Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?

In today’s Burning Question we discuss: In D&D, why do DMs limit spells, feats, races, books, etc. when they have been play-tested by Wizards of the Coast?

In today’s Burning Question we discuss: In D&D, why do DMs limit spells, feats, races, books, etc. when they have been play-tested by Wizards of the Coast?

Photo by Mark Duffel on Unsplash


The Short Answer

A DM (Dungeon Master) is well within their right to decide which options are available at their table, regardless of the source of that material. After all the DM is responsible for the integrity of the game experience and may deem some material inappropriate or unbalanced.

Digging Deeper

This may seem a bit unfair to those who have paid for a product and expect to be able to use that product anywhere they go. However, the idea of limiting the material available to players is not without precedent. Currently the D&D Adventurers’ League has a PHB +1 rule, meaning a player can use the Player’s Handbook and one other source for their character. I believe this may be increasing soon. Previous incarnations of D&D organized play would use certs and introduce content a little at a time. There is a logic to setting limits. A DM can only know so many things and it is easy to get overwhelmed with a system like D&D or Pathfinder, where the amount of add-on content is enormous and occasionally deeply themed.

Appropriate Thematics

When creating a world to play D&D in, or more specifically to run D&D (or other games) in, a DM/GM will often choose a theme for the world. It may only apply to that specific campaign or it may apply to the entire world, but the theme sets expectations for the kinds of play experiences players may run into. Many DM’s, including myself, try and create a zeitgeist, a lived in feel to the world and this may well exclude certain types of character options.

Let’s just take a few examples from the PHB itself and show how they might not be appropriate for every campaign.

  • The Gnome. In general played as a cutesy and clever race, akin to dwarves but more gem obsessed. They work fine on Faerun, but if you were porting gnomes to say historical renaissance Holy Roman Empire, would they work? Maybe not. .
  • Eldritch Knight. In a world where knights do not exist or magic is inherently evil, warriors may not even think of learning sorcery.
  • Oath of the Ancients. Works great in a world where Fey and ancient forests are prominent. Works somewhat less well in desert or ice settings and campaigns.
Of course any of these could be made more thematic with a little work, but as mentioned the DM already has a lot of work to do. An overabundance of options mean keeping track of more abilities and their potential impact on both the setting and other party members. Even having the players keep track of the information themselves does not necessarily ease that burden. A more limited scope can work better for one shots and short campaigns. Where as wildly varying characters and character abilities may upset the verisimilitude of that style of game or possibly be game breaking.

Out of Balance

Of course just because WoTC tested a product does not make it right for every campaign. Balancing mechanics across an entire game can be a daunting task. Some might say an impossible one. And typically as a design team (who might have new members added) tinkers with mechanics and new options, a degree of power creep inevitably sneaks in.

Even a balanced rule can cause issues. Take for instance Healing Spirit from Xanathar’s Guide. There is a great deal of debate over whether Healing Spirit should be allowed in a game or not. Many players do not like its downsides. Certainly more than a few players enjoy the potential upside as well, but Healing Spirit is not a slam dunk or no-brainer for a DM.

In general, a DM has a high degree of latitude when creating a setting or planning a campaign. Ideally they will discuss their motives with players and come to the best compromise.

This article was contributed by Sean Hillman (SMHWorlds) as part of EN World's Columnist (ENWC) program. We are always on the lookout for freelance columnists! If you have a pitch, please contact us!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Sean Hillman

Sean Hillman

Sadras

Legend
If the PC's are replaceable (Bob's not here this week? No problem, we'll just go on without him), then I really have to question how invested the group is in that game. If I can replace Bob at any point in time and nothing changes, well, that's not much of a game IMO.

Ideally our table would want the whole group there (as I imagine this the case with every group), but we have a house rule where if only 1 person cannot make it then we carry on because RL already reduces much of our roleplaying time and we are limited in that I'm the one that hosts 90% of our games. Of course exceptions exist as in anything and we do (often) provide a secondary date and see what suits the best for everyone. I'm, sure this is common practise for most tables.

Many of the issues we discuss here are grey areas it just comes out across on the board that everyone is hard and fast with their beliefs/playstyles. We also have to take into account preferences of the table - and table to table things are different and this would include DMs. It is very hard to judge another's table/DM when so little is known of the understood table rules, background of the group and preferred playstyle preferences.

I for one am perfectly willing to accept my friend's Westeros game while he tinkers with the rules between sessions. To others it would be a no-no, preferring that all system rules be established by session 0. Our table is not so strict on changes between sessions. The mechanics are live. Players can offer input but the DM has the final say on the matter. We're good with that. Very good.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Sadras

Legend
I also recall when 4e came out some people lost their :):):):) over Eladrin getting Fey Step as a racial encounter action, making it a daily action instead or just outright removing it. They argued that getting a teleport at 1st level is just too powerful, and made things like pit traps functionally useless. People who actually put thought into it realized as an encounter power Fey Step wasn't all that powerful. Even if a character TP'd across a chasm, the rest of the party would be left behind with no really good way to get across themselves, and then the Eladrin character would have to hang out on the other side by themself for 5 minutes before they could regroup with the party.

Use rope much?

You could argue an entire party of Eladrin would be a problem,

You could argue Mystara does not have misty-stepping Eladrin.

but at that point can you not think of different ways to challenge this party?

But at what point can you not accept no for an answer?

Do you just love pits and chasms that goddamn much?

Do you just love eladrin that goddamn much?

To be clear I don't give a crap about Eladrin, I just think you should be honest about how you represent DM's as inflexible but are unwilling to answer the same question when turned on the player.
 

Hussar

Legend
Ideally our table would want the whole group there (as I imagine this the case with every group), but we have a house rule where if only 1 person cannot make it then we carry on because RL already reduces much of our roleplaying time and we are limited in that I'm the one that hosts 90% of our games. Of course exceptions exist as in anything and we do (often) provide a secondary date and see what suits the best for everyone. I'm, sure this is common practise for most tables.

Many of the issues we discuss here are grey areas it just comes out across on the board that everyone is hard and fast with their beliefs/playstyles. We also have to take into account preferences of the table - and table to table things are different and this would include DMs. It is very hard to judge another's table/DM when so little is known of the understood table rules, background of the group and preferred playstyle preferences.

I for one am perfectly willing to accept my friend's Westeros game while he tinkers with the rules between sessions. To others it would be a no-no, preferring that all system rules be established by session 0. Our table is not so strict on changes between sessions. The mechanics are live. Players can offer input but the DM has the final say on the matter. We're good with that. Very good.

To be absolutely fair, this is very, very true. I imagine that there are far fewer differences between tables than threads like this might make one believe.
 

jasper

Rotten DM
Why is it when I suggest that consensus is a better way to run a game, people automatically take things to ridiculous extremes and assume bad faith on the part of the player? I really don't get it.
Because you is in the outer ring. The Point of the Thread is "What official material do DM ban and why?". When the dms say what they ban, you come in with the ridiculous post of a DM must build a consensus to be a good dm. You MAY have a good Point if this thread was about BEING A GOOD DM. So you off point, off topic, and that makes your posts RIDICULOUS. And we will go along with the gag and reply with RIDICULOUS POSTS.
Now. As a DM what would you ban?
 

When someone take the Dm role, I say thank you.

But otherwise, right from the phb, they introduce the concept of “optional rules”.
Feats and MC are the most important optional rules.
All the new material is presented as “options”, so don’t wonder if some Dm feel legitimate to hand pick options.
 

jasper

Rotten DM
[MENTION=59554]Panda-s1[/MENTION] “..(uh, they're all friends, right??)?...” Nope. I think in out 38 years since I started playing maybe 2 years everyone at the table were my friends. The other times it was Friends of Friends (who we decided not let them buy pizza because they insisted on no mushrooms), family of members of friends, (which I was not invited to their birthday party).
“.. OR Bob still refuses to innovate…” and when Jo Vegan becomes a success and pulls the veggie crowd away. Bob restaurant GROWS TOO because “He has the MEAT” and half the casual wait staff of JO quit and go to BOB BEEFEATER because the beef eaters tip better. Success for Bob again! Be like Bob eat beef! A burger today keeps a vegan away on Tuesday!
[MENTION=1210]the Jester[/MENTION] “..not all six want to run the game. In my experience, that's a pretty rare table…”
Crying. Thank you, Thank you. As I stated I generally had 7 players 6 dms. And all the dms wanted a fair time share of the players. Before the group broke up for life reasons, we started running different game systems. Gurps, Traveller, 3.5, total homebrew mess.
 

Grognerd

Explorer
When someone take the Dm role, I say thank you.

This. Say what you will, but the DM has the hardest job in the game, and that can't be objectively disputed. If you don't like what they are doing, find a different DM. But don't ask someone to do the most work and then complain that you can't have a special snowflake.

To the OP... why limit official WOTC material? Because some of it, quite frankly and IMHO, sucks. It might suck for thematic reasons (I think tieflings are stupid), for mechanical reasons (the ongoing complaints about Rangers or Hexblades or whatever indicate many people think those builds suck [either under or over powered]), or because they really are well and truly sucky (halflings. 'nuff said.). If you don't think X, Y, or Z suck, then no problem, there are many DM's who will agree with you. But if I'm doing the work of DMing, then no... I won't have them in my game. Even if "official."
 

Flexor the Mighty!

18/100 Strength!
I'm willing to bet that in most six person groups, not all six want to run the game. In my experience, that's a pretty rare table. As others have pointed out, a lot of gamers can't find DMs to run for them. Now, some tables are full of would-be DMs; but I think that's the exception to the rule.

Yeah, I have a 7 player group, myself included. I run a S&W game and there is the backup 5e game, so yeah I do get a bit more leeway since none of them seem to want to put the effort into running a game outside of John and my games tend to be preferred by the group. And honestly, if I'm being pushed to run something I don't really have a desire to it leads to me putting less time into it. I have limited amount of game hours in the week, and if my choice is spending prep time on a game I'm not totally into or putting that time into painting units or terrain for my weekly Chain of Command/Frostgrave/Bolt Action games...well the game I'm enjoying more tends to win out. Not to punish the players for not toeing the line, but because I get more enjoyment out of the other one. So my group tends to go along fine with whatever I want to run.
 

jasper

Rotten DM
Remember kiddies "No roleplaying is better than bad roleplaying."
Remember kiddies "If the DM is not having fun, you won't either."
Remember kiddies "You don't have to play the game unless you are an addict!"
Remember Kiddies, "Auntie Jasper will be here all week and remember to tip your host!"
 


Remove ads

Remove ads

Top