D&D General "As a whole, 3rd Party Products Make D&D Better." (a poll)

[Guest 7034872]

The benefit I see isn't in any actual third-party content, but in a system that encourages the creation of some. It's a simple matter of innovation that is not tightly controlled and monetized.

 

[Reynard]

1/2 Greek, 1/2 Game of Thrones.

I am playing it and we're now 11th level. It is a fine adventure, but there are some balance issues (I'd modify one of the early encounters rather than run it as is because there is a high chance for PC death unless they use strong tactics). I feel like we're still a ways from the end at 11th level.

So just like official adventures!

 

[Rabulias]

The benefit I see isn't in any actual third-party content, but in a system that encourages the creation of some. It's a simple matter of innovation that is not tightly controlled and monetized.

Agreed. For those who think the official WotC material is wonderful, I would suggest that owes much to the 3PP eco-system. Whether from healthy competition and/or a training ground for many WotC staffers today making such content.

 

[Velderan]

I just had this talk at my table (not me DMing in this case) where we talked about what it would take to start using DM guild things. The basics is it COULD in small doses be doable... but not without risking playing favorites. As such we are not useing third party anything execpt behind the screen (and even then it is mostly just monster books)

On that, I agree. 3pp content can often be unbalanced due to a lack of proper playtesting or understanding of the 5e action economy as some have pointed out. As a DM if you allow 1 player to use a subclass they found in a 3pp, you run the risk of being accused of favoritism if you say no to another player's horribly unbalanced request. For that reason, I don't allow 3pp player material at my table. That being said, I voted true because where 3pp can really shine is with DM material.

How do you want to handle a player trying to build a stronghold? WotC material is pretty much non-existent on the subject, but MCDM's Strongholds and Followers has some good material to help get you started on thinking out how to handle it. Want some help designing unique taverns and inns with distinct menus that add that extra level of detail to your campaign? Loresmyth's Remarkable Inns and Their Drinks has some pretty interesting ideas to work with. You obviously don't need any of this stuff, but at a minimum IMO it's incredibly hard to argue the overall game is worse off with it being available. As you mentioned in your first post, it's a bit of trial and error to find the publishers that make content you enjoy and can use.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

On that, I agree. 3pp content can often be unbalanced due to a lack of proper playtesting or understanding of the 5e action economy as some have pointed out. As a DM if you allow 1 player to use a subclass they found in a 3pp, you run the risk of being accused of favoritism if you say no to another player's horribly unbalanced request. For that reason, I don't allow 3pp player material at my table. That being said, I voted true because where 3pp can really shine is with DM material.

How do you want to handle a player trying to build a stronghold? WotC material is pretty much non-existent on the subject, but MCDM's Strongholds and Followers has some good material to help get you started on thinking out how to handle it. Want some help designing unique taverns and inns with distinct menus that add that extra level of detail to your campaign? Loresmyth's Remarkable Inns and Their Drinks has some pretty interesting ideas to work with. You obviously don't need any of this stuff, but at a minimum IMO it's incredibly hard to argue the overall game is worse off with it being available. As you mentioned in your first post, it's a bit of trial and error to find the publishers that make content you enjoy and can use.

like I have said here and many time before DM side stuff (I just backed the Journey system) but not player side stuff.

 

[Vael]

Yes... ish.

I agree that having 3rd party content enriches and diversifies the game. But I also have found that player-aimed content has had a questionable record at my tables. Someone tried a Dragoon (Final Fantasy class, I think?) once and honestly I didn't care for it. I've looked at several efforts to implement psionics and found them all wanting.

 

[Starfox]

True - if used sensibly. The best 3rd party add-ons enhance a game setting or playstyle. A product that enables "celtic rople-play" or "renaissance role-play" or "A skyship campaign" interests me. One that introduces a new class interests me if the class involves tropes I feel are missing from my game, such as the artificier or gunslinger.

This said, the mechanics of 3rd party products are usually not very good, so I tend to rewrite the rules extensively.

 

[Bedrockgames]

With the exception of the Van Richten book, I have only bought third party in recent years. I just don't connect with WOTC's style and flavor. I find there are a lot of 3rd party books I do enjoy though, and stuff for other systems I like as well. The trick to third party material is shopping around, watching reviews, finding designers, publishers you like, etc.

 

[Clint_L]

3PP add variety. Most of them aren't for me. How could they be? But they are for someone, and many are way too niche to have even been made by WotC. Also, "3PP" includes things made under license. So, for example, Wizkids miniatures are 3PP. And I have my share of those, as well as a lot of miniatures that are not licensed.

I think it is pretty inarguable that 3PP make a much richer world for D&D enthusiasts. I have yet to see a good argument that giving us fewer options is in our best interest.

 

[MNblockhead]

On the flip side, my 'enjoyment per dollar' on 3P products is muuuuuuuuuuuch lower. There are a lot more busts, and these 3P products tend to not be as cohesive with the official products, making them feel a bit out of place ... and it is very rare that 3P products provide me with something that I could not match in quality with homebrew material.

To that end, I voted no. It isn't that there is no value to 3P products - but the enjoyment per $ spent has just been so much less as to make it generally a bad idea.

I guess I'm picky with TPPs. One of the issues with these discussion is lumping ALL TPPs on one side and WotC on the other side. WotC's stuff is going to have a certain consistent quality, whether you like or dislike it, think the quality is good or not. Lumping all TPPs is going to have huge variation in quality.

I rarely find that I'm disappointed in TPP material as I am pretty picky in my purchases. In the first couple of years of 5e, there were some things I didn't end up using, but even then I read about the products and publishers, check out the previews, etc. So I can't think of anything that was surprisingly bad.

Now I mostly stick to publishers, like Kobold Press and MCDM, who I know put out quality products. Kobold Press, in particular is top notch from the balance, the content, the art, the editing, and thoughtfully prepared digital assets. MCDM is almost as good and getting better. I really like the mechanical innovations that add to, rather than replace the core game. I realize now that a lot of Coleville's stuff is 4e inspired. So some may argue it is not all that innovative, but I just find his material does a good job in bringing new mechanics into 5e that really fit well and has made running games more enjoyable.

I also have a spent a lot of money on Frog God Game's material and have a love/hate relationship with it. They get sloppy with some of their editing, especially older content updated for 5e. Their adventure paths tend to be very verbose, which doesn't make them the most easy to run at the table without quite a bit of prep, but I find them a nice antidote to WotC's anemic approach to its settings in 5e.