Limiting Options At The Game Table

There are plenty of table top RPGs out there with over a dozen rule books, and several with over one hundred. No where in any of those games is a rule that states that all printed material for the game must be used. There isn’t even a rule that demands the rules be followed as they are printed, and certainly no text that says that errata or developer opinions needs to be considered. There is, in fact, text in most of these games that backs up the idea that the rules are more like guidelines and that anything can be omitted, excluded, or altered.

I would argue that it is often better when there are limitations placed on games, especially on the players and what they can and cannot use to build and level up their characters. Limitations on options like character races, classes, and even other optional features. While it may be tempting to allow everything so players can create and build and play as they like, doing so has its own pros and cons that may not fit every game.

Take, for example, the power gamer problem that may arise with allowing any and all official material for a game like Pathfinder. Yes, the creative role player might be taking the ratfolk race to play with a strange and unusual culture, but they may also being taking it because the +2 to Intelligence and Dexterity, along with the Small size, actually benefit the witch class. They could be taking an unusual and obscure archetype from a Player Companion for the world building opportunity, or because it give them abilities that complement and enhance the killer combo they are attempting to use in combat. That combo also takes advantage of a feat in a campaign setting book and a spell in the back of one the Adventure Paths.

For a game that focuses on high powered combat, this is not a bad situation. The expectations and agreements that the game master has with the players in these games allows for all sorts of crazy combinations and character concepts. The problem comes when the game master doesn’t want the levels of power that can be achieved with such open games.

There may also be a problem with everyone feeling burned out by option overload in long standing groups. New players may also feel overwhelmed in games where more experienced players show off their knowledge of the system with complicated builds. Limiting player options can help relieve some of those problems. It can also encourage creativity, help the GM anticipate player power levels, and allow GMs to use player options as rewards.

How can this be done? I’ll use Pathfinder as the example again here.

Start by limiting it as much as possible without being overly restrictive. The Pathfinder Society Core Campaign offers rules that can be a good starting point, as it limits character options to just the Core Rulebook and gives guidelines on how to build characters. From there the GM and the Players can hang other options on the framework provided. Maybe they add in rolling for ability scores instead of using the 20 point buy system. Maybe the Advanced Players Guide, or even all hardback non-campaign books become open. Maybe all hardbacks, but the GM has restricted specific sections of the various books.

Or you can try the following:
All players are required to use the Pathfinder Society Core Campaign rules for character creation, and are restricted to the Core Rulebook and two other sources of their choice for all character option at character creation and future levels. The player does not need to pick the two other sources at character creation, but may pick a source at a later level. Allowed sources include any of the following: Advanced Players Guide, Ultimate Combat, Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Intrigue, and Occult Adventures. The GM may award access other books, such as Player Companion books, alongside traditional awards like XP and treasure.

What do you think? What advantaged do you see to limiting player options? How would you go about doing it? Is this a type of game you would play in?