Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - PlzBreakMyCampaign

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 98
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: Tier System for Players (and DMs)
« on: June 01, 2018, 02:54:09 PM »
C's no random battles sounds like you used a hack and D's lack of consumables sounds like how people joke about never spending their items anyway.
You can just run all the time before you get the moogle charm. D is how people do C.

Also you could just cast Vanish & Doom on Atma to instantly kill him before he acts.
Absolutely not in BNW. It's a bug patch / retranslation / system overhaul and difficulty mod with a dark souls-esque community that insists its not too hard, you just need to git gud.

@BNW & Unprecedented Crisis, I watched an LP on it and found a great thread with some wonderful quotes about BNW:
(click to show/hide)

D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: Tier System for Players (and DMs)
« on: May 15, 2018, 05:12:15 PM »
It works between players the same way it does between different tiers of DMs and players: those on par will have a great time and those only 1 tier away will probably not have any problem with the difference. Two tiers away and players may feel slightly frustrated, but are unlike to voice it. More than that is asking for trouble.

Edit: Yes I did an FF6BNW challenge run. A) 1st play through (aka the same order as vanilla), B) blind (no guides however I did research everything I encountered), C) no random battles (this is harder than 0xp runs), D) no combat consumables (spamming lightning rods to beat all the bosses). I was gonna do it in vanilla but BNW was supposed to be "better" so I did it there. It was fun, although Atma was even more a choke point than expected. It basically forced in-battle save scumming via save states that made the rest of the game doable ... until meeting Atma again. I stopped there because it became too grindy/cheesy. With enough time, the same tactics would have prevailed again and on the end gauntlet. Don't go to their forums, though. They make Dota 2's Low Priority look like the world's most luxurious cruise.

D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: Tier System for Players (and DMs)
« on: May 01, 2018, 11:04:35 AM »
Always good to hear from you, Endarire. The grammar check is complete and I'll definitely check out that mod/hack. Thanks!

The power level of the game, isn't exactly what these tiers measure. It is true that a full on noob simply can't make a high-powered, polished build on their own; the learning curve is just too high. But it is also true that higher tier DMs and players do tend toward higher powered games compared to lowered tier players who can't handle the complexity.

There are two reasons a DM might be 'forced' to run a lower tier game. Perhaps a tier 1 DM wants a high powered game but his tier 1 and 2 players all want to have a commoner campaign. No one black-balls it and the vote is in: commoner campaign is a-go. But this is an outlier and we all know it. The usual reason for such a DM to run a lower powered game is to teach the tier 6, contain the tier 5, keep the tier 4 on track, and speed up the tier 3 player. None of those things are especially rewarding for higher tier DMs, even if they are necessary to keep a campaign running. Tier 4 or 5 DMs often actually like this state of affairs. And this is a good thing. It's to be expected due to close-tiering between DMs and players generally being more enjoyable. Long ago I was surprised by DM blurbs on roll20 saying something similar to this.

D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Tier System for Players (and DMs)
« on: April 30, 2018, 12:08:38 AM »
I know that people complain about too many tier systems (base classes, PrCs, templates, feats, races, spells...) but I'm just going to go for it. We need a tier system in the community for player & DM capability. Basically, it's a realistic measure of how much a player can handle and it will help players to player and player to DM relationships match better and understand where each is coming from. Thus, I present

The Tier System for Players (and DMs)

Players (from the DM's perspective):

Tier 1: He brought a whopper to the table. In fact, you learned a few things when reading his incredibly well-documented build. It took a while, but you had to hand it to him; the concept was clever and the fluff fit. You lean on him when it comes to setting up the battlefield, because he's the only one you can trust to not even think about metagaming. You were proud when he walked into the trap that killed his character that he knew was there. It's okay because he has a backup, you just need a five ten minute break to read over it. In the meantime, he'll be trying to optimize the party's next level up. That doesn't worry you, though. It's his schemes that totally take the do a 180 on you that worry you.

Tier 2: She not only remembers the story, she's the one doing gather information checks. She's got good modifiers and you didn't have to help her with it. Checking over her character sheet was easy because it was all brute-force, although she forgot to site the non-core stuff. She always handles herself and is a solid player, often answering other lower tier players' questions about the plot or even their own characters

Tier 3: He plays his build just fine. Sure, he just does a few things, rinse-and-repeat (swift action buff to charge or move and heal) but he only has to be reminded of plot points. Oh, and he'll need hand-holding for his build next campaign. You're fine with it because he's a normal player. You just with the process weren't so time-consuming when he can't choose quickly for himself.

Tier 4: She's played a few sessions but is absent-minded. "What's my modifiers on attack? What do you mean grapple is touch/hold/pull? What do you mean size modifier rather than just a straight a strength check? I'll just fire my bow," she says as she looks down at the highlighted line you added to her pre-generated character sheet. She hates all the rest of the numbers. It's too "busy" to look at. Players who stay at this tier for a long time probably don't want to be playing this game.

Tier 5: This guy has played RPGs before. Warcraft, AD&D, or M&M. He'll have to be taught, but it will be a quick read. LA is something he grasps quickly, but prepared vs spontaneous castings takes a few repetitions. This is going to take an hour to go through the SRD since he's curious but sometimes bothersome about it. Warlocks fill the pinnacle of power in his high-powered fantasies, but he knows they have too much going on for him to build ... yet. Slows down play while trying to understand parts of his character sheet. Players that aren't new but stay here are either thick or purposely being disruptive.

Tier 6: The complete newbie. Maybe she's heard of D&D before. But she's never played. You'll have to explain the stat scores first. Doesn't understand the generic, English meaning of the word "race". You don't bother showing her the SRD, or even a character sheet. You give her a hammer sword and hope that she listens when she explains that not everything is a nail dragon that needs immediate slaying. Players that aren't new but still treat everything as a nail often have large personal problems.

DMs (from the player's perspective):

Tier 1: He does everything your last great DM could do (see below) but this guy laughed at your psion. Not because he agreed that it was overpowered, but because you had called it "the most powerful character you've ever made." He raises your ante by suggesting some better powers and a PrC you've never heard of. You happily listen and are really excited when you realize just how nuts this campaign is going to be. You don't even read his house rules (all posted online) because it’s all common-sense stuff to you after a long, long browse. He even tells you not to hold back, which is a good thing because you feel your pulse pick up every time he tells you to roll initiative. This has to be the time you lose your favorite, crazy character, in a campaign he's adapting into 3e from someone else's material.

Tier 2: She can tell a story. Normally you stay aware from homebrew campaigns, but the maps drew you in. She's got voices for everyone, knows their family members and the plot twists are a real zinger. She even let you play that cool character idea you had, once you explained that it was just a low-power bruiser type. You didn't even feel bad when your LA-bought off, huge-sized character got pegged into unconsciousness by fliers since you waited to get flight until you had more WBL. You remember your great character lines and hope she's going to run another campaign after this one.

Tier 3: This guy runs a typical game. He listens to what psionics is actually more balanced than magic, but either lets you be an exception to the campaign world or hedges out psionics for "flavor reasons". ToB is tolerated despite the anime. Once you finally get a build accepted, it’s a decent ride though. The roleplay could have been better but you could tell he was trying. He runs the adventure book pretty much straight (you verify afterward) and you had about the amount of fun you expected. Maybe he'll grow into a better DM as you and your friends stick it out. That's normal, after all.

Tier 4: A typical low DM experience fits here. Maybe the DM invents house rules on the fly ... constantly. Maybe mind-controlled PCs happens for entire sessions. Maybe the DM thinks 'gritty low fantasy' weak-as-paper campaigns are all anyone should ever be allowed to play. Whatever the reason, you either forgot to ask, or ignored the red flag just because a buddy was playing. It's no big deal that your DFA 5 was ruled 'too powerful' in a party of wizard 5, cleric 5, druid 5. You won't bother building another character.

Tier 5: "Hey guys I've never DM'd before, but I've played a few pre-gens and it wasn't hard. Running this module will be about the same, right?" Only the most close-knit of friends have these campaigns. If you can call it that. Mostly it’s just a lot of joking around, Doritos and Mountain Dew. Reviewing footage of these games is boring/dumb/an IQ-dropping experience for higher tier players to watch.

Tier 6: The stuff of legends. Whole threads were born of "what was the worst DM you ever had?" answers. No evidence of these campaigns exist due to legal jeopardy and fleeing players. Penny Arcade mockeries made real are this tier.

Oddly, the original tiers thread discussed how parties that are more than 1 tier apart will have a not fun/stressful time. The same seems to go with DM's and players. Tier 3 players would not mind tier 3 DMs, nor matching tier 4 or 5s. But tier 2 players might tolerate tier 3 DMs. Sure, they might not say anything, but it just won't be as good an experience as a tier 2 player with a tier 2 DM. Tier 3 players will still like tier 2 DMs, but they probably won't realize how good they have it and tier 4 players certainly won't. Tier 1 players and DMs are rather rare but will also have their patience tested with tier 3's and flat out tension with tier 4s.

Also, like the tier system, there is nothing 'wrong' with being at any particular tier as a player. We were all new and sometimes you just don't want to play certain games. Most of us have even been 'too much' for certain DMs, even decent ones, to handle. But lower tier DMs seem different to me. I can't actually justify being in a lower tier because the bar is fairly well known. The whole point of DMing is that you can handle what your players throw at you. Yes, tier 4 DM's can technically get away with DMing a fairly smooth campaign if all players are tier 3's but that's usually a rarity. Most groups I see tend to have a tier 4 player, and a tier 2 player with everyone else being tier 3. Yes, the tier 4 could label the tier 2 player as 'a problem' and the campaign might go smoother without that one player, but that still doesn't sit right to punish the tier 2 player. Tier 5's should know better and if they manage to last, they only do so because they're mostly not playing much D&D. I have no comment on Tier 6's.

I should be clear that tier representations are an 'overall picture'. If your Tier 4 DM is a thespian with wonderful improv skills, he might jump to a tier 2 DM for a few moments every session. Also, I'd like to be clear that these tiers are mostly independent of work put in. Due to diminishing returns, it’s entirely possible that the tier 4 DM puts a huge amount of time into making a halfway decent campaign and it still doesn't click for a tier 2 player. And that's no one's fault. It's just the way it is since these things are mostly independent.

Lastly, I haven't discussed multi-DM dynamics much because they don't seem to be common, or at least not discussed much. From what I can see and my own experiences, co-DMs tend to have specialized jobs / division of labor and both DMs tend for form their own little cabal so that they are on the same page. Yes, it gets awkward when they correct each other during play, but the DMs tend to be the ones who want play to run the fastest anyway, so it tends to be so quick it’s hard for players to follow. Since similar groups seem rare, most of this part is drawn from my college, 9 player round-robin group with 2 switching DMs per mini-campaign. Still, having even co-DMs categorize themselves might speed up their synchronization process. I'm eager to hear from others who have had large enough gaming groups to require multiple simultaneous or campaign world-sharing DMs.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Re: Subforum Responces
« on: March 31, 2018, 05:28:41 PM »
which shows new threads
I've never been able to keep up with any forums' all threads posted. Maybe I was too thorough before or maybe these boards have slowed down now. I don't know. But good for your for keeping up with all of them.

I despise bans because it wreaks of kneejerk reactions and lack of thought. Because I can usually figure out how to replace something with a more balanced version of the idea fairly easily.
Please do try to get creative lieu of me. I've been devoting brain power to other things for months now. But keep in mind that I have 2 fair restrictive other considerations. 1) It has to still be the thing that it was trying to be, just balanced. So for instance Skarrunks weren't mention to cause Pun Pun. They were just meant to cause small mutations. So most of the Manipulate Form text can stay and Skarrunks will still feel like they are using Manipulate Form the way it was designed post-fix. 2) The fix itself has to be applied to something that resembles D&D. This might sound nebulous but just take it at face value. For instance, you can balance thought bottles by saying something like 'We aren't using XP anymore, and thought bottles now do something completely different.' Well that is balanced and it avoids a ban, but it doesn't feel like D&D anymore. It might be great. It might be better than D&D in a certain way. But I'm not making something new. I'm just fixing what is there.

But I'm serious about trying various fixes that I might not see. I would appreciate you trying to get somewhere with something that I gave up on.

you go and remove Rogue's immunity to Dex-to-AC-deprivation to replace it with Ref-save-against-saveless-spells
Did I? That should have been an option/addition rather than a removal. I'm still in the middle of dumping, so I'm going to request a quote so I can trace it.

If you err on the side of modularity, why have a ban list?
I don't. Although if you'd like to collate those things so I can triple-check them, it might be a good idea. At least for people who knee-jerk hate for me to ban / give up fixing something, it will tell them where to look to help.

you're trying to make a fair and balanced game out of a system that is literally intended to be unfair and imbalanced. Or at the very least copies far to much from a system designed to be (TSR era D&D) to make it fair and balanced without a complete rewrite of the classes and/or spells. You're doing a lot of small, fiddly changes filled with catches and exceptions that get increasingly convoluted and nonsensical in universe. A Bard taking levels in Sublime Chord has no logical reason, anywhere, to be suddenly losing a bundle of ability score points they chose in character generation.
I'd be interested if you can find proof that 3rd edition was meant to be as imbalanced as it is. I'm not aiming for total starcraft-level balance. Just a close enough approximation of how I see it played.

But on that last part, Bards x / Sublime Chord y doesn't have to start out with Bard PB. They start out with SC PB. D&D has never explicitly allowed PCs to change their full 20 level build mid play, except via retraining (which I don't like but does address your "nonsensical in-universe" complaint). Even if a DM allowed that among players, in a game where characters suddenly gain access to leveling details that change their abilities, changing their PB doesn't seem that far-fetched to me.  :huh

You're commiting the very same act of balancing that made people despise 4e by making the rules bend over for balance, instead of changing them to be balanced by default.
Uh. No people didn't like 4e because it starts them balanced by default, not because it was 3e with rules changed to bring balance.

Some people like playing ludicrously overpowered characters, you know?
Yes I do.

Furthermore, a lot of your anti-caster measures aren't actually solving any real problems, as the fundamental problem is the spells. If you've fixed the spells, then no other fix is needed, because then the casters are then balanced. If you haven't fixed the spells, and the casters still retain access to the full 9th level spells, then the game is wildly imbalanced.
Aside from that italicized part there in the middle you are a walking advertisement for my fixes. I want to thank you. The truth is, there are ways to break RAW 3rd edition even if all casting classes are banned. That's too harsh for me, obviously and more balanced then otherwise, but still not even close to fool-proof.

penalizing ... tier, it's mechanically unusable because the DM has no possible way to judge where a player's casting will stop with multiclassing
Ialready address above with asking for full ECL20 builds.

By penalizing the higher tiers in a blanket fashion, you kill a lot of character concepts because of the fact that too damn many are fused to t1 classes at the hip.
Such as? You're previous example was pretty lose and can be accomplished with a feat to use a spellbook and a feat to swap to more of an int caster. That hasn't changed.

If you want to balance the game, then rewrite the classes and their ability lists.
No. Absolutely not. That is a good way to make the game no feel like D&D, be a nightmare to keep track of for mental consistency, and make translating build ideas like you mentioned above very problematic. I'd like to draw your attention to your previous quote.

You also seem to fail to understand the feel of D&D 3.X, given the flat-bans on large categories of items for the side rules based on them, rather than digging into those side rules to work out the problems with them to render the item acceptable.
Slights aside, you are welcome to point to specifics.

Take everything that exists for PCs and work out how to balance the idea of it. Thought Bottles are a problem for negating XP costs, so make them do a different thing based on the same idea, like undoing negative levels and mental score damage, something attainable through regular spells, made easy with a small XP cost attached.
That first part is a little weak logically. Balancing "ideas" of PrCs don't tell DMs what to do when a Lifedrinker and a Planar Shephard are in the same campaign. As to your specifics that's not really what thought bottles do. They are very different, RAW, from a little restoration spell. Feel free to try again with exact text.

There's also some problems with interactions between your own altered rules. What's the "penalty" for players to take a dead PC's items, and therefore wealth, when they get the XP to match it, like you mentioned in Strict WBL Guidelines by saying that Profession of all things gives XP to keep you on track for WBL?
I would say "yay some better specifics" here but... there's no problem here. There is no penalty. If you take said items, it counts against WBL (probably in lieu of monster treasure or whatever). If you generate WBL with a non-combat method, your XP matches because you are doing something useful. There's no beef here that I see.

Furthermore, how do you solve all the problems wealth generation making XP gives? You'd have to remove every fast wealth loop, and I see nothing about Fabricate on here
Furthermore, tisk tisk.  :) Getting ahead of ourselves are we? I already said I haven't dumped the spell stuff yet. You are welcome to go dig up my previous download if you are impatient with me posting things here.

a Wizard can powerlevel forever by mass-producing Masterwork Full Plate and keeping it in their armory. And Wealth by Level is a fucking guideline. Just like the Custom Magic Item "rules". Actually identify this before you make rules respecting it, because people are not going to ever use rules that give a strict XP to GP ratio mandating that you be locked to a line on a graph with no deviation.
Whoa. Don't go off the deep end here. What's more balanced, a Commoner 1 with ECL 20 WBL, or a Commoner 20 with ECL1 WBL? It's a plot with a straight regression. You can still stay in 100% statistical congruence with that point plot while having non-discrete inflexion points. I never said the second derivative had to be locked at 0.

What the heck happens when you Wish for an item within the cost limit?
Patience, young padawan. Remember your training:
[if] casters still retain access to the full 9th level spells, then the game is wildly imbalanced
Good. Now focus. Maybe we can address. Maybe we already have and it's just not in front of you yet.

What if a DM wants to break the guidelines of WBL to give underperforming characters items that make up for minor deficiencies?
I'm pretty sure I mention in several places that it's fine for lower performing (tier, build choice, etc) characters to have individual-only rules bent for them (LA, prereqs, combos, etc). Higher performing players should expect that. DMs should also be up front about how much was bent for whom, even if the details are insignificant and likely to change between campaigns. But I'll mention this again in the strict WBL area, though.

You're not understanding that the point of 3.X is to play a role, and it's built from a system that respects the utterly plausible result of Sword Guy ending up utterly useless in a fight between reality warping madmen
That seems plausible to me. You're welcome to quote me otherwise, though. For someone I've only spoken to once, you seem to know a lot about me. :cool

Honestly, I'm just grumpy that he claims to be keeping the feel of 3.X while trying to be throwing out the caster's supremacy. Which is literally an intended part of the game design, or at the very least had no actions to correct that explicit design choice from 2e (and several actions that exaggerated 2e's acts of assuring it).
It's the second option. Don't be grumpy! I'm not going to fully overcome caster supremacy; it's going to be there. It will just be manageable enough that when you have a wizard, a cleric, a fighter, and monk in a party, half the players won't think there's no point in playing. You seem to reference GitP a lot, so maybe you'll remember that "how much should you go play super smash bros. in the other room" explanation to caster supremacy that was over there a while ago.

Pathfinder has a vastly more conservative focus on the core of the d20 system than even 3.X did, introducing vastly lower diversity in rules than D&D proper ever did. It still lacks a first-party caster-alike that uses an alternate resource system.
Well of course PF was core-centric. Core is, in general, less balanced pound for pound than material outside core. Diverse classes are good. You're doing a good job of strengthening my argument. If you like PF because of balance, then I could say your "claims are utterly contradictory to [your] goals." :P

@Soro I have no idea what you are talking about. Is "correct him over" even a real phrase? You never know with really British slang. Yes I official do welcome help, I just know you can't provide it. But I do know you will 1) show no clear inaccuracies (least of all actually being helpful) 2) show me insulting anyone (especially if your posts count as the standard of evidence for not insulting) 3) not resist posting on this board while you are off your meds. Case and point: my posts were not "posts were moved to the homebrew section". I asked for this sub board. I waited half a year for it, and had to wait half a year before that because the BGs abandoned the forum. I've purposely waiting patiently to my own thing without bothering anyone else so that way when you come out of your way to talk about trolling, it's nice and obvious who's trolling who.

Alas, you got me. I replied to your mashed post of random whining: "this is not ... a good suggestion of how [D&D's rules] should be played." Whatever. In fact, if you had A) offered real, helpful insight, B) offered a clear, logical progression of concise, specific citations, & C) actually generated content I could quote, then I'd tell you to keep whatever new prescription they got for you and cling to it for dear life. :lmao

This took too long. It's hot tub time. I'll be back next week. Neat sidenote:

The PBMC Metacompendium / Re: Subforum Responces
« on: March 23, 2018, 06:54:43 PM »
Hello Versatility Nut and welcome to the boards. I'm confident we've not spoken before. Thanks for dropping in. I am surprised anyone noticed, to be honest. Just an FYI I'm probably not going to do the other 50% dumping of the metacompendium today or tomorrow.

How about you consolidate things to particular topics
Because then it's too difficult to find. I've looked through others' (who throw the baby out with the bath water) and think. Okay, let's test if everything is fixed. And then I ctrl+f and find no reference to thought bottles. But I know they have to be thrown out because they break one of the major currencies in D&D: XP.

Do you want several hundred threads with the only search tool being the site?
Ideally, no. I'd prefer the ability to use subboards to organize things as I have in my already released download. But it was taxing to the already generous mods, and I was also told I should 'stop caring' so much about what others might think of my organization. I promptly put this down for a month; perhaps I did care too much. I figured some distance would help. I haven't decided either way. But a least this way I have confidence that I can link individual fixes for any particular fix. I am also wary of trying to overload information in clumps; I err on the side of modularity.

That's potentially annoying to everyone on the site, factually including me, which is why I made this post.
Why is what I do over here a problem? Are you implying there's a limit to how much may be posted per day? For months before and during my hiatus, I've made no secret about my intention to dump a lot at once.

@edit, I even mentioned the table of contents as my other option when my original organization plans were shot down. Perhaps you can organize things for me the way you'd like. If it's better, I'll use it. I'll be surprised if you walk the walk, but pleasantly.

:clap that you're still at it.
Yeah my spouse was wondering why I spent all day doing this. I didn't have a good answer of than, "It will help other people" access the information more easily. Also I have, like, a years worth of threads that I need to dump as well. I estimate that there's maybe 1+1+1+2= a full work week of manhours left before I'm 100% "free" of D&D. After that I think I'll capstone run DS3.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Weapons of Legacy
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:21:54 AM »
Only 1 armor and 1 weapon is allowed. You can't found hundreds of legacies.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Wands, Scrolls, Staves, Djores
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:21:19 AM »
These are all banned. NPCs can't use them either, though. Other rare charged items like crushing skull are ONLY allowed for spells with XP costs. This makes you dig hard to find methods to pay huge amounts of XP. Potions and Power stones are fine as are other non-charged variants like runestaves.

Insert partially charged cross-rank umd metamagic wand grip extent persist monks joke here. UMD is still too strong with just Scrolls & Staves gone. These allow reproducing any 3rd level effect twice a day or 4th level infrequently or 6th level ones depending on how far outside core you go. As usual, casters (specifically artificers) do this better anyways. Substituting WBL for pretty much the only significant casting-related restrictions (uses per day & list restrictions) was a bad idea in its current implementation, especially considering the volume of effects these items provide.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Vow of Poverty
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:20:09 AM »
PCs keep previous abilities when breaking the vow, if they say so up front upon taking the vow (assuming they are still Good). PCs do not regain WBL for the levels they held the vow.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Thought Bottle
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:19:27 AM »
[CArc150] It's banned.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Strict WBL
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:19:13 AM »
Strict WBL is 760k gp in an adventurers career, period. How much benefit you gain from those limited resources is up to you. This the only way to not end up with ridiculous player actions: You get WBL in coins, regardless of what you do with it.

If you are a rogue that didn't manage to steal extra loot, then that's fine, you don't gain the XP that would go with it. If you abuse profession then you gain the XP that comes with it. This encourages players to get ahead without making them try to purchase consumables and expect to be compensated for what they wasted down the road. They ARE useful if you need to 'play the margin' to get to the next level or defeat a very hard encounter, though.

Note: it's fine for lower performing (tier, build choice, etc) characters to have individual-only rules like this bent for them. Higher performing players should expect that. DMs should also be up front about how much was bent for whom, even if the details are insignificant and likely to change between campaigns.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Starmantle Cloak
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:18:05 AM »
[BoED116] It's banned.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Stacking Extra or Nondimensions
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:17:51 AM »
Extra or nondimensional spaces in other extra or nondimensional spaces do awful things. See ropetrick. Also see Planar Handbook's section on the astral plane. This is RAW, but people often forget it. Mixing of nondimensional spaces with extradimensional ones will be treated the same.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Spellblade Tennis
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:17:01 AM »
Don't allow it to reflect a spell more than once.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Slotless Item Costs
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:16:37 AM »
No DMG x2 cost for as many slotless items as you want.

The x1.5 gp cost [MIC] is instead more balanced to add onto an item. This keeps you considering the 200k pre-epic cost restriction.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Slotless Item and Magic Stacking
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:16:13 AM »
Certain items like pearls of power no longer stack since they are all in the (slotless) category but effect the same thing.

An armor and a shield enhancement like manifesting, though would stack because they can be worn at the same time and take up a slot.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Retributive Amulet
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:14:39 AM »
[BoED116], It's banned.

The PBMC Metacompendium / No Custom Items or Traps
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:14:23 AM »
Only sample traps are RAW. Other custom traps are basically custom items and therefore DM fiat. Players that want to make traps don't get much out of them. Tomb-tainted can get free out of combat healing for 1k rather than Dread Necro 1. "Boon traps are part of the dungeon and are immobile ... the magic that was infused into the walls or floor" so they are the twenty times more expensive version for those who are good aligned. There isn't much they can do besides cure and heal. Even the haste, animal growth, stoneskin or mass bear's endurance isn't that great.

Items that derive their statistics off of traps can only do so with stated statistics rather than imaginary possibilities. Sorry spell clocks. There's no getting around that 2 round wait.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Monk's Belt
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:13:44 AM »
No longer gives wis mod to AC.

The PBMC Metacompendium / Mirror of Opposition, Aleax, et al
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:13:16 AM »
Duplicated items only work for the duplicate. They disappear outside his control. Your duplicate cannot use your items unless he kills you, at which point the item limitations reverse (the duplicated items are 'normal' and your dead character's items only work for ... dead you).

Each method of making duplicates should allow only 1 duplicate at a time.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 98