The Player's Problem with 3rd Party Products

[Voadam]

Is it me, or are 3rd party products really for the DM?

As a DM, I like third party products. But as a player, I feel that they're a waste. Not because they're not good, not because they're broken, but for one simple reason:

Wary DMs.

I've not really met someone who I could hand a 3rd party product, point to a Class or a Race or, well, anything, and say "Can I play that?" and get a go-ahead.

I've met many a DM who are wary of even books published by WotC, or those fellows who are leery of basically Anything outside of the PHB.

Which is a real shame, because many of the nice products out there are for players. Not even counting the glut of feats and PrCs, but alternate classes, or alternate casting systems. Take Green Ronin's Shaman's Handbook, or Witch's handbook. PC classes, with nice mechanics and such. But unless your DM owns the product and likes it, I doubt you'd get to play it.

Am I alone in this feeling?

I've known ones who are core only. I'e known ones who are pretty much anything goes. I've known ones who allow stuff only from what they have or specific lists of books. I know ones who will consider anything. DMs vary in what they allow, so most gaming material is more useful for GMs as they know they can use it if they want.

 

[Greg K]

Wariness extends to WOTC- at least with me. Outside of the core rules and some UA options, I disallow a lot of WOTC material including Book of Exalted Deeds, Psionics, Tome of Magic, Tome of Battle: Bo9S. Even the Complete Books and PHB2 are extremely limited as to what I will allow with Complete Warrior and Complete Arcana (based on the number of spells) having the most allowed content. Then again, as a DM and player, I just tend not to like the player oriented material from WOTC supplements based upon mechanics, class features, or just their general take on a subject


BTW, I love GR's Shaman's Handbook and Witch's Handbook (actually all three of Steve Kenson's Master class books from Green Ronin are among my favorite 3.x supplements). My ideal, 4e would incorporate a lot of third party material.

 

[Pinotage]

As others have mentioned, it's not entirely something to do with 3rd party publishers. I'm still one who'll allow anything from the core, but everything from the Complete books or other sources needs to be run by me first. There's a lot of questionable material out there, and certainly not from 3rd party publishers alone. That said, most larger publishers like Green Ronin, Necromancer and Goodman Games can generally be trusted to know what they're doing. I'm always willing to look at new material, on the provisio that things are playtested first and subject to change. That goes for all publishers.

3rd party products are not popular with, I suspect, a quite large proportion of the gaming community. You'll probably find many gaming tables just don't have 3rd party products at all.

Pinotage

 

[Rechan]

It actually surprises me the number of people who dislike/disallow the WotC products.

Man, aside from say the BoED/VD, and say Ghostwalk, there's no classes out of WotC that I would disallow. Re-fluff, yes, but not just say "No".

Well, aside from a SPellfire user out of FR.

 

[Greg K]

I wonder how much the problem with 3rd party material has to do with knowledge of what is out there. Most people I meet that don't visit ENWorld or don't have a local game store are completely clueless that third party material exists.

 

[Sollir Furryfoot]

I don't think it should be disallowed just because the DM doesn't own it, but it's still the player needs to prove to the DM that the class is balanced and will add fun to the game. So if the DM doesn't have it, they should definitely photocopy all the relevent information-and if he's asking to include it in the gameworld it should make sense with the rest of the world. So I'd be wary about adding new rules systems (Psionics, Book of 9 Swords, etc...) but be up for looking at everything else.

Worse comes worse, rule 0 can be used to erratta things before and after they are out of hand anyways, though players prefer to be nerfed before they make their class decisions, of course.

 

[Crothian]

I wonder how much the problem with 3rd party material has to do with knowledge of what is out there. Most people I meet that don't visit ENWorld or don't have a local game store are completely clueless that third party material exists.

Heck, even a lot of people here make snap judgments on the stuff. A company gets judged as bad and then people assume everything they make is crap. People just seem to want to hate things fast these days be it third party, PDFs, or even 4e.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Is it me, or are 3rd party products really for the DM?

Well by rights they probably should be. PrC's, for example, were initially intended as DM tools as I recall, but quickly became player tools when it was realized that you could sell a LOT more PrC's to players than DM's.

Makes sense. As a DM you might be just as interested as any of your players in 3rd party products, but being a good DM you are NOT interested in turning your ongoing campaign into a secondary prooving ground for potentially disastrous additions. In fact, you're not likely to want to be constantly disrupting your campaign with changes and additions - good OR bad. You want consistency in your campaign. And then when you start a new campaign, again, like the good DM you are, you don't just throw in the kitchen sink. You've heard the horror stories and at least know that not EVERYTHING that's published is right for your next game. Naturally, then, YOUR willingness to experiment with new stuff is much lower than your PLAYERS willingness to experiment with new characters.

But DM's, as noted, become WARY of what they want to allow. It's natural to be conservative in that regard. Players often WANT to be the uber-character, the broken PrC, the shiny new game focus and dominator. DM's are NEVER wary of weak additions, they're wary of unforseen, uncontrollable, OVERPOWERED additions. And WotC is no less accountable for their share of problematic publications.

Which is a real shame, because many of the nice products out there are for players. Not even counting the glut of feats and PrCs, but alternate classes, or alternate casting systems. Take Green Ronin's Shaman's Handbook, or Witch's handbook. PC classes, with nice mechanics and such. But unless your DM owns the product and likes it, I doubt you'd get to play it.

But then even if ALL of it is tested and given the Good GameKeeping Seal of Approval and a ModuleWriters Labs warranty THE DM still determines what belongs or contrasts with how he wants to run his game. The DM decides what to emphasize or omit, what creates unnecessary glut of choices and what he genuinely wouldn't mind see being used.

It is never, EVER stated by any publisher that even though they have come to gear so much product as PLAYER-oriented, that the publishers do not determine for the players what flies - the DM does. And as noted - it is in both the DM's and players interests for the DM to NOT subordinate control and development of the campaign to publishers via the whim of players.

 

[Greylock]

I've had one DM in the last many years who allowed me to play with anything from a book I owned. One. And I don't intentionally break characters, neither do the folks I play with. Another would allow me to use something outside of the Three Core Books only if I wrote it up from the book and presented it with a well thought out and written argument why it was in character; and only then if he had a chance to nerf whatever it was I liked.

So, basically, the hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of dollars I've spent on WotC non-Core books and 3rd Party books has been money pissed down the toilet as far as any real use ever has or ever will be.

2. I don't allow any Green Ronin works period.

Now that's just strange. Green Ronin Races and Classes books are some of the best out there, bar none, and even Wizards has lifted from them liberally.

Not that I've ever used them in actual play. But I own each and every one of them!

 

[Aus_Snow]

Am I alone in this feeling?

Yes.

No.

But most DMs I know allow anything that they either own or have read thoroughly, and that they approve for a given campaign. Which is generally most things, really. No-one tries on the 'way out there' type stuff - probably because no-one tends to buy that (or create it) in the first place.

Guess I'm lucky to know some open-minded DMs (in that sense, at least) - and to be one (again, in that sense.)