Character Generation Rules

3.5 edition, Greyhawk setting (with various small house rules, see the House Rules handout in-game). Core+1: you can use the 3 core books plus one other book of your choice, which can be chosen at any point during the campaign but can't change once you choose it. The 3 core books are the Player's Handbook I, the Monster Manual I, and the Dungeon Master's Guide I. Your +1 book can be anything printed for 3.5, including third party books. If a book was printed for 3.0 but not updated for 3.5, it can be chosen but small adjustments might need to be made to bring it into line with 3.5's rule changes (at DM discretion). You can also use a webpage for your +1 book, such as the homebrew mechanics on D&D Wiki , but generally in this case only one individual page will count as your +1 book (confirm with the DM before choosing the page). Some +1 Books may have special restrictions, especially if from a different campaign setting or era; for example, mechs in the Dragonmech setting can't be used by PCs. Also, certain options from some books only add power to a character without reducing anything (there are lots of these in Unearthed Arcana, like Action Points and Gestalts, for example). These are a partial exception to the "+1 Book" rule, since they're intended to be applied to the entire campaign rather than just one PC. If you wish to use one of these from your +1 Book, it must be discussed with the DM first to find a way to make it balanced. Roll scores (must be done in roll20, so the chatlog will save them. You can use /roll 4d6d1 for each one), 25 point buy, or the elite array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8). Magic items are rare, must have DM approval for each one purchased at creation. Any portion of starting wealth (of player's choice) may be converted into various bonuses by DM; once chosen, can't be undone. A wizard starting above Level 1 may treat extra spells known as something that can have been purchased like magic items in her previous adventures. Each spell costs 100gp per spell level for scribing materials, plus the price for a scroll of that spell as the source for it (note that the scroll is consumed when the spell if learned). Evil and chaotic characters are allowed (and actually encouraged, given the nature of this campaign), as long as they don't disrupt the party dynamics. Sorcerers and Favored Souls get Eschew Materials as a lv1 bonus feat. Sorcerers get 2/3 BaB progression, d8 hit die, and Light Armor Training (Ex) which give them proficieny with light armor and light shields, and lets them ignore the arcane spell failure chance for light armor and light shields. Barbarians get  Improvised Weapon Proficiency  as a lv1 bonus feat. Druids add moose (Large, CR1), elk (Large, CR1), and deer (Medium, CR 1/4) to their list of basic animal companion options. Divine casters get small rewards for doing things in line with their deity/force's goals, which may be more potent if they serve a less popular deity or even a demideity like an archdevil/archangel/etc. You can find a partial list of deities and demideities on my campaign blog here , and more on Wikipedia (just make sure they're for Greyhawk and 3.5). If you want to worship one of these lesser forces, PM me for more info. Knowledge (psionics), Psicraft, and Autohypnosis (from the Psionics Handbook) are core skills.  Psicraft is a class skill for Wizards, Autohypnosis is a class skill for Monks and Fighters. Knowledge (psionics) is included as a class skill for any class that gets Knowledge (any). The Fire domain is available to clerics of Wee Jas. Must start at ECL 3 (currently). Starting wealth is 2700 gp. Get DM approval for any magic items you want to purchase at character creation. If you take a feat that modifies starting gold (see below): roll starting gold, choose the average starting gold for your class, or choose a starting package from the PHB and roll remaining coins (these rolls must also be done in roll20, so the chatlog will save them). The resulting coin value is X. Subtract X from 2700 gp (the result is N), then apply the feat's modifier to X, and add the result to N for your total starting coin value. Kobolds have a -1 Level Adjustment (so for example, a kobold with 3 levels in the fighter class is ECL2). Venerable characters with normal aging penalties have a -1 Level Adjustment. Characters with at least 2 levels in NPC classes (Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner, or Adept) have a -1 Level Adjustment. A player can only make a new PC if all their current PCs have permanently died or were forced to leave the party for narrative reasons. Cohorts are exempt from this rule, since they're still partly NPCs. =[Advice for New Players]================================================= My campaigns are varied and complex, so damage-focused "min-maxed" characters don't often shine brighter in them. This is a perfect opportunity to play a type of character you never have before, or try new things that don't often work well or get used in D&D. Perhaps a rogue who's great at forgery, an illusionist or diviner, a veteranarian ranger, a social manipulator, a secret poisoner, an herbologist, a gem expert, a trapsmith... I will happily accommodate and support all sorts of different and unusual character choices. And while everyone should be able to do at least some damage, the most effective party in my world is one that is versatile enough to meet any kind of challenge. Player characters will also be rewarded for behaving more realistically, like spending gold on comforts and using abilities/skills/spells that do something we normally take for granted (like create water for filling their waterskins or the Autohypnosis skill for memorization). My campaign world is extremely rich in detail, and while you don't NEED to pay close attention to succeed, if noticing clues and puzzling out secrets is something you enjoy there is definitely plenty of advantage to be gleaned from it in-game. There will be lots of foreshadowing, subtle hints, and worldbuilding going in in the background throughout, and very little of it is useless fluff. If you're the type that enjoys details, I strongly suggest that you (and your character, which means having it on your character sheet with writing materials) keep a campaign journal for notes on things you encounter: symbols, sigils, monster abilities, names, dates, events, etc. You don't need to record everything, or even most things, but it's a good way to remember important information, especially when there's player turnover. Remember that the materials your equipment is made out of are important. You should note the material of any weapons and armor you have on your character sheet, including things you buy or loot off of enemies. Steel, wood, and leather are common among humans, but in the wilds you might also run into things made of bone, stone, shell, chitin, bronze, ivory, etc. Also, keep in mind that some general gear like books, paper, scrolls, maps, etc, can easily be damaged or ruined by exposure to water. Waterproof containers are available, but you need to make sure you have delicate things inside them when you jump in a lake, or deal with the consequences. Exception: By default, spellbooks are made to be sturdy enough to handle rough weather and immersion in water due to the importance and cost of their contents. ===================================== The following feats are also available to new characters (note: these are NOT bonus feats, just additional options): Blood of Osano-Wo [Ancestor] Prerequisite: Rokugani Crab clan champion (formerly human, now a Fortune of Fire and Thunder) Osano-Wo is your ancestor Benefit: You gain a +4 bonus to the following rolls: Fortitude saves made to avoid nonlethal damage from hot or cold environments, Fortitude saves against wind, Reflex saves against lightning (including natural lightning as well the effects of spells like  call lightning  and  lightning bolt ), and ranged attack rolls made in precipitation or severe and higher winds. You count as one size category larger for calculating the effects of wind on your body. Your Rokugani blood also makes you vulnerable to the Taint. Special: You can only take this feat at 1st level, and it can never be retrained. You must have the named ancestor, and be a race for which that is possible. Familiarity [Bloodline] Prerequisite: Ability to summon a familiar, powerful wizard or sorcerer ancestor Benefit: For the purpose of calculating your familiar's abilities, treat your level in the class that grants you it as 2 levels higher. If you have levels in multiple classes that grant familiars, treat only one as 2 levels higher. Special: You can only take this feat at 1st level, and it can never be retrained. Gravetouched [Bloodline] Prerequisite: Undead ancestor Benefit: Undead see you as one of their own kind. Mindless undead may not attack you, and intelligent undead start one level friendlier than normal. Special: You can only take this feat at 1st level, and it can never be retrained. Green Heart [Bloodline] Prerequisite: Plant ancestor Benefit: You gain +2 to saves vs the abilites of plant creatures and spells that use plants to attack you. Special: You can only take this feat at 1st level, and it can never be retrained. Landless Nobility [Regional] Prerequisite: From a branch of the large pre-revolutionary royal family of the United Republic of Oranzius Benefit: After rolling starting gold or taking the average for your class, double it before purchasing any equipment. You gain +4 on Charisma-based checks with anyone from the United Republic of Oranzius. Special: You can only take this feat at 1st level. If you create a character above 1st level, only the portion of your starting gold that you would have had at 1st level is affected by this feat. Linguist [Regional] Prerequisite: From Hamilia, Kingdom of Provincia, or Zenith of the United Republic of Oranzius Benefit: You start with 2 additional bonus languages, Speak Language is always a class skill for you, and you gain +1 to Decipher Script and Sense Motive checks. Special: You can only take this feat at 1st level. Stormlord Guardian [Regional] Prerequisite: From Stormlands, magically altered in the womb to serve as a bodyguard of the stormlords Benefit: Your Wisdom score is treated as 2 points higher for determining the effects and DCs of your monk special abilities. Special: You can only take this feat at 1st level, and can take it even if you do not yet have any monk levels. Wealthy Parents [Regional] Prerequisite: From a minor noble family or wealthy merchant family in Hamilia Benefit: After rolling starting gold or taking the average for your class, increase it by 105% before purchasing any equipment (for example, 100 starting gold would become 205 starting gold). Special: You can only take this feat at 1st level. If you create a character above 1st level, only the portion of your starting gold that you would have had at 1st level is affected by this feat.

please provide me with a ingame char sheet, thx.

Frederik B. said: please provide me with a ingame char sheet, thx. There's one there for you now. :)

I have a couple of questions for character creation.  Are we allowed to take traits and flaws for our character?  For Cleric domains, are we restricted to the book, because some of the Grey hawk deities that I am interested in do not have them in the core books, and their portfolio can be found in other books.  Should I DM you the book that I have chosen as my +1 ? I am using myth-weaver to make my character, would you like me to send that to you or change it over to roll20?  Are the +1 books that we pick only for our character, or can anyone share from their plus 1 book? Since this is an evil campaign, would we be able to use the rituals and stuff from BoVD without selecting the book?

I am just going to let you know, you did not put the source restrictions on your LFG page. And seeing that you are restricting it THAT MUCH  I am not sure I am okay with playing this campaign. I applied thinking you were allowing the normal content that people allow. You also said that this is your 10th campaign and that you are experienced as a DM, but I do not know of any other experienced DM that restricts it to Core only, and then opens it up to homebrew content also. Because to me, that seems like a giant red flag. I strongly urge you to consider opening up the sources, because there will likely be other people that come in who will be just as surprised as I am.

Properbo said: Are we allowed to take traits and flaws for our character?  For Cleric domains, are we restricted to the book, because some of the Grey hawk deities that I am interested in do not have them in the core books, and their portfolio can be found in other books.  Should I DM you the book that I have chosen as my +1 ? I am using myth-weaver to make my character, would you like me to send that to you or change it over to roll20?  Are the +1 books that we pick only for our character, or can anyone share from their plus 1 book? Since this is an evil campaign, would we be able to use the rituals and stuff from BoVD without selecting the book? You can take traits and flaws if your +1 book includes them. Same for cleric domains, and materials from BoVD. Please let me know your +1 book, though it doesn't need to be a secret either. I'll make you a sheet in-game shortly, please keep track of your character there. Your +1 book is just for your character. I understand that sometimes items and things from them get shared though the natural course of the story, but please try to respect the spirit of the rule when it comes to things like that (ie, don't find items from your book just  so you can give/sell them to other PCs). October31st said: I am just going to let you know, you did not put the source restrictions on your LFG page. And seeing that you are restricting it THAT MUCH  I am not sure I am okay with playing this campaign. I applied thinking you were allowing the normal content that people allow. You also said that this is your 10th campaign and that you are experienced as a DM, but I do not know of any other experienced DM that restricts it to Core only, and then opens it up to homebrew content also. Because to me, that seems like a giant red flag. I strongly urge you to consider opening up the sources, because there will likely be other people that come in who will be just as surprised as I am. I did make the game forums public, and sticky this thread on top of them, but I suppose it's not a bad idea to direct people to it in the write-up as well. I can assure you that despite things like the Core+1 rule being quite rare, it's improved the quality of my campaigns immensely since I started using it. Most players balk a little, or ask for exceptions, at first, but once they've played a while with it almost everyone seems happier. I've found over the years that it's a simple and effective way to balance power levels and keep the focus on story and characterization. But if you still feel it's too restrictive and don't want to play, no hard feelings.

Max said: Snip Ill send you my +1 once ive settled on an idea, got to look through any fun classes or anything I want to play. Seems as though traits and flaws are SRD, so I'd have to take a look with them in I guess. 

I'll make you a sheet in-game shortly, please keep track of your character there. The only things I ever put on my Roll20 sheet are my ability scores, initiative, and saves. And that is only so I can roll them. Everything else I do on Mythweavers, because the 3.5 sheet on Roll20 is literally broken. You can take traits and flaws if your +1 book includes them. Same for cleric domains, and materials from BoVD. If you are running an evil campaign then BoVD, HoH, EE, FC1, FC2, and FF should all be considered core. Those are the books that basically outline  evil characters. Without those you can't play evil, you're just murder hobos. I did make the game forums public, and sticky this thread on top of them The creation rules are not on the LFG forums, they are only available after you join the campaign. I can assure you that despite things like the Core+1 rule being quite rare, it's improved the quality of my campaigns immensely since I started using it.  Most players balk a little, or ask for exceptions, at first, but once they've played a while with it almost everyone seems happier. Core+1 is rare for good reason, 99% of 3.x players want to play all of the edition, not just the core. The only quality it would improve would be the roleplaying aspect part of it, rather than anything else. The only campaigns that (successfully) use core only are RP heavy campaigns. The reason people balk at it is because 3.x is the edition with the largest wealth of content and you are restricting it to 3 books only. I've found over the years that it's a simple and effective way to balance power levels and keep the focus on story and characterization. I feel like the only reason anyone should run core only in 3.5 for balancing reasons is if there are only new players in the campaign. But with veteran players it’s extremely restrictive and forces everyone to play cookie cutter characters. And if you’re doing it for balance reasons, then doing core +1 and allowing homebrew is not the way to do that. Because allowing homebrew alone throws balance out the window. On top of that, a knowledgeable player can throw off balance with core only. Having played since 3.0 was the most recent edition, core only is extremely boring for me. I have seen every possible character in the core (yes every one).  At the same time, I absolutely hate homebrew and as a DM I never allow it in my campaigns. There is enough content in 3.x that you don’t need it.

Properbo  said: Max  said: Snip Ill send you my +1 once ive settled on an idea, got to look through any fun classes or anything I want to play. Seems as though traits and flaws are SRD, so I'd have to take a look with them in I guess.  Traits and flaws  are  in the SRD, but since the SRD includes most of the materials from several other books as well as the 3 core books, it's too big of a resource by itself to count as a +1 book. The trait and flaw rules in it are taken from Unearthed Arcana, I believe, which is fine as a +1 book (though if you pick it, keep it mind that I don't allow gestalt characters). October31st  said: I'll make you a sheet in-game shortly, please keep track of your character there. The only things I ever put on my Roll20 sheet are my ability scores, initiative, and saves. And that is only so I can roll them. Everything else I do on Mythweavers, because the 3.5 sheet on Roll20 is literally broken. While I prefer your sheet to be tracked in-game, I suppose it's alright to use Mythweavers if the Roll20 sheets really bother you. They  do  have some bugs that annoy me, though I've found fixes or workarounds for most of them. October31st  said: You can take traits and flaws if your +1 book includes them. Same for cleric domains, and materials from BoVD. If you are running an evil campaign then BoVD, HoH, EE, FC1, FC2, and FF should all be considered core. Those are the books that basically  outline  evil characters. Without those you can't play evil, you're just murder hobos. You wouldn't consider a gang of roving serial killers to be evil? :P October31st said: I did make the game forums public, and sticky this thread on top of them The creation rules are not on the LFG forums, they are only available after you join the campaign. You're right that they're not on the LFG forums, but they are  available to view without joining. You can see for yourself by logging out and then going to this page's url. However, I don't want them to go unnoticed, so I've now added a link to them in the game's LFG ad writeup. October31st said: I can assure you that despite things like the Core+1 rule being quite rare, it's improved the quality of my campaigns immensely since I started using it.  Most players balk a little, or ask for exceptions, at first, but once they've played a while with it almost everyone seems happier. Core+1 is rare for good reason, 99% of 3.x players want to play all of the edition, not just the core. The only quality it would improve would be the roleplaying aspect part of it, rather than anything else. The only campaigns that (successfully) use core only are RP heavy campaigns. The reason people balk at it is because 3.x is the edition with the largest wealth of content and you are restricting it to 3 books only. I've found over the years that it's a simple and effective way to balance power levels and keep the focus on story and characterization. I feel like the only reason anyone should run core only in 3.5 for balancing reasons is if there are only new players in the campaign. But with veteran players it’s extremely restrictive and forces everyone to play cookie cutter characters. And if you’re doing it for balance reasons, then doing core +1 and allowing homebrew is not the way to do that. Because allowing homebrew alone throws balance out the window. On top of that, a knowledgeable player can throw off balance with core only. Having played since 3.0 was the most recent edition, core only is extremely boring for me. I have seen every possible character in the core (yes every one).  At the same time, I absolutely hate homebrew and as a DM I never allow it in my campaigns. There is enough content in 3.x that you don’t need it. From a game design perspective, no matter what game you're building, giving players everything they want is usually going to ruin the game for them. Restricting options does  improve roleplaying, and since D&D is a roleplaying game, that's a pretty important thing to improve. Even before they're built, I try to always encourage PCs to think and act in-character, and focus on their in-game interactions with the world rather than pouring through stacks of books for rules to take advantage of. As for balance, one of the ways the Core+1 rule fixes it is  between new players and experienced ones, by leveling the playing field somewhat. It doesn't force cookie cutter characters at all, either, since Core alone (not to mention a whole other book too) provides sufficient mechanics for generating thousands, if not millions, of unique and interesting characters. The option of homebrew doesn't cause problems for me either, since I always review it first, and can make adjustments if needed to balance it (which I usually have to do, since most inexperienced content creators tend to build overpowered things). While an experienced player could break the balance with Core only, doing so would not be in the spirit of the rules--in situations like that, I usually talk to the player about it directly, although it also rarely happens with the Core+1 rule, since it creates the kind of environment that naturally discourages that type of powergaming (another important game design principle: players respond to their evironmental cues). If you've had too much experience in Core alone for it to still carry novelty, I suggest finding an interesting +1 book to draw from, or even a homebrew source (I'm not sure why you hate it so much, since aside from balance--which won't be a problem here--the difference between published materials and homebrew materials is just whether someone got paid to make them up).

Small update, since the last of the PCs just leveled during their last big battle, the new people can start at ECL 2.

The trait and flaw rules in it are taken from Unearthed Arcana, I believe, which is fine as a +1 book (though if you pick it, keep it mind that I don't allow gestalt characters). That is a waste of a +1 though, grabbing UA just for content that is standard in every campaign. From a game design perspective, no matter what game you're building, giving players everything they want is usually going to ruin the game for them. Not in my 10 years of experience as a DM. That is actually what lets people play actually interesting and unique characters. Letting people use homebrew is what ruins it. Restricting options  does  improve roleplaying, and since D&D is a  roleplaying  game, that's a pretty important thing to improve. It is an RPG with rules for everything except  the roleplaying, except for how skills interact with NPC's and such. The only reason to improve the roleplaying side of it is if you are not interested in running a D&D game. From the sounds of it you are trying to run an RP, not a campaign. Even before they're built, I try to always encourage PCs to think and act in-character, and focus on their in-game interactions with the world rather than pouring through stacks of books for rules to take advantage of. Players always think and act in-character because that is the entire point of the game. The inherent problem with trying to run an RP focused campaign that is restricted to core only is that you will always see the same characters always with no exceptions. As for balance, one of the ways the Core+1 rule fixes it is  between  new players and experienced ones, by leveling the playing field somewhat.  It doesn't force cookie cutter characters at all, either, since Core alone (not to mention a whole other book too) provides sufficient mechanics for generating thousands, if not millions, of unique and interesting characters. It absolutely does not. Want an example? Pun-Pun. The reason that it doesn't provide enough content for that is because people will only ever pick the same things over and over again. Edgy rogue, nerdy/power hungry wizard, hot headed sorcerer, big dumb barbarian, stuck up/deus vult paladin, peaceful monk, drizzt knock off ranger, "lives for the fight" fighter, and hippy druid. There are no exceptions to this . The option of homebrew doesn't cause problems for me either, since I always review it first, and can make adjustments if needed to balance it (which I usually have to do, since most inexperienced content creators tend to build overpowered things). While an experienced player  could  break the balance with Core only, doing so would not be in the spirit of the rules--in situations like that, I usually talk to the player about it directly, although it also rarely happens with the Core+1 rule, since it creates the kind of environment that naturally discourages that type of powergaming (another important game design principle: players respond to their evironmental cues). That is the specific reason not to allow homebrew content in the first place. Did you even read one of the homebrew classes being used? Dark Seductress is way  overpowered. Putting out a campaign that is core only and allowing in vets (and not making exceptions for them) is a good way to get the community pissed off at you. It is also a good way to get them to come in and break it intentionally. Of course it would not be in the spirit of the rules, but it is also not in the spirit of the edition to restrict it to core only for vets. It not only discourages powergaming, it also discourages unique and flavorful characters. If you've had too much experience in Core alone for it to still carry novelty, I suggest finding an interesting +1 book to draw from, or even a homebrew source (I'm not sure why you hate it so much, since aside from balance--which won't be a problem here--the difference between published materials and homebrew materials is just whether someone got paid to make them up). The problem with only having a +1 to pull from is that you can't just pull from one source alone. It is just the same as doing core only, just with an extra bit of dirt thrown in the player's face. Homebrew sources are 100% unbalanced, untrusted, and cringeworthy. The difference between published content and homebrew isn't just that the authors were paid to write them, they were paid to make sure they were balanced for the game, because they were paid to do so.

October31st said: From a game design perspective, no matter what game you're building, giving players everything they want is usually going to ruin the game for them. Not in my 10 years of experience as a DM. That is actually what lets people play actually interesting and unique characters. Letting people use homebrew is what ruins it. It sounds like you've had some problems with really badly made homebrew stuff, then. Once it's properly balanced, it's no different from published splatbooks. October31st said: Even before they're built, I try to always encourage PCs to think and act in-character, and focus on their in-game interactions with the world rather than pouring through stacks of books for rules to take advantage of. Players always think and act in-character because that is the entire point of the game. The inherent problem with trying to run an RP focused campaign that is restricted to core only is that you will always see the same characters always with no exceptions. In all the years I've been running Core+1 campaigns, I don't think I've ever  seen the same type of character repeated, even once. October31st said: As for balance, one of the ways the Core+1 rule fixes it is  between  new players and experienced ones, by leveling the playing field somewhat.  It doesn't force cookie cutter characters at all, either, since Core alone (not to mention a whole other book too) provides sufficient mechanics for generating thousands, if not millions, of unique and interesting characters. The reason that it doesn't provide enough content for that is because people will only ever pick the same things over and over again. Edgy rogue, nerdy/power hungry wizard, hot headed sorcerer, big dumb barbarian, stuck up/deus vult paladin, peaceful monk, drizzt knock off ranger, "lives for the fight" fighter, and hippy druid. There are no exceptions to this . While I've seen examples of most of these, I've always seen dozens of exceptions in my Core+1 campaigns. Again, players take cues from their environment: if the world displays a creativity and versatility that doesn't rely upon mechanics, they'll usually do the same.  October31st said: The option of homebrew doesn't cause problems for me either, since I always review it first, and can make adjustments if needed to balance it (which I usually have to do, since most inexperienced content creators tend to build overpowered things). While an experienced player  could  break the balance with Core only, doing so would not be in the spirit of the rules--in situations like that, I usually talk to the player about it directly, although it also rarely happens with the Core+1 rule, since it creates the kind of environment that naturally discourages that type of powergaming (another important game design principle: players respond to their evironmental cues). That is the specific reason not to allow homebrew content in the first place. Did you even read one of the homebrew classes being used? Dark Seductress is way  overpowered. Putting out a campaign that is core only and allowing in vets (and not making exceptions for them) is a good way to get the community pissed off at you. It is also a good way to get them to come in and break it intentionally. Of course it would not be in the spirit of the rules, but it is also not in the spirit of the edition to restrict it to core only for vets. It not only discourages powergaming, it also discourages unique and flavorful characters. As I said, I read all of the homebrew materials players use for +1 books and adjust it as needed. Dark Seductress was  overpowered, which is why I make adjustments to balance it before I let it in. And to be frank, I don't care at all what "the community" thinks of my campaign. I care what my players  think, and what kind of experience they have, which is why I strive to make it as fun and engaging as possible for everyone involved. I get that you think 3.5 edition should only be played in one specific way, but I have to disagree entirely: D&D isn't really a game , so much as a set of tools for building a game. It is the nature of the system to be endlessly customizable. There are pros and cons to doing this, and the values change over different scales, but over the years I've found a balance that brings out the kind of gameplay and roleplay I most enjoy engaging with as a DM. For those who enjoy the same thing, I'm happy to build a world around them and tell a story with them; for those that don't, well, as you pointed out, 'every other campaign' is still available. 

It sounds like you've had some problems with really badly made homebrew stuff, then. Once it's properly balanced, it's no different from published splatbooks. I still don't trust homebrew content, even after its been vetted. And it isn't so much that I've had problems, there is just so much content is way overpowered that it is impossible to sift through it all to find balanced content. And when it comes to the DM "balancing it", we might have very different opinions on what balanced is. In all the years I've been running Core+1 campaigns, I don't think I've  ever  seen the same type of character repeated, even once. They have probably been 99.99% RP for that to happen. And at that point it isn't D&D anymore. As I said, I read all of the homebrew materials players use for +1 books and adjust it as needed. Dark Seductress  was  overpowered, which is why I make adjustments to balance it before I let it in. And to be frank, I don't care at all what "the community" thinks of my campaign. I care what my  players  think, and what kind of experience they have, which is why I strive to make it as fun and engaging as possible for everyone involved. You probably should think of what the community thinks. If you get a bad reputation as a DM on Roll20 people will avoid the campaign altogether and you won't be able to get new players in. I get that you think 3.5 edition should only be played in one specific way, but I have to disagree entirely: D&D isn't really a  game , so much as a set of tools for  building  a game. It is the nature of the system to be endlessly customizable. There are pros and cons to doing this, and the values change over different scales, but over the years I've found a balance that brings out the kind of gameplay and roleplay I most enjoy engaging with as a DM. For those who enjoy the same thing, I'm happy to build a world around them and tell a story with them; for those that don't, well, as you pointed out, 'every other campaign' is still available.  It's not about there being one specific way to be played, its the opposite. Having all of the edition usable lets you play the game in more ways than you can when you restrict it to core. That is the nature of the system because  there is so much content. I feel like the reason you restrict it to core only isn't for "balancing reasons", but because some bad player brought in an optimized character and ruined your campaign or derailed it at one point. The problem that I am having is that I cannot  build anything fun with core only because I have literally exhausted all options and combinations available in the core. When I join a campaign I want to play something new, rather than something recycled, and only having access to core means that I have to play a character that I have played several times over. Sure I can refluff it to make it look like someone else, but it will be the same character on the sheet.

All i have to say after reading lots of this.  If you have such major issues with how the DM runs his games and the choices of what he allows, doesn't allow, etc.  Why are you still talking here and not just moving on to play in a different campaign if this one is not vibing with you? Otherwise I will simply add these tidbits. As a player I think the +1 concept was refreshing and new and so far has really made a wide range of different characters in the campaign. I have played in campaigns that allow tons of different books and materials as well as games with just the very basic core books or SRD. Basic Core SRD makes for very cookie cutter boring characters and having tons of different books and materials from where people can cherry pick all kinds of feats and other things from all over different books and material also makes for a less realistic and less fun experience for me. This latter option usually revolving around rather overpowered characters/builds that cherry pick all the right things for some really rediculous wombo combo's etc.  I have also greatly enjoyed the setting and how the game has been playing out so far. So as far as I'm concerned whatever the DM has been doing seems to be working from my perspective, I  speak happily for at least one of the other players that I know is also enjoying the campaign.

Oh one last thing to add, Plenty of published material has been grossly overpowered or of severely different power levels where some are exceptionally weak/bad and other published material is amazingly strong.

I don't think much can compete with power attack, invisibility and polymorph.

Why are you still talking here and not just moving on to play in a different campaign if this one is not vibing with you? Because obviously I do not plan on leaving and am trying to understand why things are the way they are. Or I am tired of running into campaigns that use Core only and just want to play. I have not been able to play in a campaign in a while, as there are lots of players, but no DM's. As a player I think the +1 concept was refreshing and new and so far has really made a wide range of different characters in the campaign. I have played in campaigns that allow tons of different books and materials as well as games with just the very basic core books or SRD. Basic Core SRD makes for very cookie cutter boring characters and having tons of different books and materials from where people can cherry pick all kinds of feats and other things from all over different books and material also makes for a less realistic and less fun experience for me. This latter option usually revolving around rather overpowered characters/builds that cherry pick all the right things for some really rediculous wombo combo's etc.  You are right, it is a new concept but it is not very refreshing. This is still a Core only campaign, even if it allows one extra book of your choice.  Please tell me how a Shadowcaster from Tome of Magic that uses feats and sources from several outside sources to become average power level, or on par with a core sorcerer, is some how less realistic or fun? You are reusing the same opinions that people who have had their experiences ruined are saying. You don't dislike the content because the wealth of it is inherently bad, you just don't like it because someone broke a campaign you were in. So it left a bad taste in your mouth making you stereotype everyone that uses all of the content. Oh one last thing to add, Plenty of published material has been grossly overpowered or of severely different power levels where some are exceptionally weak/bad and other published material is amazingly strong. Yes, and that is why the DM should vet the characters before they enter the game instead of just banning entire sources (in this case everything non core). Because if he can vet homebrew content coming in for balance, what is so hard about vetting official content coming into the campaign? (If you actually find it hard to do this, there are guides available to show you what is and is not broke/overpowered) At this point, I am just tired of looking around for campaigns with DM's that allow all content. Because the only players/DM's entering 3.5e are people that started in 5e and think that anything that isn't super simple to understand is "overpowered" or "broken". I will just have to find some homebrew content that either isn't super cringeworthy or obviously broken.

October31st said: It sounds like you've had some problems with really badly made homebrew stuff, then. Once it's properly balanced, it's no different from published splatbooks. And it isn't so much that I've had problems, there is just so much content is way overpowered that it is impossible to sift through it all to find balanced content. The point of the +1 rule is that there isn't so much content: usually just a few pages to check. Easy-peasy. October31st said: It sounds like you've had some problems with really badly made homebrew stuff, then. Once it's properly balanced, it's no different from published splatbooks. And when it comes to the DM "balancing it", we might have very different opinions on what balanced is. Yes, players and DMs often disagree about whether content is acceptable. That's why there's a DM. Part of the job of the DM is to be the final arbiter for a campaign, so that things don't dissolve into endless arguing. October31st said: As I said, I read all of the homebrew materials players use for +1 books and adjust it as needed. Dark Seductress  was  overpowered, which is why I make adjustments to balance it before I let it in. And to be frank, I don't care at all what "the community" thinks of my campaign. I care what my  players  think, and what kind of experience they have, which is why I strive to make it as fun and engaging as possible for everyone involved. You probably should think of what the community thinks. If you get a bad reputation as a DM on Roll20 people will avoid the campaign altogether and you won't be able to get new players in. I appreciate your concern, but I think you vastly underestimate how large the world is. I will literally always have more people interested than I have room for in my campaigns, especially because, as you pointed out, "there are lots of players, but no DM's." It makes no sense to try to run a campaign I won't enjoy, just to cater to people I don't need to satisfy. Venom said: having tons of different books and materials from where people can cherry pick all kinds of feats and other things from all over different books and material also makes for a less realistic and less fun experience for me. This latter option usually revolving around rather overpowered characters/builds that cherry pick all the right things for some really rediculous wombo combo's etc.  I have also greatly enjoyed the setting and how the game has been playing out so far. So as far as I'm concerned whatever the DM has been doing seems to be working from my perspective, I  speak happily for at least one of the other players that I know is also enjoying the campaign. I'm very happy that you're enjoying the campaign so much, Venom. I also agree that unrestricted source material produces less immersive characters and encourages powergaming. I started trying out the Core+1 rule years ago, not because "some bad player brought in an optimized character and ruined your campaign or derailed it at one point", but because most of the players did that in every campaign I played in or ran. For years . When everyone does the same thing wrong, it's not a fault of the players, but of the system: when it encourages that, players will do it. October31st said: The problem that I am having is that I cannot  build anything fun with core only because I have literally exhausted all options and combinations available in the core. When I join a campaign I want to play something new, rather than something recycled, and only having access to core means that I have to play a character that I have played several times over. Sure I can refluff it to make it look like someone else, but it will be the same character on the sheet. Maybe I can help with ideas. Here are some character concepts from my notes, on the offchance there's one or two you haven't tried, or at least haven't played in a while: Ranger with special focus in veterinary healing and wild empathy Archer who uses Mounted Combat from an armored battlecart full of weapons and supplies, pulled by a barded donkey Trapper barbarian with a club and Exotic Weapon Proficiency to use a bear trap as a reach weapon Bard who's taken a Vow of Silence, and draws attention to the ambient sound for his bardic "music" Witch-like druid with a flock or crows or swarm of insects as her animal companion Retiarias-style fighter with throwing net and tridents Fighter/monk who specializes in a wide variety of throwing weapons for different situations Ninja pretending to be another class while long-conning the party into bringing him near their boss for an assassination Hardened dungeoneer who uses Weapon and Torch [style] feat to debuff and strike at the same time Rogue forger with Bluff and Profession (clerk) who spends his time making a variety of fake documents for all sorts of purposes Druid based on Chinese wǔxíng elemental magic, who touches parts of their body to charge or weaken elemental spells based on succession flow Gish who bases their fighting style on the daggerspell stance  spell, adjusting stances for each situation Venerable elven wizard in a wheelchair, very frail but wise and powerful enough to be worth dragging along Numerologist diviner who enhances their spells with arithmancy

The point of the +1 rule is that there  isn't  so much content: usually just a few pages to check. Easy-peasy. You missed the point completely. My point is that if you are going to use homebrew as your +1, then you have to sift through the entirety  of dndwiki for the content to use  as your +1. I appreciate your concern, but I think you vastly underestimate how large the world is. I will literally always have more people interested than I have room for in my campaigns, especially because, as you pointed out, "there are lots of players, but no DM's." It makes no sense to try to run a campaign I won't enjoy, just to cater to people I don't need to satisfy. It's about quality over quantity at this point. Would you rather have a small group of players that are dedicated to the campaign and are willing to go out of their way to join the sessions? Or would you rather have a campaign where the players come and go all the time? I'm very happy that you're enjoying the campaign so much, Venom. I also agree that unrestricted source material produces less immersive characters and encourages powergaming. I started trying out the Core+1 rule years ago, not because "some bad player brought in an optimized character and ruined your campaign or derailed it at one point", but because  most  of the players did that in  every  campaign I played in  or  ran. For  years . When everyone does the same thing wrong, it's not a fault of the players, but of the system: when it encourages that, players will do it. I never said to use fully unrestricted source material, that is the entire point of vetting the characters before they join the campaign. Having properly vetted characters  is conducive to immersive characters and fair gameplay. You are clearly misunderstanding what I am talking about completely. I am not saying allow all characters that use the edition unchecked, what I am saying is that you open up the material to include all official content and then vet the characters. Vetting in this way gets rid of the powergaming and still allows players to be able to enjoy playing 3.5e without being forced to resort to fluffing the mechanics and homebrew. And I am going to have to say you are 100% wrong about the powergaming. 3.5e is easy to abuse, this is a well known fact. However, this is not a flaw in the system, it is a flaw in the DM for even allowing the powergamers into the campaign in the first place. Experienced DM's know how to vet the characters in a way that allows the entire edition to be used without powergaming. During 3.x's prime, I was an officially licensed League DM. And we had to take actual exams on the rules of the game, and how things were intended to be interpreted. There are proper vetting procedures that you follow to determine the power level of a character. And with the system being as old as it is, there are plenty of community made guides on how to do this. Maybe I can help with ideas. Here are some character concepts from my notes, on the offchance there's one or two you haven't tried, or at least haven't played in a while: list I will not copy for length reasons I have played all of these, and if not then something very similar. What I don't think you realize is that nothing you posted is possible in the core. Let me explain: This is the huntsman ACF for druid, found in UA, which would also require other sources for you to also be a proficient healer You can't proficiently do mounted combat with core +1, and if you tried you would fail horrifically in every combat scenario a bear trap would be considered an improvised weapon, and specializing in it would require at least 3 books outside of core there is no such thing as Vow of Silence in 3.5e, and even then the vows are outside of core the only way to do a "witch like druid" is to: use the blighter PrC, which is just bad and should never be played ever ; use the witch ACF for sorcerers which is also bad and should never be played unless you want to be literally useless; and the only way to be able to summon swarms or insects would require several books outside of core throwing nets and tridents are in Stormwrack, and then specializing in them are in another book entirely, ruling this out specializing in multiple weapons as either a fighter or a monk is not possible without homebrew or high level of cheese ninja isnt even core, and the only things able to mimic other classes are the Factotoum and the Chameleon. both of which are in their own respective books outside the core the only things that could be considered a "dungeoneer" class would be a Factotum, Artificer, Archivist, or Rogue. And the only reason anyone would want to offhand a torch in combat is if their idea of fun was sitting on their hands and not doing anything so... an NPC? that is literally just a Wu Jen, which is fun and flavorful, it is not playable without outside sources if you are going to play a gish, you are not going to be focusing on that  spell in particular. Asmof you should not even be looking at Complete Adventurer. playing a gish also requires several source books in order to not be outclassed by literally everything except NPC classes so... literally every wizard ever? the only class in the game that uses "math based magic" would be the Geometer, which is bad. But I digress, for the sake of not having to go searching through endless amounts of pay to play or (dare I say) anime based campaigns, I am just going to have to find something homebrew that works. However much I dislike having to do it.

October31st said: I appreciate your concern, but I think you vastly underestimate how large the world is. I will literally always have more people interested than I have room for in my campaigns, especially because, as you pointed out, "there are lots of players, but no DM's." It makes no sense to try to run a campaign I won't enjoy, just to cater to people I don't need to satisfy. It's about quality over quantity at this point. Would you rather have a small group of players that are dedicated to the campaign and are willing to go out of their way to join the sessions? Or would you rather have a campaign where the players come and go all the time? In all of my experience as both a player and DM, whether on Roll20 or in-person, regardless of the sources available, most players will join and then flake soon after, but a few will stick around for the long haul. I've never found any correllation between this behavior and the amount of materials available. October31st said: Maybe I can help with ideas. Here are some character concepts from my notes, on the offchance there's one or two you haven't tried, or at least haven't played in a while: list I will not copy for length reasons I have played all of these, and if not then something very similar. What I don't think you realize is that nothing you posted is possible in the core. Let me explain: This is the huntsman ACF for druid, found in UA, which would also require other sources for you to also be a proficient healer You can't proficiently do mounted combat with core +1, and if you tried you would fail horrifically in every combat scenario a bear trap would be considered an improvised weapon, and specializing in it would require at least 3 books outside of core there is no such thing as Vow of Silence in 3.5e, and even then the vows are outside of core the only way to do a "witch like druid" is to: use the blighter PrC, which is just bad and should never be played ever ; use the witch ACF for sorcerers which is also bad and should never be played unless you want to be literally useless; and the only way to be able to summon swarms or insects would require several books outside of core throwing nets and tridents are in Stormwrack, and then specializing in them are in another book entirely, ruling this out specializing in multiple weapons as either a fighter or a monk is not possible without homebrew or high level of cheese ninja isnt even core, and the only things able to mimic other classes are the Factotoum and the Chameleon. both of which are in their own respective books outside the core the only things that could be considered a "dungeoneer" class would be a Factotum, Artificer, Archivist, or Rogue. And the only reason anyone would want to offhand a torch in combat is if their idea of fun was sitting on their hands and not doing anything so... an NPC? that is literally just a Wu Jen, which is fun and flavorful, it is not playable without outside sources if you are going to play a gish, you are not going to be focusing on that  spell in particular. Asmof you should not even be looking at Complete Adventurer. playing a gish also requires several source books in order to not be outclassed by literally everything except NPC classes so... literally every wizard ever? the only class in the game that uses "math based magic" would be the Geometer, which is bad. But I digress, for the sake of not having to go searching through endless amounts of pay to play or (dare I say) anime based campaigns, I am just going to have to find something homebrew that works. However much I dislike having to do it. ALL of them are possible in Core+1 though, and almost all the "issues" you found with them reflect a problem of mindset rather than rules. This "X idea is useless without this book and that book and the other book and..." kind of thinking is exactly what the Core+1 rule is meant to help put an end to. It takes all the fun out of 3.5 and turns it into library bookkeeping. Every single thing you do in a campaign does not have to come from a book. You can just... do things! Interact with the world! The Core rules alone provide all the foundation needed for doing almost anything, and a little homebrewing, an extra sourcebook, or some working with the DM is almost always enough to accomplish the rest. Rather than "sifting through the  entirety  of dndwiki for the content to  use  as your +1", I suggest you stop thinking of D&D as a list of books and documents, and just decide what you want your character to be. Don't fight against the game system, play it. It's a lot  more fun when you do, trust me.

In all of my experience as both a player and DM, whether on Roll20 or in-person, regardless of the sources available, most players will join and then flake soon after, but a few will stick around for the long haul. I've never found any correlation between this behavior and the amount of materials available. Not in mine however. Face to face campaigns generally last longer because they are face to face. However, on Roll20, people will leave a campaign with less material simply because it is more constraining on what you can and cannot do. I have run, and helped run, several campaigns on here. Some of which started as core only for new players. Once the campaign started accepting veteran players, they would not stay with only the core books. ALL of them are possible in Core+1 though, and almost all the "issues" you found with them reflect a problem of mindset rather than rules. This "X idea is useless without this book and that book and the other book and..." kind of thinking is exactly what the Core+1 rule is meant to help put an end to. It takes all the fun out of 3.5 and turns it into library bookkeeping. Every single thing you do in a campaign does not have to come from a book. You can just...  do  things! Interact with the world! The Core rules alone provide all the foundation needed for doing almost anything, and a little homebrewing, an extra sourcebook, or some working with the DM is almost always enough to accomplish the rest. Rather than "sifting through the  entirety  of dndwiki for the content to  use  as your +1", I suggest you stop thinking of D&D as a list of books and documents, and just decide what you want your character to be. Don't fight against the game system, play it. It's a  lot  more fun when you do, trust me. Not without DM fiats and refluffing they aren't. With certain content banned, the rules and feats simply don't exist. And it isn't a mindset, it is the simple fact that when certain things cannot perform in combat (which is what D&D is designed for whether you like it or not), the class cannot make it to the roleplay side. Dead character = no roleplaying. And if you want something to work a certain way in D&D, where there are set rules and mechanics, you have to use the source books they belong to. The only way around this is homebrewing and DM fiats, which is just homebrew done by the DM. The point is that with 3.5, you don't NEED  to homebrew or get a DM fiat to do what you want, the material is already provided . And if what you are saying is true where i can "just do things" then I can play a class out of a book that is banned because i just want to do it.  

Foes are balanced to the situation, so you don't need the extra power of more books.

October31st said: ALL of them are possible in Core+1 though, and almost all the "issues" you found with them reflect a problem of mindset rather than rules. This "X idea is useless without this book and that book and the other book and..." kind of thinking is exactly what the Core+1 rule is meant to help put an end to. It takes all the fun out of 3.5 and turns it into library bookkeeping. Every single thing you do in a campaign does not have to come from a book. You can just...  do  things! Interact with the world! The Core rules alone provide all the foundation needed for doing almost anything, and a little homebrewing, an extra sourcebook, or some working with the DM is almost always enough to accomplish the rest. Rather than "sifting through the  entirety  of dndwiki for the content to  use  as your +1", I suggest you stop thinking of D&D as a list of books and documents, and just decide what you want your character to be. Don't fight against the game system, play it. It's a  lot  more fun when you do, trust me. Not without DM fiats and refluffing they aren't. With certain content banned, the rules and feats simply don't exist. And it isn't a mindset, it is the simple fact that when certain things cannot perform in combat (which is what D&D is designed for whether you like it or not), the class cannot make it to the roleplay side. Dead character = no roleplaying. And if you want something to work a certain way in D&D, where there are set rules and mechanics, you have to use the source books they belong to. The only way around this is homebrewing and DM fiats, which is just homebrew done by the DM. The point is that with 3.5, you don't NEED  to homebrew or get a DM fiat to do what you want, the material is already provided . And if what you are saying is true where i can "just do things" then I can play a class out of a book that is banned because i just want to do it.   "DM fiat" is such a strange phrase, in a game where literally everything that happens is subject to the DM's approval. And I think your use of it is part of that mindset problem I was talking about. D&D isn't a game you're playing with the books, it's a game you're playing with the DM. The only real purpose of sourcebooks in D&D is to serve as a guideline and a reference for the DM.  There is no difference between combat and roleplaying. Combat is part  of roleplaying. Everything in the game is part of roleplaying, because as I said before, it's a roleplaying game. As long as you roleplay well, survival shouldn't be an issue, unless you're roleplaying a suicidal or incredibly stupid character (luck is a factor too, but that's true regardless of how many books you use). Instead of piecing together a character out of mechanics from a dozen books, try starting with a conceptual idea of who you want your character to be--the role you want to play--and then I can help you realize it. 

"DM fiat" is such a strange phrase, in a game where literally everything that happens is subject to the DM's approval. And I think your use of it is part of that mindset problem I was talking about. D&D isn't a game you're playing with the books, it's a game you're playing with the DM. The only real purpose of sourcebooks in D&D is to serve as a guideline and a reference for the DM. "DM fiat" simply means the DM hand waved some content that is not official for you to use. Or the DM has refluffed something so that you can use it. I don't have a "mindset problem", there are just two different styles of play: there is RAI and RAW. I prefer RAW play because it is easier to scale things and it works more smoothly. RAI just allows for too much wiggle room imo and things can break, fast. There is no difference between combat and roleplaying. Combat is  part  of roleplaying. Everything in the game is part of roleplaying, because as I said before, it's a  roleplaying  game. As long as you roleplay well, survival shouldn't be an issue, unless you're roleplaying a suicidal or incredibly stupid character (luck is a factor too, but that's true regardless of how many books you use). Instead of piecing together a character out of mechanics from a dozen books, try starting with a conceptual idea of who you want your character to be--the role you want to play--and then I can help you realize it.  I think it needs to be reworded. The difference is between combat roleplaying  and social roleplaying,  and 3.5e is more focused on combat roleplaying.  The thing about it is that the content for what I want to roleplay already exists . You're just making more steps for me to get there by not allowing them.

Valenos . said: Foes are balanced to the situation, so you don't need the extra power of more books. I am not looking for extra power from other books, I am looking for a specific flavor. It's like having all of the ingredients I need at Wal-Mart, but instead I am being forced to go to Food Lion and get their off brand versions. It looks  the same, but it isn't  the same.

Good luck finding your walmart i guess. But I still hope you give the place a try, I've found cool players make games cool more than the ruleset. I'll try be cool :D

Max said: Small update, since the last of the PCs just leveled during their last big battle, the new people can start at ECL 2. how much gold does a level 2 start with?

Josh said: Max said: Small update, since the last of the PCs just leveled during their last big battle, the new people can start at ECL 2. how much gold does a level 2 start with? 900gp

Blood of Osano-Wo ancestor feat from the @CatacombOptions twitter listed here as well.