DM: Do you allow Mongoose Publishing Books into your game?

[Vrylakos]

Though it requires a lot of system babysitting (which is why I don't run Champions anymore), I go through and do a case by case look at who wrote the material. Mike Mearls has done two great Quintessential books, and the Q. Monk was very good.

However, yes, they are VERY uneven at times, so you have to keep your eye out.

Vrylakos

 

[Kichwas]

Some Mongoose stuff is really good, some of it is really bad.

Nothing bugs me more than a DM/GM who bans stuff outright though, without reason.

Reasons I will find acceptable:
DM finds it imbalanced.
Dm feels it won't fit the tone or genre of the game.

Reasons that bug me:
No reason.
Doesn't like art, author, or publisher.
Only accepts WotC stuff.

In the end though, the only recourses you have is to accept what a GM decides, pester them to no end, or leave.



On a note with AEG and Mongoose: Some of the best books I have seen were from these two, but some of the worst books were as well.

At least with Mongoose. With AEG it's been mediocre (Evil) to great (Mercenaries).

My policy is to take each individual item in each individual book and judge it on it's own merrits before deciding if it can come or go.

No company has a perfect record - if I followed even a four strikes rule WotC would be out for me, on a two strike rule I would simply not have -ANY- publisher I could buy from.

 

[tburdett]

No, I don't use anything from Mongoose. The QB of Elves was the book that motivated me to drop support for the Mongoose stuff in my game.

 

[physicscarp]

Agree with the majority

Mongoose got four chances from me, and they are now banned from my table and my bookshelf. The quality of writing is hit and miss even among a single author. Sam Witt wrote a great EA book (Chaos Magic) but followed it up with the abysmal Quint Psychic Warrior. This isn't a terrible strike against the company as a whole though many of the ideas seem to get rehashed in all of their Quint books. Editing within their products is atrocious, with numerous formatting errors, such as presenting prestige class charts in three different manners within the same chapter of a book. I've also encountered entire sections of text that have been removed from the descriptive section, only to be replaced in the appendix. Finally, many of the rules available in each Mongoose book that I have read have been severe game breakers, and I truly wonder how many of them go through extensive playtesting.

Just for the record, I tried two of the Encyclopedia Arcane (Chronomancy and Chaos Magic) series and two of the Quint. series (Psion & Psychic Warrior). In addition, I've played in games where rules were used from Quint Fighter and Quint Rogue.

Carp

 

[Bagpuss]

Wow, that's a brutal policy. I don't think there is a single compnay that has yet to put out less then three books that weren't good.

Yeah I think if I applied the three strikes rule WotC would have been out after the splatbooks! I think I have more Mongoose D20 than anything else thanks to Slaine and Judge Dredd.

 

[Neo]

Well I for one use lots of Mongoose products in my games, and there are some really excellent books out from them.

I actually use I would say at least one or two things for definite in my own home build campaign setting from most of the books.

also to those of you who would judge the company based on one or two books you may have seen, you should realise that Mongoose has many writers, and among them some real gems. Sam Witt, August Hahn, Ian Sturrock and Matthew Sprange himself among my favourites. I would also add J Miller as a noteworthy as his EA: Familiars, Crouching Monkey, Hidden Toad was a fantastic book and Robert J Schwalb has my eternal gratitudes for the fantastic job he did with Quintessential Witch.

those doubters among you should also note that its easy to judge, but what other company puts out as much as regularly as Mongoose does? I'll tell you noone thats who.

Mongoose Publishing
Green Ronin
Bastion Press

are my three favourite companies outside of Wizards and they ALL produce quality books.

This is not to say every Mongoose book is wonderful, not at all. But as with any book from ANY company every book has its high and low points, but no book is iredeemably broken by Mongoose or anyone else.

 

[Bagpuss]

Re: "Let your yes be yes, and your no be no"

I apply a variation on the "three strikes and you're out" rule: the first three books by Mongoose that I saw were not good, and that's the end of them in my games. Ditto for AEG's "one word" books... although it was two strikes for them.

Just curious as to which books you saw, guessing some of the Slayer's Guide to... as they have been of a mixed standard.

 

[MerricB]

Originally posted by Neo also to those of you who would judge the company based on one or two books you may have seen, you should realise that Mongoose has many writers, and among them some real gems. [/B]

If Mongoose Publishing doesn't advertise who actually wrote the book on the front cover, then they don't get any credit for who wrote the book.

Instead, they get lumped into "It's Mongoose, and the books I've seen of theirs are horrible."

If the Slayer's Guide to Dragons had "by Gary Gygax and J Creffield" on the front cover, that would have a draw all of its own - but it doesn't.

Cheers!

 

[Davelozzi]

I don't have a formal policy against Mongoose books but I'm not a fan of what I've seen. I doubt that I'd buy anything else from them and my players really only buy things on my recommedation, if at all, so not much need to ban them outright as it'll probably never be an issue.

 

[Mouseferatu]

those doubters among you should also note that its easy to judge, but what other company puts out as much as regularly as Mongoose does? I'll tell you noone thats who.

Is that necessarily a good thing, though?

Not necessarily speaking of Mongoose in specific, but just in general terms... I don't consider the title of "Most Prolific Publisher of D20 Material" to be something worth striving for. I would rather both support and work for a company that produced a reasonable number of useful and good-quality supplements than a company that produced huge numbers of stuff that was hit-or-miss.

(And yes, quality is subjective, and no company's going to get universal accolades from everyone, but I think most of you know what I mean.)

To answer the question at hand, I don't forbid any specific company in my games, but I insist that my players give me a convincing argument for any non-core material they want to bring into the game. If I think it fits the setting, fits the character, and is balanced, I'll allow it. If not, I won't. Doesn't matter if it's Mongoose, SSS, Green Ronin or WotC itself.