The Serge said:
And I'll say that I have a great deal more faith in WotC's material than I do in most (not all) of the 3rd party publishers. Does this mean that WotC is infallible? Certainly not. There are still magic items, spells, and even PrCs that seem a little out of wack. But, my observation (and those of the people with whom I play) have revealed that WotC seems to be a great deal more "cautious," and therefore tends to be more "balanced." However, that does not mean that WotC's material is necessarily superior or the be all, end all.
"Official" is often a crutch for people afraid to experiment. Yes, there are companies out there that have produced really shoddy material. And, I've drastically reduced the amount of 3rd party stuff I've bought as a result... but, I do think that "official" has nothing to do with it. When people start vomiting out that word, it's been my experience that these are the same people that want to argue with the DM when s/he offers something new or different (on the surface) from what appears in the books. It reduces the ability for DMs and creators to look to other sources, who may be as balanced and as playtesting oriented as WotC, for alternatives.
It's like you're living inside my head
: these comments perfectly sum up my perspective on the quality of WotC vs. third party material and the official/unofficial debate at hand.
When I started playing 3e, I also started indexing rules material online. Since I wanted my indexes to be as complete as possible, I bought every book that had new feats, PrCs, classes and skills in it as they came out. This gave me a very broad exposure to 3e material over the first year and a half after the PHB came out, and it meant I built up an excellent collection of good books -- but also a large number of really shoddy products, most of which seemed to be from the same companies.
After I stopped indexing things, I sold off all of the books I didn't like and started being very picky about my 3e purchases. In general, I know I can pick up a WotC book and use it without worrying too much about unbalanced rules, overpowered feats, etc. There are some third party publishers for whom this is also true -- Green Ronin, Malhavoc and Privateer Press, for example -- but the great majority of products simply don't have the same level of consistency and quality.
Does this mean that everything WotC, GR, etc. put out is perfect? Of course not -- Sword & Fist and Song & Silence were both pretty shabby, as was GR's Assassin's Handbook, etc. But my expectations are still different when I pick up a WotC book than they are when I pick up a Fantasy Flight book, for example. FFG makes some great stuff for 3e, but IMO a decent portion of it isn't terribly balanced or well thought-out. If I buy a Legends & Lairs book, I know I'll be able to use most of it as is -- but I'll also have to scrutinize it carefully for problems. The same goes for AEG's "one word" series, or the crunchier Scarred Lands books, etc.
I don't mind doing this kind of work when I buy a new 3e book, but I do mind when I have to do what I perceive as
too much work. I'm sure the definition of "too much work" varies from person to person, and I expect I'm somewhere in the middle of the spectrum -- I avoid books that will require a complete overhaul to be useful, but I don't require 100% plug-and-play material either.
