Should a DM buy the player splats?

[haakon1]

It's cheapest (and in my opinion better gaming) if you just play core rules and ban splat.

That's what I do, though occassionally I'll allow in a specific rule from a splat book, Pathfinder, or more often the Net Book of Feats. (I run 3.5e.)

 

[Stormonu]

I agree, because, I've never met a gamer that isn't committed to the game in at least a small capacity. So why invest someone who will most likely flake and drop out of the gaming group in a couple of months.

And if you tell me you have a player that has been with you for years but won't read the books, I will tell you they are either lazy or you have been duped by a very good con artist.

Actually, I've had and have several players who haven't actually sat down and read the books, nor do they own their own copies. My wife is one.

 

[Thunderfoot]

Actually, I've had and have several players who haven't actually sat down and read the books, nor do they own their own copies. My wife is one.

See, and my wife has copies of all her own books for 3 editions.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Mostly because NO book should be allowed at the table that the DM hasn't thoroughly read first. That being said, the DM's copy doesn't have to be available to use for the players; they should have their own.

I find it odd that some players demand that the DM do anything - there was a time that DMs were minor deities... these are sad times indeed.

Also remember that anything beyond the core rules are "suggestions" and that even the core rules can be altered heavily if the DM so desires, but the players should have fore knowledge and access to the rules changes (we used to keep a log of house rules that eventually turned into a player's guide.)

This, in toto.

I have been known to line veto a splat - which would not be possible if I did not have a copy. (Oozemaster, I am looking at you!)

Until I check a book over - whether primary source or third party, the answer is 'No'.

The Auld Grump

 

[S'mon]

There is no moral obligation on the DM to allow player splats.

I have to say that I've found 4e works much better as "Everything is Forbidden that is not Expressly Permitted" - start with a limited range of options and those can be expanded as circumstance and the needs of the campaign warrant.

Recently I decided to allow in Martial Power 1 & 2 to my Southlands campaign, and not being short of funds I ordered my own copies off amazon. It helped that MP2 is a pretty good book with lots of inspirational ideas, and MP 1 is... cheap.

But it's fine to not buy them, to disallow them, to require the player to bring a copy (or a laptop with working Internet & DDI subscription), etc.

 

[delericho]

But I have to question, why should a DM buy a book that's about player options? Why should he be the one spending the money, when it's 1) the players using it, and 2) the only reason the DM has it is to check the rules?

Speaking only for myself:

I expect to be able to check up on PC capabilities, and often have to do such things between sessions. If the player were willing to leave his copy with me for the duration of the campaign (or, I suppose, were there an electronic version I could reference), that would be fine, but otherwise, I need my own copy.

Do you think DMs should be the ones buying the splats?

No. But then, it has been my experience that most games play better in a core-rules-only manner anyway, or perhaps with a very small set of carefully selected supplements. Too many games have later supplements that introduce poorly balanced elements (due to poor playtesting), power creep (again, playtesting... or deliberately), or just add complexity where it isn't needed.

4e appears to be a bit better in this regard, in that the creeping errata take care of most of the balance issues. But then, I don't run 4e... and in part this is because I'm turned away by option bloat.

Does a DM have to own the book for it to be allowed in the group? I know that this is how quite a few Dms operate (if I don't own it you can't use it), but that 1) assumes the DM reads the entire thing and knows all the broken bits anyways, 2) puts the purchasing burden on the DM.

I take that view. In fact, I go further: at the start of the campaign I identify the books that will be used (and sometimes, the parts of books that will be used), and after that the list is fixed. We don't change the rules mid-stream.

There are two reasons for this. The first is because of balance issues, as I've mentioned above. The second, however, is that I insist on a level playing field for all participants. If Al gets to use a particular sourcebook, so does Bob. And while, in theory, they could share Al's copy, that has several practical issues (notably Bob's ability to check the book between sessions). Limiting it to only books I own at least guarantees everyone reasonable access to the books, and ensures that I can check the books between sessions.

As for the purchasing burden... I've spent way more on RPGs than I probably should. Traditionally, it's never been a problem - for the games I've been running, I've typically owned way more books than any of the players, and usually more than all of them combined.

 

[DragonLancer]

It's cheapest (and in my opinion better gaming) if you just play core rules and ban splat.

That's what I say. I allow players to pick from Pathfinder core rules, Inner Sea campaign setting, Gods & Magic and the Adventurer's Armoury. Nothing else is used. Keep it simple is always the best policy.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Speaking in terms of 4e:

I started a thread asking about suggested purchases for DMs buying into an edition, and one (possibly more) suggested picking up various player books.

But I have to question, why should a DM buy a book that's about player options?

No longer relevant with the Character Builder. One of these days I'm going to post a long rant thread about why I hate the CB so much.

In my group, I've tried to restrict to just PH1-3 stuff, DSCS and Essentials 1 (with only limited crossover between Essentials 1 and PH 1-3 stuff).

For my Dark Sun group, I'm the DM. I'm the only person at the table who doesn't have a laptop and doesn't use the character builder. (I ended up downloading it anyway, because that was the only way to get players to update their sheets; they won't even post them on the campaign wiki.)

Dark Sun doesn't work properly in the CB because they're using the offline version, and it doesn't contain power text, and there's other issues, yet there's a mass refusal to consider using paper instead.

Apparently the CB has a filter that lets you see only stuff from a few books. In practice, players don't know how to use that filter or they ignore it. I'm always being presented with something from Dragon Magazine, Divine Power, Martial Power or whatever the first item vault was. One player played a Battlerager Vigor fighter and is still upset that I banned it (I couldn't tell it was broken until I'd seen it in play). I know at least some players are genuinely confused by this, like the person whose "cleric" took Moment of Glory.

This also makes it harder for a DM to "thoroughly read" those splatbooks. There's so many available within the CB alone that, short of mass pirating 4e (which I have no intention of doing) it's impossible. And an inexperienced DM* can't keep up.

*4e is three years old now. I ran about 4 or 5 sessions in 2008 when the campaign fell apart due to RP issues. I restarted in late 2010, but have only run about 1 game a month (a large rotation system). Therefore, I'm not an experienced DM, and I've literally never met another 4e DM. Alas, the game has changed drastically over three years, and the CB makes it impossible to ignore these changes that I missed

 

[Umbran]

Actually, I've had and have several players who haven't actually sat down and read the books, nor do they own their own copies. My wife is one.

My wife is another.

You got that, Thunderfoot? You've just insulted the wife of one of the moderators! Excellent work, Sir!

I think you want to think very, very carefully about whether you think others are apt to be forgiving about calling their loved ones lazy or liars before you continue.

It is for reasons like this that we ask you not to over-generalize, folks. Please attempt to learn from Thunderfoot's mistake.

 

[hopeless]

Okay

That's what I say. I allow players to pick from Pathfinder core rules, Inner Sea campaign setting, Gods & Magic and the Adventurer's Armoury. Nothing else is used. Keep it simple is always the best policy.

Do you mean the player's version of the Inner Sea setting guide or the full version?

Sorry just curious!