> > I suspect that those of us who don't like S&P didn't bother to
> comment
> > (I've found that good players don't need the rules to add flavour to
> > PCs, and that having rules like that just encourages munchkin
> behaviour
> > - YMMV, obviously).
> >

Yes, it is true that good players do not need rules to add flavour to
their PCs. But it is also true that good players sometimes enjoy the
chance to give their PCs tweaks and changes without having to go through
endless hours of discussion with the DM. S&P allows PCs to create
non-standard fighters, etc. No longer will every fighter or mage you
meet be able to be slotted into a certain box for categorization.

Yes, S&P (in the hands of a slack DM and a power-hungry Player) can
create very powerful PCs. But, in the hands of a good player and a
decent DM, all it does is enhance the PCs, enabling the player to create
a character he has always wanted to, but unable to do so before without
creating a tremendous amount of new house rules.

I have been using the Player's Option books throughout my entire 18
month BR campaign. Myself and my players are far from being classified
as munchkins. Some still have their original characters, some do not.
They are all around 5th - 8th level, and have a grand total of about 6
magical items. 3 of these are potions.

Out of C&T we mainly use the initiative system and the critical hits.
Out of S&P we use pretty much everything, and so far no one has created
a munchkin character. And, even if they did, I would not allow it, for
I hate that style of gaming.
Out of S&M we mainly use the spell point system and critical hits. In a
future game I would opt for the channeller rules.
And yes, we use the weapon mastery, etc.