Only the Lonely: Why We Demand Official Product

[Morrus]

I sometimes wonder why the 3rd party publishers are bothering with additional player material.

Because people seem to like them. 1000 people subscribe to our Patreon, and our last Kickstarter for 5E classes raised over $100K.

 

[Salthorae]

Because people seem to like them. 1000 people subscribe to our Patreon, and our last Kickstarter for 5E classes raised over $100K.

Agreed.

I mean... MCDM raised almost $3.5M over 2 Kickstarter's for Followers & Strongholds + Kingdoms & Warfare. I guess it's debatable if those are "player options", but yeah.

Kobold Press' Deep Magic 5e compilation conversion garnered almost $250k and it is all player's option stuff basically.

The market is there regardless of what the perception of 3PP seems to be online.

While I shy away from most 3PP material, I tend to give MCDM and Kobold Press more latitude in allowing. Hence I've Kickstarted both the Deep Magic and the Kingdoms & Followers in recent months.

 

[TwoSix]

I sometimes wonder why the 3rd party publishers are bothering with additional player material. I bought the Scarred Lands players guide a while ago because I loved the setting back in 3rd edition. I bought it as a GM but it's chock full of players options, almost none of which I would be inclined to encourage players to use (A barbarian with 1/3 druid casting, a Feat for Spiked Chain users - really?) and it really just highlights that there's not really all that much space really for player material.

Where there would be space is if you were able to tie all the options you gave to specific setting elements or organisations. But that doesn't work too well and if it does, it limits broad appeal anyway - (which supposedly is the reason why setting books are chocked full of player stuff).

There's also the fact that official D&D material is easily referenced online whether through D&D Beyond all one of the many other probably non-legal wikis that spring up. This means that I don't actually have to haul my copy of Xanathar's guide along to the game with me just in case I need to check something. Similarly spells - not only is it easy to look them up online you can also get those handy spell card packs which make everything a lot easier. Once you start mixing and matching 3pp material this becomes a lot harder (and really there is NOT a lack of spells in the game alreay).

I think 3pp subclasses and feats need to be setting specific and intensely flavourful. A lot of publishers just seem to look for gaps, many of which exist for a reason, and then fill them. The most useful material for them to publish is probably GM material - there's always space for magic items and monsters.

Yea, everything you said is pretty much something I disagree with. Barbarian with druid-based EK casting sounds cool. Feats for specific weapons is exactly the sort of mechanical specificity I'm looking for 3PP to fill.

Pretty much all the 3PP I have is electronic, so the weight/bulk issue seems immaterial. And, for me, flavor comes easily; just give me new material that's mechanically interesting and I'll reskin it to fit whatever character or world concept I need.

 

[TwoSix]

Because people seem to like them. 1000 people subscribe to our Patreon, and our last Kickstarter for 5E classes raised over $100K.

Well deserved, my groups really like the book!

 

[Gadget]

Well, I think part of the reason that would go along with "quality" in the original post is the bad reputation many 3pp got during the 3x glut. Though I'm not sure how most new players would take on that particular view. Even in the 'glut' days a lot of the stuff was printed and bought off of physical shelves. It took quite a bit of publishing know how and connections to produce even a relatively poor print book. I don't think the barrier to entry for third parties is quite that high in the digital age. This can be both a good and a bad thing; as it allows more people's great ideas to get out there, but it also requires less investment and possibly less quality control. Besides, there's so many "ideas" being put out there on the internet for free, the line has become very thin between do-it-yourself homebrew and 3pp.

Case in point, the 3pp supplement mentioned earlier in the thread sounds like they were really trying to publish something with 3.x aesthetics for 5e, with a few numbers massaged. With the surface similarities of of the two systems, such as feats, class names, spells and such, it can be tempting to just present warmed over 3.x stuff as 5e, and that can cause problems with some groups, as the balance and design goals are different in the two systems.

 

[Retreater]

First off, I don't like campaign settings, whether published by 3pp or Wizards. I have my own homebrew world that I am very comfortable running, and I can't ever be familiar enough with hundreds of pages of lore. And honestly, most of the stuff in campaign settings never comes up in my games anyway (i.e.: nations hundreds of miles away, thousands of years of history, nobility who will never be interacted with, etc.)

What I do like are published adventures. I love the shared community experience of them - the war stories that bond groups who have never sat at a table together.

I ran my fiancée through a couple levels of Rappan Athuk (published by the 3pp Frog God Games) last night, and we had a blast. Give me something like that instead of a Critical Role Campaign Setting, and I'll be happy.

 

[Arilyn]

Well deserved, my groups really like the book!

Mine too.

 

[Weiley31]

Open the floodgates for any and all 3PP products? My mind shudders as it gazes into the abyss of powergaming and depravity that would ensue. I'm going to go cry in a corner now.

I mean, it's not like I haven't legit gone off my rocker before. So put it all in 3pp/UA material!!

 

[Todd Roybark]

I would expect Hasbro to go the freelance route like Vox media eventually.
Half the published Sandbox Adventures were third party written. Assuming the spells in PotA were written in part by the third party, then the greater portion (page countwise) of XGE was thus 3rd party written.

New design done internally is not a Hasbro goal in 5E. Never has been it would seem to me.

 

[jgsugden]

3 factors for me:

1.) D&D Beyond - I like the materials to be in this handy reference and character management tool. I can hunt and peck to add a lot of other content, but man does that get annoying.
2.) History - I want official D&D content - because it updates material I've been using for decades. This is true for settings, classes, adventures, spells, etc... I have NPCs that have existed since 1981 that use psionic rules... and I want to be able to update them into a new edition with the official rules so that when new players meet them, they have an idea what they can do.
3.) Balance - WotC tries to consider their prior game contributions to the edition when considering balance. If they introduce a feat, they'll be on the lookout to make sure a class feature does not form a 'power combo' with that feat that is abusive. If the feat is 3rd party, WotC doesn't consider it when making new elements for the game.