A symbol to show that a product is for DMs only...

[333 Dave]

I have this idea, that we could use some sort of special marking to show that a certain product or even part of one contains information that players should not see. I was thinking along the lines of a padlock with the letters GM stamped on it. I'm not terribly gifted in things of this nature though, so I was wondering if we could have a contest of sorts to see who comes up with the best one. Who likes this idea? Who thinks its pointless? Who has a suggestion?

 

[trancejeremy]

Seems to me, that doing something like that would hurt sales. At least making a product that is DM only (besides, say, adventures).

 

[333 Dave]

Adventures at the least. Monster books are other obvious choices. How many DM's are going to use something if they know that the players might also have that product or have skimmed through it in a store? Do you expect them to tell players on a product by product basis what not to look at? Why not just say "Hey, don't look at stuff with this symbol on it". That way DM's get more from the product than they might otherwise. Besides, DMs are the main target anyway. Hurt sales? Maybe. Insure DM confidence? A little bit. I know I'm going to use some such symbol on my products.... (of course, free products don't care about sales as much as ones that cost money do... I don't make a profit either way).

 

[whatisitgoodfor]

Hey!!! Better yet, we can just talk WotC into putting a key inside every copy of the second printing of the DMG!!

Then, all of the d20 publishers can just make all of their DM only books with a lock on them.
****************

Seriously, though, having this would be fairly pointless. I know that most of the people in my group are both DM and player, depending on what campaign setting is being played, and who feels like doing the DMing that night.

IMO, it doesn't really matter whether or not the players have read the DM only books, since most people don't have a photographic memory. I have never known anyone who actually memorized even a single book on a gaming topic, they're just too dry.

Admittedly, adventures are a different issue, but then no one in my group has ever run a published adventure.

 

[Phanboy]

Whats wrong with the whole blue cover and brown cover system?

 

[333 Dave]

Whats wrong with the whole blue cover and brown cover system?

That works for WotC, but if every DM's only guide was forced to be blue cover then I think there would be a problem. As would a problem arise if every monster book had to be red. I don't know how many publishers would prefer to change the color of a cover over adding a small icon in a corner or something. I guess nobody likes my idea.... which means I'll have to make my own little GMs Only logo....

 

[Alaric_Prympax]

How about a small treasure chest (one where you can see the lock) with DM only (is that trademarked?). I think that would work just like your padlock but it would not only drive rogues crazy but all other classes would be dying to see what is in there too. I can hear the players now: "Must... have... what's... in... BOX!!" I can just them unable to control themselves diving for the product to be the first to look inside it.

Interesting idea but I just don't see it working. Players are going to look at products unless they are shrinkwrapped, and even then people still open them. Just some thoughts...

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Interesting idea but I just don't see it working. Players are going to look at products unless they are shrinkwrapped, and even then people still open them.

I'm inclined to agree. Or they just go behind the GM's back and read the book while the GM is on the phone with the pizza guy or whatever.

One thing I'd like to see from module developers is some random placement. If you randomize the dungeons a little it won't matter if the players look at the book. Of course from a story perspective this is hard to justify.

 

[333 Dave]

Anyone at all going to back me up on this? Anybody?

 

[fba827]

Anyone at all going to back me up on this? Anybody?

I think it is a good idea in concept but in both practice and follow-through it would probably not serve the purpose for which it was meant.

a) Honest players are already not going to read books they shouldn't (nor would they probably be willing to spend the unnecessary money) while those that do want to see "the goodies" aren't going to be stopped by a picture - they will continue to look at what they want to
b) As potinted out above, some game groups don't keep a defined DM all the time - players and DMs switch around. By the end of a year perhaps everyone has flipped through all the DMs books by virtue of role reversal
c) Would all publishers really have incentive enough to agree? unless it was honrbound into the OGL (which they have to follow) I doubt _all_ of them will

Don't take this the wrong way, again, I wholeheartedly think this is a good idea in concept. I just can't see it serving the purpose it was meant to in actual practice.

If this was one publishers self-defined way of establishing its own rules, by all means, I would wholeheartedly encourage that publisher to do just that.