I find it really screws over spell casters, since access to an expanded spell list can be crucial.
Martial Classes, unless you want a specific subclass or racial feat care.
That said I'm looking forward to making an Elf with double scimitar for the Eberron AL!
I do find it annoying that they don't reprint all the races with the racial feats that apply to them! XgtE had racial feats for races not in the book, making it comical.
I doubt it. The whole point of the +1 AL rule is to keep the book bulk down and to cut out some rather insane combinations, especially with keeping spellcasters in check. This puts less a burden both on the DM and the writers for not having to memorize all these different books and how they might interact. This rule is literally made to restrict the massive numbers of books.
If I had to choose between not having the +1 rule and having it, I would choose to have it. Its the same argument for a standard format in tcgs and ccgs. That being said I wish they would exceptions for things like Volos, the War Mage was made for hobgoblins
I agree with Li0nbear. I'd rather have it than not have it. Daisy chaining source books together is how 3e got to where it got. I think the +1 rule is a good shield against powercreep/unintended consequences. I wouldn't even mind abiding by it in the home game I play in.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Yah, 3E was great about that. It is something I find 5E really, really lacks. It kind of discouarages people from buying material because it can not be used, and makes 5E hard to stick with after playing a bit.
Yah, 3E was great about that. It is something I find 5E really, really lacks. It kind of discoualrages people from buying material because it can not be used, and makes 5E hard to stick with after playing a bit.
1) Adventurers League is a small percentage of the overall D&D player base.
2) It also doesn't discourage sales for AL players either, because people can play more than one character. I have about 30-40 AL characters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
I think expanding the limits placed on Adventurers League would be a good thing, even if it was just a bump to “+2”. Personally, a lot of aspects of AL turn me off as a player ,and a DM, because I prefer a less “vanilla” approach to D&D. If it were possible to mix the characters up a bit more, it would be more appealing to attend/run AL. It does seem that the more constricting nature is a drawing point for some, as they feel they require fewer books or whatever, but my shop gives players access to ALL the material anyway (either with physical copies or dndbeyond). As a DM I don’t feel these restrictions make anything inherently easier. I would welcome revisions to the character guidelines that allow more variety.
If anything I would just want them to add one more book into the "core" set. Volo's being my personal pick to include in the core books.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
+2 or +Voldo's should be sufficient. I honestly don't believe 5E has enough rules to really need worrying about DM's not being aware of something. It is inevitable, but not something I think is too terrible.
A simple fix is to require an official copy of relavent rules sources in order use a non-PHB class/spell/other.
Like all ruling in AL there could only be one reason for such a rule. Getting more players to play. Selling more.
But I see a lot of veteran Players leaving AL tables, because they cannot have their fancy builds (Scourge Aasimar Divine Soul Sorcerer with Green Flame Blade in the spell list = PHB+3 already). At least I play less AL in favor of such builds.
I think WotC want to not scare away potential new players with people on the table that make them think they have to invest so much on books to have the full experience.
I'm not sure though if it pays off or would really scare anybody away. One might be scared the other might be attracted (the other who potentially would also want all that books).
Also with the character builder, if you just build your Character with what it has to offer in each step and list it's easy anyways.
So if I were WotC I would go with a recommendation and great emphasis on "You really only need PHB or PHB+1 to have fun, but it's very ok to have more"
Just my two cents. But honestly I would be happy if they drop the rule. DMs still have to deal with all the books as long as it is not PHB+0.
Or at least make the character builder support the freaking PHB+1 Rule. It's so hard to be fully sure if the char is AL legal when you build it with the dndbeyond character builder. For example spells have no source label. But it should be as easy as selecting the +1 in the initial screen of the builder and all should be filtered for AL legality.
Considering with Season 8 we are now using a modified Xp/Treasure system as detailed in XGtE, I figure that would be the next likely "core" book.
PHB + XGtE + 1
Of course that means you're deciding between a non-core race or Sword Coast cantrips.
That would make a lot of sense actually.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I'm not sure how it reduces the DM's required knowledge of the books since they can have many different players using all different books.
The rule, as I understand it, is not so much intended to help with DM's required knowledge as it is intended to help with unforeseen combinations. When publishing new options with the +1 rule, you basically only need to compare it to the PHB to see how things combine, but without it you need to compare a potential new book to both the PHB, Xanathar's Guide to Everything, Volo's Guide to Monsters, and Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes. Otherwise, you run the risk of Pun-pun cheese.
Oh Yeah? Give me an example where it is a real problem.
It's not that big a problem with 5e because there just isn't that much rules material to use - basically only the PHB and Xanathar's, plus some races from Volo's and Mordenkainen's. And a tiny bit of stuff from Sword Coast, but the best parts of that are reprinted in Xanathar's anyway.
But I'm guessing that when they instituted the +1 rule, they weren't entirely sure what direction they were going in with 5e. For example, with both 3e and 4e, they released a lot of player-focused material, not all of it very well playtested. One of the selling points of the 3e FRCS was even that it contained a whole bunch of feats/prestige classes/spells that were easily usable even if you weren't playing in FR, and toward the end of 3e's life they even released books whose main purpose was collecting the magic items and spells spread out over a bazillion books. Across the books I have for 3.5e, I have about 50 different base classes available. It is completely impossible to get a grasp on all the different ways these rules elements can interact. In a home game, a DM can always nix any particular combo, but that's not an option in a shared campaign like AL. So stricter rules are needed, and Core +1 is it.
if the +1 rule was relaxed, I can picture a flood of builds using some of the more OP races from Volos.
So the rule should not be relaxed, because otherwise somebody would actually use Races from Volos Guide? Because they would make a good match with Xanathars subclasses in some cases? And Xanathar+Volo (or other +2) gives room for too many OP combinations?
That could be. While I see no OP combination in Yuan-Ti Hexblade... But Aasimar Divine Soul Sorcerer maybe a little bit (I play this currently outside AL). Still I do not believe anything is ok at least not over several tiers. Hexblade Warlock is definitely OP for Tier 1 standalone already imao.
But effectively it takes all the fun out of Volos. Then they won't sell any sourcebooks, that do not mix new races with new spells and subclasses, from an AL player's view point they are worthless with just races.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
As WotC continues to publish more and more character content, are there any plans to expand the "+1 Rule"?
Check out my Extended Signature here
Aside from any secret plans they may have, there has been no mention by any of the admins of any plans to change it.
Feature Requests || Homebrew FAQ || Pricing FAQ || Hardcovers FAQ || Snippet Codes || Tooltips
DDB Guides & FAQs, Class Guides, Character Builds, Game Guides, Useful Websites, and WOTC Resources
I find it really screws over spell casters, since access to an expanded spell list can be crucial.
Martial Classes, unless you want a specific subclass or racial feat care.
That said I'm looking forward to making an Elf with double scimitar for the Eberron AL!
I do find it annoying that they don't reprint all the races with the racial feats that apply to them! XgtE had racial feats for races not in the book, making it comical.
I doubt it. The whole point of the +1 AL rule is to keep the book bulk down and to cut out some rather insane combinations, especially with keeping spellcasters in check. This puts less a burden both on the DM and the writers for not having to memorize all these different books and how they might interact. This rule is literally made to restrict the massive numbers of books.
If I had to choose between not having the +1 rule and having it, I would choose to have it. Its the same argument for a standard format in tcgs and ccgs. That being said I wish they would exceptions for things like Volos, the War Mage was made for hobgoblins
I'm not sure how it reduces the DM's required knowledge of the books since they can have many different players using all different books.
Check out my Extended Signature here
I agree with Li0nbear. I'd rather have it than not have it. Daisy chaining source books together is how 3e got to where it got. I think the +1 rule is a good shield against powercreep/unintended consequences. I wouldn't even mind abiding by it in the home game I play in.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Yah, 3E was great about that. It is something I find 5E really, really lacks. It kind of discouarages people from buying material because it can not be used, and makes 5E hard to stick with after playing a bit.
1) Adventurers League is a small percentage of the overall D&D player base.
2) It also doesn't discourage sales for AL players either, because people can play more than one character. I have about 30-40 AL characters.
Feature Requests || Homebrew FAQ || Pricing FAQ || Hardcovers FAQ || Snippet Codes || Tooltips
DDB Guides & FAQs, Class Guides, Character Builds, Game Guides, Useful Websites, and WOTC Resources
I think expanding the limits placed on Adventurers League would be a good thing, even if it was just a bump to “+2”. Personally, a lot of aspects of AL turn me off as a player ,and a DM, because I prefer a less “vanilla” approach to D&D. If it were possible to mix the characters up a bit more, it would be more appealing to attend/run AL. It does seem that the more constricting nature is a drawing point for some, as they feel they require fewer books or whatever, but my shop gives players access to ALL the material anyway (either with physical copies or dndbeyond). As a DM I don’t feel these restrictions make anything inherently easier. I would welcome revisions to the character guidelines that allow more variety.
If anything I would just want them to add one more book into the "core" set. Volo's being my personal pick to include in the core books.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Considering with Season 8 we are now using a modified Xp/Treasure system as detailed in XGtE, I figure that would be the next likely "core" book.
PHB + XGtE + 1
Of course that means you're deciding between a non-core race or Sword Coast cantrips.
+2 or +Voldo's should be sufficient. I honestly don't believe 5E has enough rules to really need worrying about DM's not being aware of something. It is inevitable, but not something I think is too terrible.
A simple fix is to require an official copy of relavent rules sources in order use a non-PHB class/spell/other.
Like all ruling in AL there could only be one reason for such a rule. Getting more players to play. Selling more.
But I see a lot of veteran Players leaving AL tables, because they cannot have their fancy builds (Scourge Aasimar Divine Soul Sorcerer with Green Flame Blade in the spell list = PHB+3 already). At least I play less AL in favor of such builds.
I think WotC want to not scare away potential new players with people on the table that make them think they have to invest so much on books to have the full experience.
I'm not sure though if it pays off or would really scare anybody away. One might be scared the other might be attracted (the other who potentially would also want all that books).
Also with the character builder, if you just build your Character with what it has to offer in each step and list it's easy anyways.
So if I were WotC I would go with a recommendation and great emphasis on "You really only need PHB or PHB+1 to have fun, but it's very ok to have more"
Just my two cents. But honestly I would be happy if they drop the rule. DMs still have to deal with all the books as long as it is not PHB+0.
Or at least make the character builder support the freaking PHB+1 Rule. It's so hard to be fully sure if the char is AL legal when you build it with the dndbeyond character builder. For example spells have no source label. But it should be as easy as selecting the +1 in the initial screen of the builder and all should be filtered for AL legality.
That would make a lot of sense actually.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
The rule, as I understand it, is not so much intended to help with DM's required knowledge as it is intended to help with unforeseen combinations. When publishing new options with the +1 rule, you basically only need to compare it to the PHB to see how things combine, but without it you need to compare a potential new book to both the PHB, Xanathar's Guide to Everything, Volo's Guide to Monsters, and Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes. Otherwise, you run the risk of Pun-pun cheese.
Oh Yeah? Give me an example where it is a real problem.
It's not that big a problem with 5e because there just isn't that much rules material to use - basically only the PHB and Xanathar's, plus some races from Volo's and Mordenkainen's. And a tiny bit of stuff from Sword Coast, but the best parts of that are reprinted in Xanathar's anyway.
But I'm guessing that when they instituted the +1 rule, they weren't entirely sure what direction they were going in with 5e. For example, with both 3e and 4e, they released a lot of player-focused material, not all of it very well playtested. One of the selling points of the 3e FRCS was even that it contained a whole bunch of feats/prestige classes/spells that were easily usable even if you weren't playing in FR, and toward the end of 3e's life they even released books whose main purpose was collecting the magic items and spells spread out over a bazillion books. Across the books I have for 3.5e, I have about 50 different base classes available. It is completely impossible to get a grasp on all the different ways these rules elements can interact. In a home game, a DM can always nix any particular combo, but that's not an option in a shared campaign like AL. So stricter rules are needed, and Core +1 is it.
I think that there are some fairly powerful races in Volos that combo very well with content in XGtE.
in particular, the yuan-ti pure blood with Hexblade warlock. It also works well with the other charisma based classes in XGtE.
if the +1 rule was relaxed, I can picture a flood of builds using some of the more OP races from Volos.
So the rule should not be relaxed, because otherwise somebody would actually use Races from Volos Guide? Because they would make a good match with Xanathars subclasses in some cases? And Xanathar+Volo (or other +2) gives room for too many OP combinations?
That could be. While I see no OP combination in Yuan-Ti Hexblade... But Aasimar Divine Soul Sorcerer maybe a little bit (I play this currently outside AL). Still I do not believe anything is ok at least not over several tiers. Hexblade Warlock is definitely OP for Tier 1 standalone already imao.
But effectively it takes all the fun out of Volos. Then they won't sell any sourcebooks, that do not mix new races with new spells and subclasses, from an AL player's view point they are worthless with just races.