requiring players to buy books

[Arnwyn]

I require my players to own a copy of the PHB (or SRD). It doesn't need to be a 3.5 PHB (I'm not certainly not going to ask them to buy another hardcover so soon after 3e came out), unless they are playing a spellcaster (in which they must have the 3.5 rules).

 

[was]

Just the PHB...

 

[woodelf]

I agree. I want my players to be excited about coming to each session and look forward to it. If I see they are putting some effort into it, then I feel like I did my job. The worst feeling as a DM (especially for newer players) is to feel that they haven't cracked the PHB since the previous session. If you don't want to learn the rules, what's the point?

Or, conversely, if you either don't have the interest or time to learn complex rules, that's what simpler RPGs are for. As my friends' lives get busier, the amount of time they can realistically devote to the game between sessions gets steadily less.

 

[Davelozzi]

I don't require the players to buy anything, but I encourage them to buy at least a PHB. Generally, people playing spellcasters do so, people playing warriors don't, and everyone else can go either way. This works out well enough for me, as we end up with several copies at the table, so the game flows fine.

Likewise, some folks choose to buy a splat here and there, but most don't. One player plays a psion, so it was pretty essential that he pick up the XPH, and he did.

I've been using a homebrew since 3e came out, so campaign sourcebooks haven't been an issue. In the 2e days, the campaign materials generally didn't have much player useful crunch anyway, so I generally preferred that they did not buy them.

 

[maddman75]

It depends entirely on 'how often will a player need to look something up during play?'

For D&D, the PHB is a must. You at least need one in the group per spellcaster, so they can have their spell effects ready at hand. For less rules intensive games, this isn't required. For instance, I wouldn't require extra books for Unisystem games such as All Flesh Must Be Eaten or Buffy. In those games the rules are much simpler. There aren't hundreds of pages of spells, all of which are unique. The only thing you need the book for is special combat situations that may come up.

Some games have workarounds. Exalted you could make a case for wanting the players to own the core book, plus whatever other Exalted type they want to play. The huge number of charms approaches the spells issue in D&D. Luckily, White Wolf was good enough to put handy-dandy charm cards on their web site, so the charms a player has is close by.

As for specific campaign books in D&D, no generally not. Unless it has information that the player will need to frequently reference in play.

 

[Desdichado]

As for rule books? SRD. What do you need a PHB for?

Damn straight. For a while, I always assumed I would eventually buy the 3.5 PHB despite my annoyance with the update. Now, I've pretty much decided not to bother. Especially since I don't particularly like playing spellcasters, which is where most of the text is.

 

[RFisher]

Even if I had the chutzpah to try to require other people in my group to buy anything, I wouldn't.

I've never been in a group in which there haven't been enough books, dice, pencils, & paper to share.

 

[Vchan]

I think its a matter of degree. Asking them to spend $50 on books in six months to a year? No worries at all.


Asking them to spend $500 on books? I can see where they'd start having problems. Its one thing for a person to spend large chunks of their paychecks on a hobby because they want to. Its another thing when its at the behest of someone else.

 

[SpringPlum]

For our main weekly campaign, every must have their 3.5 PHB. The DM would probably allow a 3.0 PHB but every bought the new one anyway so it was a moot point. The DM compiles and prints out any special rules garnered from other books that he decided to incorporate. If anyone wants to use something like a class or spell outside of the PHB or DMG then they either need to own the book or make sure our DM does (and he probably does).

We have on-again, off-again Star Trek and Star Wars campaigns and for those we have 1 book per 2 people and that hasn't been a problem because if we're going to play more than one session then we players are usually interested in buying the books for ourselves.

Occasionally when we run a one-shot from another system then we usually make sure that the DM has a copy and the players share another. If money is an issue then we split the cost. But frankly, the DM and one our players typically own the books already.

 

[Mercule]

There has always been at least one PHB per household in my group, so it's never been an issue. I run homebrew, so there's no setting book. But, if I ran, say, Eberron, I'd actively discourage purchase of Eberron products because I want to have the best understanding of the setting in the group -- even though I could change stuff, I don't want someone making incorrect assumptions based on a book.

I wouldn't mind if some of my players bought the "Complete" books. Better yet, someone could get Unearthed Arcana. Still, I don't require, or even suggest, such purchases. To be honest, my only wish in this area is that when someone decided they did want to buy a book, they checked with me, first.

The player of the druid picked up Masters of the Wild last year, just before Complete Divine came out. I never much liked the 3.0 splatbooks and was eagerly awaiting the Complete books to replace them. So, he bought a book that I was actively looking to eliminate from my game. *sigh*