Does Your Group Allow Homebrew or 3PP Material for D&D Games?

Mine does, although so far we haven't actually used any, other than a couple of minor tweaks to the core material for flavor's sake. A few items were brought up and discussed and we said we'd try them out, but then they were never followed up on.

So although right now everything in our game is from the core material, we're totally open to the possibility of 3rd party or homebrew material.

 

[Desh-Rae-Halra]

I do when I GM, I just want to look it over so I get a feel for the Class/Race/Archetype/etc and does this fit for the setting. I like to have those discussions way before we get to the gaming table.

The person that regularly GMs for our group is absolutely phobic about any book he doesn't own, or even the Sage Advice column material. He outright assumes anything not published by WotC (or Paizo wen we play Pathfinder) must inherently be broken, despite his pattern of throwing challenges at us that are CR +3 at a minimum and not understanding why there is a revolving door of PCs.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Just voted, and I am actually amazed that only a smidge over 70% are on the "allow" side! O_O Back in the day...yeah, I know....ahem...this sort of question wouldn't even be asked because it's like asking someone who goes to the Olympic games "Do you only eat officially sponsored food for the entire time of the Olympics?" ...it just seems...so...wacky.

Anyway, yeah, if something is cool or needs a smack with the Fix-It Stick, then that's what we do. Honestly, the thought of "official only" never enters into any of our minds. Huh... "The times...they are a change'n".

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[CapnZapp]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but that's the whole point of the conversation between DM and player, right? I mean, if I as a player want to try something not officially WoTC, I come up to you before the game and we talk about it and see if it's even a concept that fits in your game world, and if it is, does it mechanically feel right with you. I'm interpreting your statement here to read that you'll shut down the player during game play, and that seems odd to me because I would think that's a conversation you have before gameplay even begins.

You can relax - your interpretation is wrong

The simplest and cleanest way is to lay out the allowed character sources already before the campaign starts. Such as "only PHB build options please" for example.

First off, I would probably allow a hypothetical 3PP race or background, since they're unlikely to break anything. Classes, subclasses, spells and class features (where the real meat of a character lies) not so much. What I could possibly do is to consider mixing one class with the subclass of another class.

Now, my players generally don't frequent the forums, and don't buy from DMs Guild. So thankfully I'm getting few such "conversations".

That might change, though. For each new campaign (and the next time would be the fourth time, I guess, we sat down to create a 5E party) the desire to use more material than PHB grows.

Hopefully WotC will deliver by then. Otherwise that might make players look elsewhere.

The current official build offerings I'd rate as follows:
- races: good (there are lots of races; they're easy to make and to allow)
- classes: the 5E PHB was actually outright generous. By next time, I hope whatever supplement the new Ranger will be in is ready. And that this doesn't come alone. SCAG certainly does not cut it by itself.

 

[Morrus]

Hiya!

Just voted, and I am actually amazed that only a smidge over 70% are on the "allow" side! O_O Back in the day...yeah, I know....ahem...this sort of question wouldn't even be asked because it's like asking someone who goes to the Olympic games "Do you only eat officially sponsored food for the entire time of the Olympics?" ...it just seems...so...wacky.

Anyway, yeah, if something is cool or needs a smack with the Fix-It Stick, then that's what we do. Honestly, the thought of "official only" never enters into any of our minds. Huh... "The times...they are a change'n".

^_^

Paul L. Ming

I think there's a weird generational thing, where the way folks are introduced to RPGs is different. Back then, the very rulebooks told you to home-brew the crap out of it. Now there's this weird cult of "officialdom". Literally, a label is all that matters - I guess branding works. It's very contrary to the spirit of RPGs as I grew up with them, and I feel it is damaging them immeasurably. RPGs have gone from punk rock to Disneyland.

 

[MechaPilot]

Inspired by some of the threads going around. Pretty simple question. In your gaming group (not a pick up game with people you don't know, and AL is excluded for obvious reasons), do you allow any sort of 3PP material or homebrew material? Or does your group stick with official RAW published by WoTC only?

I allow homebrew and third-party material, but I have to review it and approve it first. I won't allow something without a proper review. And, when I do allow something it's with the caveat that if it has an unforeseen interaction with other rules I have the right to modify it (though I usually work with the player on that to try to come up with a solution we can both live with).

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I think there's a weird generational thing, where the way folks are introduced to RPGs is different. Back then, the very rulebooks told you to home-brew the crap out of it. Now there's this weird cult of "officialdom". Literally, a label is all that matters - I guess branding works.

I do not remember what it was like back in the days of the RPGA, but in recent years, with Pathfinder Society and Adventurer's League only allowing their company's material, and many players maybe only getting to play through these organizations, that kind of mindset can stick with these players and DMs when they get to finally have a non-Organized Play game.

 

[CapnZapp]

Somewhat of a problematic poll combining homebrew and 3PP.

That is because of the other thread(s) which inspired this poll, in which a claim was made that most DMs don't allow non-official content of any kind.

So the poll is designed to test that very claim by presenting the options of A) some amount of non-official material of some kind is allowed, or B) "official only" is actually the case.

I don't know what other thread that is, but I think there's a risk you're not representing that claim correctly.

After all, you cut Shiroiken off before he could say this:

On the DM side of things, it's almost impossible NOT to use homebrew for custom magic items, traps, and NPCs, and probably monsters too.

So, again, what are we really discussing here?

I bet that other thread contained complaints "my DM won't allow me to use option Z". That is, the perspective of a player.

This is exactly right. It seems there were a few people who said they want more official content because 3PP and homebrew doesn't count and DMs won't allow anything not officially supported. I've even heard the claim that "most" DMs won't allow anything not official. So I wanted to see. It seems as if 80% of DMs will allow at least some non official material, so the great news is that if you have a DM that doesn't allow it, there's a high chance the next DM you play with will (depending on how out of the box you want**). Which goes back to rule 1 I suppose: If you're not enjoying the people you're playing with, find new people. It's a social game first and foremost.

Still, the poll conflates two things.

1) Players wanting 3PP and homebrew options. This clearly means character build options.
2) DMs using 3PP and homebrew options. This could very well be invisible to the players - a player might not know or care whether magic item X or spell Y comes from WotC or elsewhere.

So what is it?

Are those "few people" players or are they DMs?

I guess you could be interested in the difference between DMs that don't use any homebrew at all, and DMs that only use homebrew for their own use.

But I think you mean players. As I said previously, I myself voted "no", since that is in line with what I suspect is your intention for the poll. But others might have voted "yes", so I'm afraid the results won't be usable either way...

Perhaps a poll such as the following might have been better?

Asking players to vote whether their DMs allow them to use homebrew and 3PP character options?
- Yes, I can use 3PP options for my character if I can persuade my DM to allow it
- No, my DM does not include 3PP options for player characters

 

[not-so-newguy]

At the FLGS where I play, there's a good mix of new players and old (usually folks who have emigrated from Pathfinder). At any given time, there's 2-5 separate campaigns going at the store.


When I started a year and a half ago the store was exclusively AL rules. About a year ago, someone started a homebrew campaign and from there it has spread. At this moment nobody runs AL material, with all four DMs running homebrewed campaigns. That being said, the AL rules (point buy, etc.) are the assumed default rules unless otherwise stated.


I think the number of people who exclusively play AL will dwindle over time.

 

[barasawa]

For most of our games, the answer is a conditional depends.

There is homebrew stuff that everyone agrees on, and that goes along with the no secret rules thing.

Other than that, if the GM doesn't have that book or supplement, your odds of getting it approved are pretty close to zero.

If the GM does have a copy, he (or she) will look it over and decide if it will be a proper fit into their campaign. If so, in some cases it will be a unilateral decision to add, other times we discuss it and take a vote. Depending on how big a change it might be sets whether it will be a majority vote or unanimous required.

Sure, it's kind of by feel rather than by set procedure, but it works and nobody feels like the rug is being pulled out from under them.
This has come about by too many cases of people blindsiding the GMs and other players with bogus stuff from other supplements, though the vast majority of those were 3rd party. Just because it says it's for, or compatible with, the game system doesn't mean it's good for our game.

Yes, we have multiple GMs, and the seat rotates usually after a full storyline. (Unless someone gets burned out, or someone else gets a major wild hair.)

 

[Morrus]

I do not remember what it was like back in the days of the RPGA, but in recent years, with Pathfinder Society and Adventurer's League only allowing their company's material, and many players maybe only getting to play through these organizations, that kind of mindset can stick with these players and DMs when they get to finally have a non-Organized Play game.

Haven't a clue. But this site always has been and always will be very, very supportive of third parties and homebrews. It has been since its inception (in fact, that's *all* it was at its inception - d20 news, while Eric Noah handled official news).