Is the "official D&D product" really that big a deal?

[Greg K]

It is not a big deal to me at all. In general, I don't like WOTC's material and am lucky to find 10 pages worth worth of material that I like in an average WOTC product. Therefore, I don't consider them worth purchasing for myself or my players. There are exceptions such as Unearthed Arcana, Heroes of Horror, Book of Vile Darkness, Stormwrack MM2, Fiend Folio and the themed monster books (e.g., fiendish Codex, Lords of Madness), but these are more DM oriented books.

I

 

[Tiberius]

Are there really that many people out there who will only buy official stuff? Certainly, no ENWorlders, I'd assume.

You assume incorrectly. I don't purchase or use at my table non-Wizards stuff. I began doing this during the Great d20 Glut, when product quality tended toward the poor. We were all learning the system, and I was clearing out the 1E cobwebs and assumptions. I didn't need the added complication of shoddy materials. I felt that Wizards products were better-grounded in the rules and benefited from better playtesting. These days, I don't have the time to look over third-party materials for balance and flavor; even some products with the Wizards imprimatu (like the PsiHB and BoED) are tossed out on that basis.

My group is very legalistic when it comes to the rules. We all try to eek out every last benefit we can. I can trust Wizards stuff, on the whole, to be within the realm of reasonable (save wackiness like the Ur-Priest and Pun Pun). I just don't have that trust relationship with the other companies, nor is one likely to develop.

 

[Glyfair]

Personally, I tend to buy almost all WotC products (for D&D). I used to buy almost everything but found that I never used the 3rd party bits in my game (there are a few exceptions - monster books and adventures). WotC has an internal balance in it. It's not perfect, but I find that 3rd party products work far less smoothly with the baseline than WotC products.

Also, like Crothian, we are playing almost exclusively in Eberron. If I was running in Kingdoms of Kalamar things might be different.

I think simplicity is a big factor too. The amount of 3rd party stuff can be fairly overwhelming. Saying "WotC books only" also gives the DM a level of control so they know what players are bringing to the table.

Also, it's much easier to find players who have WotC products. For example, I strongly encouraged the Book of Eldritch Might as a source for my game. No choose to use it, mostly because they didn't own it. The WotC books don't have that problem.

For the record, my campaign policy has always been that I'll consider any 3rd party rule. No one has even asked.

 

[MerricB]

I primarily use only Wizards material. (The exceptions tend to be adventures).

A few reasons why:
* I like the Wizards design paradigms.
* I have not enjoyed other companies' design paradigms so much. And I'm looking straight at the Books of Eldritch Might here. I think Monte is an extremely skilled designer, but his style doesn't quite mesh with my own.
* Availability. I'd love a lot more Necromancer adventures, but they're quite tricky for me to get.
* Availability: for player resources to work, they need to be available to the DM and players. We're all likely to get the Complete Books. The Quintessential series? Not so much.

I am far more likely to get a 3rd party adventure than a 3rd party rules supplement.

Cheers!

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I think one good reason to not use 3rd party stuff is simply that there's no reason anyone needs to. There's only so much of relevance that can be covered for a single edition of D&D, and it doesn't take more than one game company to do it. You could argue that there's not really enough to keep even one company busy.

No, you could argue that WotC likes to retread the same ground over and over again and not venture into areas where products would sell in smaller numbers, while still being viable ideas. Anyone who's ever bitched about the lack of psionics support or the lack of military or kingdom rulership options from WotC, you lose by not checking out D20 products.

It's not like trusted WotC developers haven't tripped all over themselves to make it obvious what's the good stuff, either. Monte Cook's Year's Best D20 contains more goodness in a softcover volume than WotC managed in all of 2004, and it even says it's the good stuff on the cover, so no one has to get confused trying to find where the best D20 stuff is.

Likewise, products like Ptolus and Redhurst aren't worth WotC's time -- just like adventures only reappeared on their radar recently -- but they stand up to anything WotC has done, and more. And anyone crying in their near beer about not having enough good adventures but who refuses to go get the wheelbarrow full of options from Goodman Games and Necromancer Games deserves to be beaten to death with a rolled-up copy of Deep Horizon.

And let's not even talk about awesomeness like the Open Design project. I may run Empire of the Ghouls as a pbp here just to taunt everyone who didn't get it.

Another reason is that official D&D products reference and expand upon each other in a way that 3rd party products don't, despite the existence of the OGL.

Wow, this is so untrue, it's mind-boggling.

 

[Glyfair]

- The high quality of production (full colour/suitable/evocative artwork - the recent "Drow of the Underdark" has raised this quality up another notch in my opinion).

I admit, I don't understand this as a criteria for products you'll use. Sure, I might consider production quality if I'm buying a product. However, once I own it, it wouldn't matter. Pure text is fine. In fact, I might consider that that quality is a detriment at the table (distracting, wasted space, etc).

 

[MerricB]

No, you could argue that WotC likes to retread the same ground over and over again and not venture into areas where products would sell in smaller numbers, while still being viable ideas.

You could argue that and be quite incorrect. No, Wizards doesn't do *everything*, but they've done Incarnum, Tome of Magic, Book of 9 Swords, Heroes of Battle, Complete Psionic and a host of other niche books.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

You could argue that and be quite incorrect. No, Wizards doesn't do *everything*, but they've done Incarnum, Tome of Magic, Book of 9 Swords, Heroes of Battle, Complete Psionic and a host of other niche books.

One psionic supplement in seven years! Wowee!

Complete PHB Splatbook, though, man, they got THAT nailed!

A "host" of other niche books? Do you really want to stick with that noun? "Handful" is more accurate.

I suspect if we compared Goodman Games' adventure output from one year, it'd equal the number of adventures WotC has produced since 3E came along. (And on a head-to-head quality level, Goodman Games is at worst tied with WotC, at best blowing them the hell out of the water.)

WotC is great for the big products that are sure-fire hits. They occasionally do stuff that's likely to sell a touch less. For the most part, though, they go for the safe and conservative stuff. When they come out with a monster book about treants or beholders or wererats, then I'll get excited. They're mostly interested in sure-fire stuff like dragons, undead and drow. All good books, but hardly the signs of bold risk-taking.

 

[Delta]

In a couple recent threads, I've heard mention about the significance of the "official D&D product" label... Are there really that many people out there who will only buy official stuff?

I'm sure that the ratio is at least 100:1 or 1000:1 in favor of people who only buy official "Dungeons & Dragons" products.

Most people in the world don't know that a product is made for D&D unless they see "D&D" on the cover. You might read up some on the basic ideas of modern marketing and branding, it's pretty cut-and-dried.

 

[Sigurd]

The very sad thing is that availability really limits people's experience.


Even if you don't agree with Whizbang, and for the record I have to say I do agree, the vast majority of gamers will never see competing published works unless they are hardcore or very persistent.

Compared to 20 years ago the FLGS is really small and really one sided if it exists at all for most people. Box stores tend to only stock WOTC. My local store went as far as the Lord of the Rings RPG when the movies were hot. The don't stock white wolf and they never would have stocked the multiple products from Chaosium, Runequest and other titles I remember from the past. So much of the 3rd party stuff really deserves more exposure.

I don't think they have a pen & paper rpg Magazine beyond Dragon & Dungeon and we all know how long that's going to last.

Sigurd