. Options from other sources require approval. Our DM has implemented one house rule regarding item creation: the creator has to equal or exceed the item's caster level in order to craft the item. This has reduced the potential bloat from player made items.Just out of curiosity, how do you guys deal with basically never being able to craft metamagic rods till level 17, since all of them (even lesser ones) are CL17+?
The item might be available for purchase from an NPC crafter. The DM has also allowed new characters to request specific equipment (our sorcerer entered the campaign with a metamagic extend rod). Despite this, he's handed out some nice items (oathbow, helm of brilliance, horn of valhalla) and we just barely hit 9th level.
I have never had an issue with it. I don't allow a book wholesale until I have read it though. The only things that are banned that I can recall are the antagonize feat, and the spell that gives you paladin class features.
|
In my group, Core and the APG are automatically allowed. Options from other sources require approval. Our DM has implemented one house rule regarding item creation: the creator has to equal or exceed the item's caster level in order to craft the item. This has reduced the potential bloat from player made items.Just out of curiosity, how do you guys deal with basically never being able to craft metamagic rods till level 17, since all of them (even lesser ones) are CL17+?
Sounds fine by me. I've never played with metamagic rods.
The item might be available for purchase from an NPC crafter. The DM has also allowed new characters to request specific equipment (our sorcerer entered the campaign with a metamagic extend rod). Despite this, he's handed out some nice items (oathbow, helm of brilliance, horn of valhalla) and we just barely hit 9th level.In my group, Core and the APG are automatically allowed. Options from other sources require approval. Our DM has implemented one house rule regarding item creation: the creator has to equal or exceed the item's caster level in order to craft the item. This has reduced the potential bloat from player made items.Just out of curiosity, how do you guys deal with basically never being able to craft metamagic rods till level 17, since all of them (even lesser ones) are CL17+?
Oh, so your DM feels rules bloat involving crafting items would make things too powerful, so he solves this by giving 125000gp items to a level 9 party.
Seems balanced. Really resolved that power creep problem right there.
|
|
Oh, so your DM feels rules bloat involving crafting items would make things too powerful, so he solves this by giving 125000gp items to a level 9 party.
Seems balanced. Really resolved that power creep problem right there.
There's a big difference between letting the players choose what enters the GM's world, and the GM deciding independently what enters the GM's world. Heck, I'll give out major artifacts at first level if I know it will work for my campaign.
Our rules for my group is we allow all Paizo Books, Super Genius, and Rite Publishing as long as all of the ones in our group have access to the material. We are open to any 3pp as long as a copy is given to our three GM's So far bloat and power creep has not been a problem. I feel the more options I have the more useful tools I gain to build exciting adventures for my players.
I have never seen new options as "bloat". There's nothing wrong with giving your characters new powers (creep) as long as the monsters can do the same. In fact, I really don't understand the hate for new options and the cries of "power creep", etc. It has never been an issue for my group. Not once has anyone brought it up.
The item might be available for purchase from an NPC crafter. The DM has also allowed new characters to request specific equipment (our sorcerer entered the campaign with a metamagic extend rod). Despite this, he's handed out some nice items (oathbow, helm of brilliance, horn of valhalla) and we just barely hit 9th level.In my group, Core and the APG are automatically allowed. Options from other sources require approval. Our DM has implemented one house rule regarding item creation: the creator has to equal or exceed the item's caster level in order to craft the item. This has reduced the potential bloat from player made items.Just out of curiosity, how do you guys deal with basically never being able to craft metamagic rods till level 17, since all of them (even lesser ones) are CL17+?Oh, so your DM feels rules bloat involving crafting items would make things too powerful, so he solves this by giving 125000gp items to a level 9 party.
Seems balanced. Really resolved that power creep problem right there.
These things can happen when your group plays with a Deck of Many Things and gets VERY lucky. ; )
|
I haven't encountered any "bloat" problems in the game I run, mostly because my players are not really interested in trying to bloat up their PCs. They love the archetypes, but otherwise are relatively plain vanilla with other stuff. Most are there for the story/adventure or the role-play interactions. For books I really only use the core book, APG, and Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat. Those easily cover what we need at the table. Sure, I have some 3rd party stuff too, but mostly to give me options/inspiration as a GM.
On the question of number of PCs/year, I rarely see final, irrevocable PC deaths, either as player or GM. Either the GM is over the top or the players need better tactics. I find it bizarre that a game would average even one character death per month. And why stay in a game with a killer GM? I've walked out on campaigns like that rather than waste my time.
... I find it bizarre that a game would average even one character death per month. And why stay in a game with a killer GM? I've walked out on campaigns like that rather than waste my time.
I've been in and enjoyed 'killer campaigns' several times. As long as it's known going in and it is fair across all players. It can still be fun. {Of course I won't spend hours agonizing over the back story like some people do in the more normal campaigns.} Sometimes it gives a more dangerous rather than fairy tale feel to the campaign. It can get old after a while though.
I think the only time this becomes a problem is at character creation. We have always been pretty open to new stuff. I or the other rotating GM's allow it, there is an occaisional conversation about what exactly an ability does. The GM or another player may look something over to make sure there is not a misunderstanding or a prerequisit not met. It is much much worse if you are starting at anthing above low level, but its more a kid in the candy store kinda feeling. I will say that the nature of bloat is toward specialization. Making characters very good at certain things and helpless in other situations.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I found the best way to handle bloat is to get the players interested in the campaign and their current character as much as possible. Once they are focused, their options are seriously reduced. The barbarian won't care at all about what is available for the wizard. He's concerned with the 2 options that affect his character.
Keep the players focused and interested on their character concept and run campaigns where the players are invested and interested and much of the bloat problem goes away. I didn't have a problem with bloat in 3.5 either and I own every book from every WotC setting plus Dragonlance.
|
|
I do not mind bloat in the least.
What I do not like is a player trying to outsmart the GM by creating a character who will make a big part of the scenarios useless with some surprise combo of abilities.
It feels too much like a players vs GM situation which is definitely not how I want to run my games.
I want players to trust me to take their characters through interesting adventures that will challenge their characters (both abilties and roleplay) as much as possible so that we can all have a good time together building an epic story.
Because of this, I spend a lot of time with my players when they create their character to better understand what they will be able to do and how they want to shine so that I can provide them with as much as I can.
I don't really see a bloat issue. You're talking about 4 books over the course of years, instead of the 4 books a month that Wizards was doing in 3.5. The fact that everything is on the PRD is pretty awesome as well. No more digging through books to find things.
I just wish the search function hadn't suddenly gone to crap on the PRD. These days it's absolutely useless for some reason.
I give bonus feats every level and in some cases in lieu of treasure. Too much great stuff, not enough time.
creatures/NPCs benefit from that as well, so things get highpowered but not unbalanced.
|
|
If there is never a new feat, class, arch-type, race, option or what ever introduced from this point forward I would be forever greatful.
Yeah. After Ultimate Equipment, if the RPG line dropped off to being only a bestiary every year or two, I would be perfectly fine with that. And really, I don't see any need for anything beyond that.
Bloat is actually pretty straightforwards to deal with in my opinion.
In my campaigns (for new archetypes and classes for instance) I create cultures/groups etc. which have 'Iconic Classes/Archetypes' which fit with the culture/races therein and would be well-supported by the institutions et al of that culture/subcultures.
I make it clear at the start of the campaign that Iconic Classes are the only ones which can be taken as Favoured Classes and that some Feats, Spells etc. will have restricted etc availability based on campaign norms - which includes any future decisions I make on newly released expansion material - allowing of course for discussion with players on what they would like to see included.
Most of what falls out of these reasonably extensive lists come under the 'Individualist' category which can be taken with some background justification but do not attract the Favoured Class bonuses.
As extra supplements come out with more choice - I deal with these in one of three ways;
1. Integrate them into exisiting cultures as lesser-known Iconic Classes (through subcultures etc.).
2. Introduce them as key components of newly discovered (from the PC's point of view) organisations (cults, mages circles, secretive sorcerous bloodlines etc.).
3. Put them in the Individualist category.
New Feats, Spells etc. can be dealt with similarly - with the added fun of allowing them to be reasearched or discovered by players or NPC's or introduced as 'lost lore' as treasure.
You shoudn't see anything new as 'bloat', merely as choice. YOU are the GM and YOU decide what goes in your campaign, how it goes in and how available it is.
Any player says they should be able to access something from an expansion just because it is in a book is a bad player and needs to to be reminded of the pre-established caveats of your campaign.
However, if they can justify the choices they want to make based on CAMPAIGN perogatives (rather than just a desire to play a 'special snowflake' which flies in the face of the campaign) then I can nearly always accomodate it as outlined above.
I normally follow the say yes rule but my group doesn't use any 3.5 stuff and rarely uses 3pp stuff. Anything published by paizo is fine and if something crops up (antagonise) then we deal with it on a case by case basis.
|
For my homegame, I limited character options to what is legal for PFS, though ive made a few exceptions here or there.
Keeps 3pp completely out, much to the disdain of one player. Also helps keep PCs in line more or less where I want them. Only other restrictions Ive done, I think are to ban gunslingers (it was still in playtesting when we started the game) and I have made a few requests of the part Summoner.
I asked him not to take the Huge sized evolution for his eidolon cause it would be really inconvenient for maps, etc. Ive also asked hi to refrain from summoning other monsters while his eidolon is out. He's generally fine with it, as we have a large party, though he knows that if I banish/ kill the eidolon, that gives him fre reign to summon to his hearts content.
+1
My view is that it takes more skill to challenge a party at that hairy edge where the players think they can beat something but just aren't sure than to make encounters so hard that there's regular PC deaths.
Now, at a high-enough level of play, PC death is not quite as onerous as it once was, but that doesn't really make the task any easier.
Basically for me, if something is outside the core rules, it requires approval from the dm.
This is the usual policy in (non-PFS) games I've played in, and the GMs are usually pretty mellow when it comes to approving stuff.