Dragon magazine is considered official!

[Wombat]

The more I look at all of these threads, the more I believe I belong to a very, very odd minority.

My feeling about rpgs in general has always been (well, since I started playing them, at any rate), "There are more rules than a kid's Cops 'n' Robbers game, but the rules are flexible and ignorable if the group agrees." In other words, it's not merely GM Fiat, but collective decisions. Yes, as GM I can lay down guidelines, but if all my players say, "NO!", then I have to change, not them. Equally, if a player comes up with an idea and the others agree, we incorporate the new idea.

...or more simply stated...

"Official" doesn't matter.

All that matters is what the group can agree upon.

Start from the base, alter as necessary to achieve the best tale, and go from there.

RPGs, unlike Bridge or Monopoly, are not "competitive" games where a single set of rules and a single interpretation is all-important. There are no RPG double-elimination tournaments with set international standards, etc. Sure, there are games at cons that are pretty close, but only close, never 100%.

Ultimately coming up with a set of rules for an RPG that everyone agrees to and holds to 100% of the time is along the same lines as trying to herd cats.

 

[Desdichado]

The more I look at all of these threads, the more I believe I belong to a very, very odd minority.

That's odd since practically everyone who's posted agrees with you.

 

[Nifelhein]

That's odd since practically everyone who's posted agrees with you.

yeah, we do, when we say rule 0 or I said golden rule we meant that the DM decide what applies but also that the players are welcome to a debate, provided it is not in middle of a session.

I not just accept arguments but accept defeat, I don't use massive damage because I think it detrimental to the players and beneficial to the monsters, they agreed, point. We used the vital damage, I found that it would be far more dangerous to them, they accepted it but wanted anyway, point.

The only debate that is problematic is that that arise in middle of a game, and books are not one of that.

The official for me or not in this thread is supposed to know if you accept anything before seeing it, or so we have taken it to, I have already stated, but I don't, let me see, read and then, only then, I may accept it in the game, if not I give reasons for it, and also ALTERNATIVES...

 

[Darrin Drader]

Not to beat this horse to death, but one more comment I think should be noted is that you don't even have to allow the core rules in your game if you don't want to. Though I do in fact work for Wizards, I personally do not allow Spring Attack, Mystic Theurge or the Eldritch Knight in my game. Why? Balance issues. While I'm sure that they are fine in many people' games, they are simply too powerful for mine, so they're out. The DM is the final arbiter of balance within their game, and can therefore pick and choose the rules they allow.

 

[Nifelhein]

Not to beat this horse to death, but one more comment I think should be noted is that you don't even have to allow the core rules in your game if you don't want to. Though I do in fact work for Wizards, I personally do not allow Spring Attack, Mystic Theurge or the Eldritch Knight in my game. Why? Balance issues. While I'm sure that they are fine in many people' games, they are simply too powerful for mine, so they're out. The DM is the final arbiter of balance within their game, and can therefore pick and choose the rules they allow.

And that is entirely true to me, nothing in absolute is used unless i say it should and the players are okay with it, not even core rules, and we may change them if we think we should...

 

[Psion]

I hardly consider myself faceless.

Not you, silly! That gut without facial features that works in the next cubicle...

I guess this is my way of saying sorry I was so callous in my remarks.

The point I was trying to make, and that you almost make yourself in a later post, is that letting someone who you have no affilation with your group or your game decide what is appropriate?

Rules Support exists to clarify rules issues, not overrule DMs.

Sure, clarifying rules issue, getting intent or interperetation is fine. By calling something "official"? Just what is the effect of that? I am just not seeing it. It's not clarifying a rule.

As for Dragon, yes, it is 100% official.

Again, which means what exactly? Again, unless I am mistaken, it certainly doesn't dictate what is available in the living campaigns. I am not seeing that this has any meaning beyond those who have some strange obescience to the letter of what is declared "official."

 

[Grazzt]

And that is entirely true to me, nothing in absolute is used unless i say it should and the players are okay with it, not even core rules, and we may change them if we think we should...

Yep- agreed. And just because I like quoting myself, I'll reprint what I said earlier in this thread:

"Whatever book I allow at the table is official for me. My word overrides and overrules ANY supplement, magazine, book, or rules lawyer (be it a WotC book, Dragon, Necromancer book, SSS book, it doesnt matter). I am the DM. MY word is OFFICIAL in my campaign."

 

[Darrin Drader]

Not you, silly! That gut without facial features that works in the next cubicle...

I guess this is my way of saying sorry I was so callous in my remarks.

Apology accepted, of course.

 

[d4]

i run my games the same way, Grazzt (never thought i'd be having a conversation with a demon prince ), and i'd imagine the majority of people here do too.

however, if you read Greymarch's other threads, you will see that his group does not play that way. they've thrown out Rule 0 and do not allow the DM to add new feats, new spells, new prestige classes, new monsters, etc. they only allow things from "official" D&D sources and forgo the rest. thus, his desire to determine what exactly is official.

given this playing style, i would think it would be easier to go "core rules only." at least that way, you have a standardized set of rules that will not change over time (barring errata). by going the "official" route (and we're still not 100% clear what is considered official -- is the FRCS official in a Greyhawk campaign? is KoK official? etc.) you are opening yourself to exactly the same situation you would have if you simply allowed all 3rd party D&D material -- an ever-increasing amount of new material that one must sift through for balance/fun/campaign fit/whatever.

 

[Particle_Man]

So it seems that there are multiple versions of "official".

1) Whatever the DM says.
2) Whatever the DM and players agree to.
3) Whatever is allowed in GenCon tournaments/Living Greyhawk, etc.
4) Core Rules (PHB,DMG,MM)
5) Core Rules plus other wotc D&D books.
5a) Core Rules plus other D&D books (for the Kingdoms of Kalamar special case -- still the only non-wotc "official" D&D setting, I think -- I mean, they paid to put that on their books, right?).
6) Core Rules plus other D&D books plus some magazines like Dragon, Dungeon, etc.

Dragon magazine may be official by 1 or 2, but is not official by 3 or 4 or 5. By definition, it is official by 6. (But I wonder if the latter is trading on the fact that Dragon used to be owned by wotc, and tsr before them).

Other 3rd party stuff may be official by 1 or 2, but is not official by 3 through 6. And if one invents a new definition of official to include 3rd party stuff, then I fail to see what could count as unofficial on such a definition.

I think the main relevant distinctions should be what the DM wants and what the players and the Dm can agree to. That said, if I heard a DM say "official rules only" my first instinct would be that he meant either 4 or 5. And if I were going to run a campaign that had only the most play-tested rules, then I would mean 4. But I would probably say "core rules only" rather than "official rules only".

As it happens, I like adding stuff as I see fit. The BoED looks interesting to me.

I guess the upshot is that "official" is best defined relative to a context (Living Greyhawk? Joe's campaign?). Otherwise, it doesn't carry much meaning. No offense to anyone, but there is no way I would let anyone freely pick and choose out of all the 3rd party/dragon magazine articles to find the most powerful feats/prestige classes/etc. just because it said "official". That would be far too unbalancing, particularly if they meshed in odd ways with each other. I would, however, be comfortable with "core rules only" as it is unlikely that there is much that is THAT unbalanced in the basic three books.

And I think that Wotc Customer Support's reputation is still smarting after the Sword and Fist: Halfling Outrider "Don't worry, it's meant to have no BAB" debacle. But they likely have gotten much better and smarter since then.