The Dungeon Master's Handbook

Greetings.

One thing which struck me as I was considering my new campaign is that I haven't ever really structured a campaign to deal with Optimisers. Hmm, 'deal with' sounds a bit confrontational. This isn't the case.

My players are getting, well, better and better at designing characters to fight out of their weight division, so to speak, with some of them getting quite spectacularly strong builds.

The problem, of course, is that to make things challenging requires either (1) hitting them with the nerf bat; (2) stripping them of equipment; (3) stripping them of levels; or (4) creating an escalating arms-race of optimisation.

Or not allowing the problems in the first place.

Things came to a head last session, when my normally tactically strong players made a big tactical mistake (placing six characters in a 10' x 15' area, right next to the BBEG who had a Maximised Greater Fireburst. 150 points of damage later to the PCs (averaging 15th level), and, well, most of them had fairly ordinary Reflex Saves.

A TPK ensued.

So, I thought I would create this Mini-Handbook for the DMs in this community, specifically as it pertains to Optimisers among their group.

I would like to welcome any DMs to put forward their thoughts on:

Banning: Is it ever a good idea? If so, what do you declare off limits?
House Rules: What balances gameplay without players getting upset?
Optional Rules: Should flaws be allowed?
Deoptimisation: What advice would you give for bringing a campaign into line, when it has come a bit out of control without making players feel nerfed?
General DM Advice: Anything and everything else.
Anecdotes: A sort of What's a DM to do for the Optimising crowd. Or, indeed, just your war stories.

I will, of course, be offering my own thoughts, so the following areas will be filled over time.

So, here's a spot for you DMs out there. Consider this a community handbook of how to keep balance in your campaign, and avoiding hidden pitfalls.

Tell me your tales of sorrow - or victory. What has the field of conflict taught you?

C.

Banning

I am a big fan of banning things. I hope, and I believe, that I ban things for the right reason. Broadly, my reasons are one, or both, of the following:

1. The rules set (item, feat, prestige class, etc) has the potential for rules abuse; or (a much better reason)
2. The rules set does not fit within the verisimilitude of the campaign.

Here's what I ban (or don't make available for rules balance issues), and why (expect this list to expand as I think of them):

1. Nightsticks. Their stacking rules are unclear, and open to abuse.
2. Thought Bottles. They are vastly open to abuse.

Here's what I am considering banning (again, expect expansion):

Any template or character adjustment that has a Level Adjustment greater than 2. Is this too harsh?

But, I think that the best (hell, the only) time to ban things is at the creation of the campaign. Players will accept change to their character if it is part of the design process. To suddenly turn around and tell them that they can't take a Prestige Class they have been aiming for is more than harsh, I think.

What are your thoughts?

Optional Rules

I allow flaws, traits & skill tricks. Of them, flaws have the most potential for abuse, but I think that a DM should always make a player, for want of a gentlre word, regret a flaw almost as much as they relish a feat.

I only allow spells from the Player's Handbook or the Spell Compendium. Every otehr spell has to be researched to be gained from another D&D3.5 source, such as Complete Arcane.

What is acceptable in your camaign? What alternate rules have messed with your world?

Anecdotes

Allowing a player to create a character with few restrictions, at a level of greater than 1st, is fraught with problems. I have had a few experiences countering strong character builds:

Giving a character a Helm of Brilliance can be a very fine prize, but the player should be aware that the Helm is the functional equivalent of wearing a hat made of grenades. Hit that character with a Coercive Spell (or any Wisdom draining effect), and then 31 points of magical fire means you get one Will Save to avoid activating the helm, inflicting (as was the case for my player and friend) up to 350d6 fire damage. Crispy.

What have your experiences taught you?

Disjunction is on my Ban List.  By mutual agreement with the players.  It just takes too long to calculate for combat to be interesting, and screws you over even if you win the battle.

Well I'm running my first 3.0/3.5 campaign right now.  I have piles of experience running other games from other editions though.

Banning: I don't like to outright ban anything and so far none of the items mentioned so far have even been a factor in my campaign.  I do currently have a monk who took martial study and picked up a maneuver that allows a fort save to avoid 15d6 dam or 5d6 on save.  It can only be used on a target that is denied their dex bonus.  I don't remember which maneuver it is off hand but i remember it being a 7th or so level maneuver that had no requirements.  For a level 9 party this just seemed out of whack but it all looks legal.  I guess it would bother me more if the party of three wasn't a bit underpowered as it was.

House Rules: None so far outside of class/prestige class racial limits for campaign story purposes.

Optional Rules: I don't have a problem with flaws in concept but as we don't have Unearthed Arcana it hasn't come up.

Deoptimisation: Changing the encounters to challenge players in a new way really does help bring characters in line.  They may be able to dominate on a battlefield but what sort of investigators are they?  If something /is/ really disruptive to game balance, chatting with the offending player about retraining options can help.

General DM Advice: Try to plan out in advance what sort of campaign you want.  Low/High magic, Low/High money, Setting etc.  All these things can put limitations on what you allow.  You don't have to take every possible option into account but if you at least have a general idea of what the local is like and what races/cultures might live in them you can use it as a baseline for decision making.

Anecdotes: The monk I mentioned earlier was fighting while balance on the lip of a cauldron of hot wax.  The party was fighting an enchanter in his work shop.  The enchanter casts Tasha's hideous laughter on him and he fails his save. Monk spends the rest of the battle laughing while bathing in hot wax.

Deoptimisation: Books allowed = Core + 2 Books of Choice from the Player (if its in an book you didnt choose you cannot use items, spells, anything from it. Even if you see the spell used from an partymember)

In my experience if the DM and players can sit down together and discuss things like ladies and gentlemen, balance can be worked out at almost any level.

Some players want a higher tier class?  Work out an arrangement that won't let that class overshadow.  Players want to fudge some rules to get the build they want?  Sure thing, so long as it doesn't result in power creep.  Someone wasn't to be a samurai?  Work out an alternate class progression for them that feels samurai-ish.

The problem is when people decide to be uncooperative or deliberately disruptive, which IME, is MUCH more of a problem in IRL games than PBP, because IRL you have to play with people within reach, jerks includes, especially if said jerk is a buddy of someone else in the group, while PBP players are self selecting and more likely to be genuinely interested in the DM's concept.

I couldn't agree more. Gladly I have a great group at uni nowadays, including the gentleman's agreement, but I've had some pretty crappy ones in the past as well, including the problems you described.

Fu for you, good sir

I must say I don't really have a problem with that, but only when the player/DM playing the debuffer has a list of effects caused by the debuffs in question (attack penalties, save penalties etc.) to avoid slowing down gameplay...


Kinda like writing down the stats and effects of your Polymorph and/or Wild Shape forms I guess

I must say I don't really have a problem with that, but only when the player/DM playing the debuffer has a list of effects caused by the debuffs in question (attack penalties, save penalties etc.) to avoid slowing down gameplay...


Kinda like writing down the stats and effects of your Polymorph and/or Wild Shape forms I guess

Can't really do that with disjunction.

OK everyone, let's spend five minutes rolling saves for all your items, then marking off which ones are completely worthless, then recalculating all our statblocks without those magical bonuses.