GMing vs. Playing: Are Different Books a Double-Standard?

[Dark Mistress]

To go along with what Umbran said. I think the problem is this.

You are telling your players you want to limit their options to the books you know well because of time when you GM. Ok makes sense.

But then as a player you are wanting to use this book and expect the other GM's to be ok with it.

I am not saying this is how it is or how you meant it, but I think that is the perception going on here and why they are reacting the way they are.

You could do what I do, allow the stuff from the other books but make sure the players ask. Then I can at home C&P those sections and print them out as a handy reference doc. I make one for each player, it list all their feats, spells etc not in the core book on a couple of pages of print material. Makes it a LOT easier to look things up and still allows players to use any source.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Thanks to everyone who's replied so far! To answer some of the questions and comments that have been put forth:



If you mean if anyone had asked to make an Eclipse-built PC while I was GMing, I would have allowed it. As for why I would have, it would have been because it was a book I was already familiar with, and so didn't need to read in order to be up to speed on what such a character could do (though, being point-buy, I'd have asked to be briefed on what options were being used beforehand, and that I could disallow certain combinations - something I said I'd be willing to be subject to if I were using the book as a player).

Hence why I said it's not about option restriction as it is that I'm burnt out on reading new material. As the GM, I want to be at least somewhat familiar with how the PCs are designed, but it's getting harder and harder for me to keep up with the endless treadmill of new books.

So why do you want others to read your obscure third party game books when you can't even be bothered to keep up with the core content Paizo is putting out? Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat are not third party, and are not new and therefore are much closer to a default setup for Pathfinder than anything a third party could come up with. Further, they aren't point buy - and most point buy RPGs can be twisted, folded, and spindled in some really odd directions as the greater flexibility allows players to take things in really unexpected directions. Also Eclipse is a third party product - and I remember well the reputation 3PP content had for 3.0 and 3.5; the most unbalanced stuff you can find. (And woe betide the DM who gives people access even to such a respected publisher as Frog God Games, allowing the PCs to summon Gravity Elementals with Summon Monster II).

Compounding this is that you didn't offer Eclipse when you started DMing. Had you said you wanted to try it out with you in the DMs chair and openly dropped it on the table for anyone to use it would probably have been devoured by your players, over half of them would have used it, and you'd probably have been allowed to use it. But instead you gave your players a set of restrictions that made them chafe and now want to use a book that is way outside the normal rules and even the default assumptions of Pathfinder. Far more overwhelming than the default player options.

 

[Alzrius]

NC, I wanted to respond to some of the points you raised.

So why do you want others to read your obscure third party game books when you can't even be bothered to keep up with the core content Paizo is putting out?

A few things here. First, saying "can't be bothered" is - in addition to being dismissive and insulting - disingenuous. It implies that I don't place any particular importance on doing something.

That's not the case. It's more correct to say that I would like to read and gain greater familiarity with these new options; I'm just finding it very hard to do so.

I started GMing two years ago, when I was unemployed. Since then, I've started a new career, and work a 9-to-5 job. Between that, sleeping, the running around in the mornings getting ready, the commute, and dinner when I get home, I have about three hours of free time on any given weekday - most of which is already set aside for other things. As such, what little of that is left finds me too tired.

I hence try to squeeze most everything else into the weekends, which is itself taken up with various errands. In other words, I'm finding it very hard to add new material to what's already in my head.

Secondly, it's also misleading to say that I "want others to read" the book I mentioned. The other players don't necessarily need to read the book, as I just want to use it for myself. I won't go so far as to say that it shouldn't matter to them, since players are a team, but the onus of doing so falls far more on the GM.

Likewise, the other GMs have far and away more free time than I do. One is a full-time student, and makes no bones about the fact that he often gets frequent bursts of creativity and will stay up until 3 AM reading and writing things, even when he has early classes the next morning. The other GM works full-time but (somehow) finds it easy to make time for reading (I suspect that being in his mid-20's helps).

Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat are not third party, and are not new and therefore are much closer to a default setup for Pathfinder than anything a third party could come up with.

Whether something is "new" or not after a year or so of release is a matter of opinion. Likewise, the question of "closer to a default" is also far less clear than you put forth so easily. Most of our group has developed an antipathy towards Ultimate Combat, seeing it as unplaytested and near-broken in its options...though they'll still use it.

Further, they aren't point buy - and most point buy RPGs can be twisted, folded, and spindled in some really odd directions as the greater flexibility allows players to take things in really unexpected directions.

Yes, it can. The book also talks about this more than once, and introduces some ways for GM's to try and keep a handle on this (the useful checklist in the back of the book for what options are (dis)allowed is quite helpful). However, the main thing to stop something from being used to create a broken, overpowered character is for the player to not try and create a broken, overpowered character. Working with the GM in this regard - such as submitting characters to them for review and approval beforehand - is part of the process that I was happy to go through.

Also Eclipse is a third party product - and I remember well the reputation 3PP content had for 3.0 and 3.5; the most unbalanced stuff you can find. (And woe betide the DM who gives people access even to such a respected publisher as Frog God Games, allowing the PCs to summon Gravity Elementals with Summon Monster II).

That's not a reputation so much as it is a stereotype - the "first-party is always good because they know it better; third-party is always bad because its broken, unplaytested crap" is easily disproven. See above about Ultimate Combat.

Compounding this is that you didn't offer Eclipse when you started DMing. Had you said you wanted to try it out with you in the DMs chair and openly dropped it on the table for anyone to use it would probably have been devoured by your players, over half of them would have used it, and you'd probably have been allowed to use it. But instead you gave your players a set of restrictions that made them chafe and now want to use a book that is way outside the normal rules and even the default assumptions of Pathfinder. Far more overwhelming than the default player options.

I didn't offer Eclipse when I started GMing because I was only peripherally aware of it back then. I also was happily soaking up new material (the Advanced Player's Guide, for example, was no problem) as I had no job to occupy my time.

Believe me, I wished I could have anticipated that working full-time would be such a major drain on me, and that I'd grow to enjoy Eclipse so much - but if my major failing is not being able to foresee the future, then I'm certainly guilty as charged.

 

[Corathon]

I haven't the time to read the whole thread, but here's my answer to the question in the OP.

If you are allowed to use the point-buy system, your DM will have to read (and understand) it. As a Champions DM, I can verify that a GM needs to be in command of point-buy rules if he's running a game that uses them.

So there is a contradiction here, IMO.