Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- individual adventure modules! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed to plug in to your game.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dreaded_beast" data-source="post: 1144433" data-attributes="member: 11185">just my opinion, but why the negative vibes against dragon and wotc?seems as if people don't think much of wotc or dragon magazine, as if they are just in it for the money, which is true to some extent, since they are money-making businesses after all. it's as if people look down at them for actually trying to make a buck from their product. i get the feeling that there is an "elite" attitude, as if not using any wotc products makes someone a better gamer, as if it something to be proud of not to use wotc products.i've always respected wotc for making dnd open source and am dissappointed when people still see wotc in a negative light. it is their game and they didn't have to do that but they did, which allows people to just buy products from other publishers and not wotc. i believe that wotc deserves at least some respect for making that choice, which i feel is lacking when others talk of wotc:"we used you to get the bare minimum to play dnd and now that we got it, we're not going to buy any of your other products because it's all crap anyway"that's a very extreme example, but that is how i feel at times when it comes to other gamers' views on wotc.this isn't meant to be inflammatory, just how i feel and what i believe is true to some extentin regards to "official", ever since i started playing dnd, i've always considered dragon magazine as "official" and anything produced by wotc as being "official". my definition of "official" is that the rules can be taken as canon and supersede any other rules produced by any other party or can be integrated with existing "official" rules. this is taking into account that wotc makes mistakes as well, but that is addressed by the erratta that they put out.however, that can only go so far, since every gaming group plays their own way and has "house" rules. i feel that "official" is important for groups that need rulings on situations that are not covered in the core rules, but are covered in "official" products. i believe that "official" brings some sort of "industry standard" that everyone can refer to when there is doubt about how something should be handled, in other words, consistancy.however, most gaming groups probably have a multitude of their own "house" rules, so "official" goes only so far, where "house" rules usually supersed "official" rules. every campaign is different, so the rules are tailored to fit their campaign. in fact, in one of the core rule books, the main rule is to change whatever you want to fit the way you want the game to be played.this makes me wonder what it means when "kingdoms of kalamar" is an "official" dnd product. i think it was the first non-wotc product to be "official".</blockquote>

Verification