D&D 5E Supplemental books: Why the compulsion to buy and use, but complain about it?

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

It doesn't feel shallow to me.

Game systems are designed to work pretty darn well out of the box. It's often the splat books that can break a game system.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree here. As I have said Many times over the years for our groups 3.5 was broken out of the box (PHB only) and only worked well when you used later supplements.

I can easily understanding a rookie DM feeling overwhelmed with the game in front of her, let alone the game in front of her plus a bunch of other stuff.

I agree, but one who had played before could just as easily choose to learn the 3-7 classes the players want to play, or restrict them to just the PHB and then still need to learn the 3-7 classes from that list.

See, this is where I think some of the disconnect lies. As a player, I bend over backwards to make things as easy as possible for a brand new DM (we have a brand new DM in our current campaign).

so do I, but again in the example given I don't think it is any easier to learn to run for a Ranger, Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Fighter then it is to learn to run for a Gunslinger, Witch, Cleric, Rogue, Fighter...

I do not try to argue for me to play a PC that the DM is uncomfortable with. I also don't say, "Well, the DM has to learn 5 PC classes anyway, it might as well be 3 from the core book and 2 from these other books". Who knows what other additional rules and baggage comes along with a PC class out of a splat book?

if he was going to play core only homebrew, maybe... but running a pathfinder AP is pretty easy, they go out of there way to make it so the DM only needs the basics and the AP... the players can totally make it easy with any race/class that AP supports. In some cases using the class/race that fits the AP is better and easier then Core only...

Sorry, this will be one more area where you and I disagree (big surprise ). Players should be helping new DMs, not hindering them. JMO.

the problem is in the example NOTHING shows the player was hindering or helping, just wanting to play a character.

 

[prosfilaes]

Playing casual D&D is not bad. Playing casual D&D and trying to force the game into your mold, not so good.

Again, players should sit down and take what the DM wants. If the players want casual D&D, then they will have most fun playing casual D&D. No, DMs aren't likely to be the casual players, but they do have the problem if they're the only one at the table that wants to play in a more complex style and their players don't.

Being particular about how one spends their time is not bad. Being so particular about how someone spends their time that they threaten to quit a game if it is not done their way, not so good. It's usually not the DM with these particular types of poor behaviors.

You've expressed over and over that DMs should only run a game if it's done their way, so yes, DMs certainly have that problem. And I continue to see it outrageous that you can criticize someone for how they decide to use their time. If someone is only interested in playing four-color superheros or Planescape, that's their choice.

 

[KarinsDad]

the problem is in the example NOTHING shows the player was hindering or helping, just wanting to play a character.

This sounded like hindering.

Any way K dragged his feet and eventually made a cleric. The game lasted two sessions because K was just such a pain in the rear over this. And since he was a friend the DM didn't want to cause friction so she took the easy way out and made up an excuse that she couldn't DM for awhile. So another DM stepped up

I only know what EW posted, but this sounds a bit problematic to me. It really does not sound like helping the new DM.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

This sounded like hindering.



I only know what EW posted, but this sounds a bit problematic to me. It really does not sound like helping the new DM.

I also only know what was written here, and addressed this in my post already, there are two sides to every story, and even this side can easly be read the guy was just not having fun...

 

[KarinsDad]

I also only know what was written here, and addressed this in my post already, there are two sides to every story, and even this side can easly be read the guy was just not having fun...

Perhaps.

I was taking EW's word on what happened and not trying to read into it. If I am at a table and somebody is giving the new DM a hard time, I admit that I will probably jump to the conclusion that the person is being a pain and not that he is just not having fun. This could very well be an inaccurate conclusion.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Perhaps.

I was taking EW's word on what happened and not trying to read into it.

the problem is why... why did he drag his feet... why did he act like a pain in the ass...

it matters because it is the difference between being a jerk, and just not having fun...

If I am at a table and somebody is giving the new DM a hard time, I admit that I will probably jump to the conclusion that the person is being a pain and not that he is just not having fun. This could very well be an inaccurate conclusion.

just take the first part. Why would someone drag there feet when making a character... maybe they can't find something they want to play... it isn't that hard to look into that.

 

[TwoSix]

I also only know what was written here, and addressed this in my post already, there are two sides to every story, and even this side can easly be read the guy was just not having fun...

That's because both sides are wrong, but the player was more wrong. Both DMs and players should, to quote Dan Savage, be GGG (Good, Giving, and Game). If the player bring a supplement to your attention, let them try it out! Trust them (and yourself) to make it work. Likewise, as a player, if a DM says there's something they can't allow, and there's a good reason for it, TRUST them. Find something else that makes you excited to play. If you really can't get excited about playing because that concept get nixed, you need to a) bow out and b) figure out what your hangup is. I've never met a roleplaying game where I can't find 10 concepts I want to try.

That's why I feel the bigger screwup in that story is on the player. He/she didn't trust the DM, and allowed his/her play to become lackadaisical as a result. Not cool. Even if you're playing your third-string concept, you owe it to the table to bring your "A" game.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Perhaps.

I was taking EW's word on what happened and not trying to read into it. If I am at a table and somebody is giving the new DM a hard time, I admit that I will probably jump to the conclusion that the person is being a pain and not that he is just not having fun. This could very well be an inaccurate conclusion.

I think it matters, because of the time I was accused of it.

My friend ross wanted to run a Mutants and Masterminds game. I jumped at the chance and designed a superman like character that was immune to most damage, but those powers didn't work on magic, and turned off under a red sunlight... he also had flight and a super strong punch that could kill almost anything, but an alt power to that one where he could 'hold back'. He said that was way too powerful (and I could see that). So I designed a magic based character with magic fire based on a mix of Allen scott green lantern and the darknees. He said it too was too powerful (I could not see that). So I designed wally west flash, I was a speedster with the ability to lend and steal momentum. He said he didn't want speedsters. So I designed a spiderman like character with tactile telkinisss for his wallcrawl and strength, and his webbing was tk controlled, he also had a cool suit with computer hook ups. He said he felt it was too many powers (by this point I was annoyed). SO I pitched a basic coustumed adventurer like batman or blue bettele. His answer was "No Batman". So I said I was out of idea's...

I finally asked him what I should play, and he designed a telepathic character that I customized with some alien Tech. Game 1 I meet the other players and we started. I had no fun at all in the game. not one bit. the story was weird, I always wanted to be playing something else. when asked why I was honest "Because every superhero I wanted to play was said no to." It was a crappy way to start a campaign.\

That's why I feel the bigger screwup in that story is on the player. He/she didn't trust the DM, and allowed his/her play to become lackadaisical as a result. Not cool. Even if you're playing your third-string concept, you owe it to the table to bring your "A" game.

easier said then done. I don't like being forced to play things I don't want to play. If the DM is saying "Don't play what you want" then yea, it may become a lackadaisical play as a result.

To go on with my example, I was told I wasn't really trying when we fought a giant monster, but I had no offensive powers, so I just mink linked the group to help coordinate. It was all I really had... and the mystry part of the game had everyone immune to telepathy so I couldn't 'win the game' but the immunity to telepathy wasn't a clue... it was just random so I couldn't 'win the game' so I really felt my character was out of place.

 

[TwoSix]

easier said then done. I don't like being forced to play things I don't want to play. If the DM is saying "Don't play what you want" then yea, it may become a lackadaisical play as a result.

To go on with my example, I was told I wasn't really trying when we fought a giant monster, but I had no offensive powers, so I just mink linked the group to help coordinate. It was all I really had... and the mystry part of the game had everyone immune to telepathy so I couldn't 'win the game' but the immunity to telepathy wasn't a clue... it was just random so I couldn't 'win the game' so I really felt my character was out of place.

Well, sure. Obviously that particular DM is a case of being in egregious violation of your trust as a player. I've often found super games ran afoul of that more often, because of the vast variance in genre expectations different players can hold.

Plus, crappy DMs are crappy, and sometimes you just have to bail.

 

[billd91]

Did I use the phrase "don't need to know"?

Wrong spin, wrong words, wrong English. Lot of people here tend to misread what other people write. You knew what I meant.

Actually, I did misread what you wrote. Ran over it too quickly and read it as the player not needing to know. Sorry.