Dragon magazine is considered official!

[Arnwyn]

The DM does not rule the roost in our games. He makes decisions, and sometimes he has to pull rank, but he knows damn well that everything better remain fair or people will walk. Power mongering DMs do NOT interest us, and anyone who is part of the DM's Way or the Highway school needs to understand that saying "whatever the DM rules" is NOT going to satisfy Greymarch because that's not what he's asking.

And here is your problem, and why Greymarch is probably not getting his answer (and likely never will).

You're making the rather simple (and completely erroneous) assumption that anything "official" = "balanced". This has been clearly shown (for anyone that reads Dragon, for example - but there are other WotC products that apply) that this is definitely not the truth.

So, to be honest, many people (as shown on both this board and the above-linked WotC boards) still have no idea what he's talking about. There's a break in your (or Greymarch's, or your group's) logic, since you have not defined "official".

 

[Psion]

I don't have the foggiest idea what my DM is using in terms of feats, prestige classes, monsters, etc. My DM (and me, when I DM) don't make a habit of showing the players all my notes, character sheets and monster books. This concept of "it's not fair for the DM to use a feat I can't use" strikes me as incredibly odd. Does the DM use the Scent feat on his monsters? You can't use that either.

Can't gnomes take the scent feat or somesuch? Further, if the GM allows monstrous races, it be an option then, too.

I get what you are saying though. The first Green Ronin product I did not like was Secret College of Necromancy. It had some great flavor text in it, but the classes were uber-powered on the premise that "only NPCs would be taking them." A feat, a skill, a spell, or a level of a class should be about the same whether it is generally appropriate for PCs or NPCs. Feats or classes that are more powerful but supposedly okay because only NPCs can take them is "dirty pool" AFAIAC.

 

[Tom Cashel]

Didn't this fight about what's "official" and what's "not official" spring up before? Like, last year or something?

Yes it did. And I'll repeat what I said then: I, Thomas Cashel Fitzmaurice O'Boyle O'Flynn, am the sole arbiter of what is Official and Unofficial.

For example, Darrin Drader and BVB are completely Unofficial. This thread is Unofficial. Rule 0 is Official. EN World's House Rules forum is Unofficial. Devil-Dogs are Official, but Twinkies are not.

 

[Desdichado]

arnwyn: it could also be that greymarch isn't getting an answer because he didn't actually ask a question. He made a statement -- some guy at Wizards (Hi, Darrin) said that Dragon was official, and he wants to spread the word. greymarch made the erroneous assumption that we cared about that. The questions have been after his initial post, from folks who've essentially said "so what?" and "who cares?" I guess greymarch isn't really obligated to answer that if he doesn't want to.

 

[Grazzt]

Yes it did. And I'll repeat what I said then: I, Thomas Cashel Fitzmaurice O'Boyle O'Flynn, am the sole arbiter of what is Official and Unofficial.

For example, Darrin Drader and BVB are completely Unofficial. This thread is Unofficial. Rule 0 is Official. EN World's House Rules forum is Unofficial. Devil-Dogs are Official, but Twinkies are not.

Right. And what's official in my game may not be official in yours. And vice versa. For example, halflings, officially do NOT exist in my world. Never have...and likely never will. There is also a race of winged humans in my campaign..they are official. So, official is whatever the DM makes it, whether that DM is you, me, Darrin, greymarch, Gygax, Greenwood, Cook, Peterson, whoever. It really matters not.

 

[Desdichado]

I get what you are saying though. The first Green Ronin product I did not like was Secret College of Necromancy. It had some great flavor text in it, but the classes were uber-powered on the premise that "only NPCs would be taking them." A feat, a skill, a spell, or a level of a class should be about the same whether it is generally appropriate for PCs or NPCs. Feats or classes that are more powerful but supposedly okay because only NPCs can take them is "dirty pool" AFAIAC.

I agree; I don't like that logic that "an NPC class can be more powerful than a PC class, because PCs won't have it anyway." But at the same time, I have not idea what "class" the NPCs I go up against as a player are, nor do I want to know. There is, after all, a reason for there to have been a DM's Screen invented all those years ago.

I understand ryard's point to a certain extent; any DM who has the attitude he describes wouldn't be welcome at my group either, but then again, that's a classic strawman argument. Since nobody actually proposed such a draconian DM strategy, arguing against it proves nothing.

 

[maddman75]

As a MEMBER of Grey's gaming group, I just want to distance myself from a couple of his comments. I've subscribed to Dragon since dang near time began, and have had more than one discussion with Greymarch about its validity. I still remember pointing at the text on the cover..."It says it's official RIGHT HERE!!!" And that was only a month ago. Half of the regular group has always been in favor of using materials from third party sources...half aren't. Simple as that. It's just usually not worth the arguments, and, to be perfectly honest, it would be a little unfair for me (or the DM, for that matter) to pull some rule or kit or class from a source that not everyone has full and equal access to. I know I'd be mad as hell if the DM pulled something from an obscure third party source that ended up causing some serious imbalance in the game, and I'm forced to purchase the material to keep up with the Joneses (which, even if it was loaned to me, I don't have time to peruse). And I know the DM would be unhappy if I suddenly cast some obscene spell from a book he's never even heard of.

The DM does not rule the roost in our games. He makes decisions, and sometimes he has to pull rank, but he knows damn well that everything better remain fair or people will walk. Power mongering DMs do NOT interest us, and anyone who is part of the DM's Way or the Highway school needs to understand that saying "whatever the DM rules" is NOT going to satisfy Greymarch because that's not what he's asking.

That's about as far from what I percieve a RPG as as you can get. The DM is in the business of crafting worlds. It very much is his place to say what is or is not appropriate for his campaign!

How can the DM 'pull' something from a third party source, I don't get that. What about the time honored tradition of just making stuff up? Does every effect have to come from a spell somewhere, or can you just handwave that the Dark Knight cannot be harmed until his Golden Helm is destroyed?

As far as third party material goes, my rule is anything outside the core has to be ran by me first. Every feat, every spell, I'll let you know if they're okay. trusting to 'official' to keep things balanced is way out there. IIRC, with the exception of the 3.0 PHB, the stuff from Sword and Sorcery is more heavily playtested than the stuff from WotC. The idea that wizards stuff is always better is simply incorrect.

And what exactly does official mean? To mean it means nothing, or 'what the DM says is okay to use in his game.' Baraendur, I'd like to second psion's question. When you say "dragon is official", what does that mean?

 

[Grazzt]

What about the time honored tradition of just making stuff up? Does every effect have to come from a spell somewhere, or can you just handwave that the Dark Knight cannot be harmed until his Golden Helm is destroyed?

A discussion for another thread perhaps, but the act of improvising, making stuff up on the fly, and so on is a lost art it seems with 3e. Not with all DMs mind you, but with many of the "new generation" DMs. Perhaps I'll start a thread on it or something, who knows.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled discussion...

 

[Desdichado]

Not with us. We specifically set up a game in which improvisation and "on the fly" are brought back with a vengeance, and I really welcome it because I find the tendency to strictly adhere to increased codification to be bad for fun.

See the story hour in my sig to see how it's worked so far...

 

[Psion]

Not with all DMs mind you, but with many of the "new generation" DMs. Perhaps I'll start a thread on it or something, who knows.

Do any new DMs (say, less than five years DMing experience) care to comment on this?

Like Joshua, I could say "not for us", but I am an experienced GM. I do use a fair ammount of supplements, but I consider them timesavers and idea mines more than anything else, and if I want to make an item, creature, or class that's not in print I do so (or hammer something in print into shape.)