Options by default: on or off?

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Off.

Most new options have, unfortunately, done more harm than good to campaigns. Not all, but enough to make us wary.

The XPH and Eberron are, by default, on. Everything else is, by default, off.

 

[Desdichado]

Wow, I have absolutely no idea how to answer this...

To me that sounds like "off". Both options allow for exceptions, but still describe a more general attitude towards non-Core material.

If I'd thought through the poll more closely, I might have created a few options:

• Assume core only, exceptions case by case.
• Assume core + Campaign Setting book only, exceptions case by case.
• Assume core + WotC splatbooks only, exceptions case by case.
• Assume anything, but naturally subject to DM review, and DM retains veto power.

But I didn't. Maybe some other time.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Extra options are, by default, off. I'll turn some "on" before the campaign begins in order to cuztomize some things for the world, and then I'll let players request other options if they really want them - if they can justify the change/make it attractive enough to include, I'll allow it.

I control the switch, but I'm willing to listen to suggestions as to when to turn it on or off.

I was going to make my own post, but this sums it up so nicely that I'll just say "ditto".

 

[TheGM]

When starting to plan a campaign I turn everything off. I then turn on only the few things that make sense for the world, and after that convincing me is a task, but not impossible.

I actually think there are too many options in the game. I don't need a prestige class for nosepicker, and I don't need some Timmy taking said prestige class to get the cool flinging feat.

 

[Berandor]

It depends on what kind of option it is.

Optional base classes, optional systems/rules must convince me before I allow them; feats, spells, prestige classes are generally allowed unless I find them egrerious.

I need to aloow/disallow each option before it's used, though.

 

[BryonD]

On by default, but everything gets a good close look before actually making it to the table.

I err on the side of letting players run the character they want to. If I'm concerned but uncertain, I'll just let them know its a trial basis and we may tweak. Typically a minor house rule is enough to bring these borderline things in if needed.

 

[Talmun]

I allow anything for 3.5 from WotC with a couple caveats: BoVD and BoED stuff needs to be cleared before-hand, as does anything from Dragon, and the Radiant Servant of Pelor is not allowed. 3.0 stuff I allow only if it hasn't been converted.

Non-WotC stuff is generally not allowed, but I'm always open to discussion.

 

[francisca]

Good heavens! I thought diagloitis was one of those kinds of diseases that once you had it once, you were immune for the rest of your life kinda things! I know it was for me; I'll never be laid up by OD&D or AD&D again.

To each his own. I'm having a great time running 1e **NOT A PUT DOWN OF 3E, YOU GUYS GOT THAT?**, and the players are having a good time as well.

When I was running 3.x (for ~3.5 years), default was off, though I did allow a few things, when asked for, and OK'd by me.

 

[derbacher]

Off. Everything that gets added must be disceuused and approved. Players are also reminded that if they get it, so do the NPCs!

 

[IronWolf]

I voted allow, but I really only allow WotC options in campaigns I DM currently. This does not include Dragon crunch which I tend to not allow. I am not quite comfortable enough with the core rules to allow in material from 3rd party resources. As time goes on and my grasp of the core rules and options improves and I can make a better call as to whether something is unbalancing I would like to start allowing in more 3rd party variants and options.