D&D (2024) What would you put in 1D&D from 4E?

[GMforPowergamers]

I imagine they probably think the same thing about why players are so cold about using new classes that other third-parties make. Why are they the only company that can make a Psionicist that players will accept, when there have been plenty of Psionicists made by other people across the 'net to choose from and use? And if players want a Warlord or the infamous "arcane half-caster"... you can find all manner of versions out there as well. But apparently those don't count?

I don't know if "don't count" is the right word... but my group doesn't use player side 3pp products... so no classes for 3pp.

Here is why. back in 3.5 (and a bit into 4e) we did, and what we found what happened went something like this... 1 player would find a cool class, or race or feat or magic item... anything really, and bring it to the DM and say "Can I use X" and the DM would read through it and give a thumbs up or thumbs down... we have plenty of DMs so if 1 said no you could try 2-5 more people depending on the year in question...
As we got older the less time we had to dedicate to gaming things. So today the idea that I as a DM would keep up with talk and read about all the WotC books is hard on me along with school work and wedding planning... and for Jon that is 2 jobs (although 1 just like 30 hrs a month) and being married and having a kid, and for matt that has gone from working at a store to owning a store... and we ALL need more 'down' time.
So, If I grab a warlord I like and Jon grabs a half arcane caster he likes and Linda grabs a complex warrior she likes and Kurt is nice... he just has 3 spells he wants his cleric to have from these 2 books.... that is now 4 books for matt to review,

now remember there are atleast 4 warlords on DMsguild... so If I am the DM and Ross brings me 1, and I don;t like it, I used to just go look for 1 I did and say "how about this?" I don't have the time to look them all over.

At some point WotC probably just threw up their hands and said "We went through all the effort to use the OGL for 5E so that players could get everything they wanted out of D&D that we ourselves were not interested or able to make... and yet players don't want to any of it and keep banging the drum for us to make it. We just can't win here!"

Your right they can't... unless (and this may sound crazy) they put out all of the classes they had in all teh PHB1s through out the games history that would be a great start... #JusticeforWarlord

 

[DEFCON 1]

So, If I grab a warlord I like and Jon grabs a half arcane caster he likes and Linda grabs a complex warrior she likes and Kurt is nice... he just has 3 spells he wants his cleric to have from these 2 books.... that is now 4 books for matt to review.

Or of course the other option is that all of you players just make the choice to not offer up or use options you know are overpowered, and thus Matt doesn't have to review a thing. You just find what you like that you know is completely adequate of a game component... and you play with it. And if by some chance down the line after you've all played them for a while, you all and Matt see that one of you really made a bad choice and the component either stinks or is trivializing everything... you do a couple edits and fix it without anyone putting up a stink.

It's all well and good for all of us to wish upon a star that WotC could give us every single little thing we desire... but at some point we all have to be a little realistic. They cannot and will not give us everything we want for the game, which is why they tell us to go outside of their publishing circle to get it. And at some point we have to make a decision of what's more important to us-- not playing what we want because we don't have the time or energy to make sure what we want is 100% balanced before it even its the table... or finding what we want and spend just a little bit of time playing it and then analyzing it to make sure we find it to be a reasonable character option.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Your right they can't... unless (and this may sound crazy) they put out all of the classes they had in all teh PHB1s through out the games history that would be a great start... #JusticeforWarlord

You're right, that does sound crazy.

 

[Undrave]

4e's rules where every ability has an Encounter/Daily uses and it doesn't matter how long anyone rests?

That's not how 4e works.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Or of course the other option is that all of you players just make the choice to not offer up or use options you know are overpowered, and thus Matt doesn't have to review a thing.

all we would need is a baseline... that even WotC can't provide. so I mean that seems like a tall order. 99.9% of the time we are not trying to cheat, we were just looking for fun.

You just find what you like that you know is completely adequate of a game component... and you play with it.

for the most part as a group we normally start with DM buy in then it (if disagree) goes to all of us for a vote... I have been told giving the whole table a say is odd though.

And if by some chance down the line after you've all played them for a while, you all and Matt see that one of you really made a bad choice and the component either stinks or is trivializing everything... you do a couple edits and fix it without anyone putting up a stink.

yeah not reading and just allowing all 3pp doesn't sound very tenable to me...

It's all well and good for all of us to wish upon a star that WotC could give us every single little thing we desire... but at some point we all have to be a little realistic.

what is unrealistic about asking for more classes?

They cannot and will not give us everything we want for the game, which is why they tell us to go outside of their publishing circle to get it.

and that is not a good answer for everyone... why are we arguing this in this of all threads?

And at some point we have to make a decision of what's more important to us-- not playing what we want because we don't have the time or energy to make sure what we want is 100% balanced before it even its the table... or finding what we want and spend just a little bit of time playing it and then analyzing it to make sure we find it to be a reasonable character option.

what we have come up with is each DM takes DM side (monster adventure, even full subsystems) and we ignore most player side 3pp... then we ask WotC to provide us with a full game to play

 

[GMforPowergamers]

That's not how 4e works.

its weird how many people dislike 4e stuff and quote or tell me things that in no way are the 4e way of doing it.

 

[mamba]

So, If I grab a warlord I like and Jon grabs a half arcane caster he likes and Linda grabs a complex warrior she likes and Kurt is nice... he just has 3 spells he wants his cleric to have from these 2 books.... that is now 4 books for matt to review,

or Matt just says' sure, go with it, if anything comes up during play that I consider problematic, I'll let you know and we discuss / adjust it then'. Which is probably what I would do (after a quick look over it, rather than an in depth review upfront)

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

or Matt just says' sure, go with it, if anything comes up during play that I consider problematic, I'll let you know and we discuss / adjust it then'. Which is probably what I would do (after a quick look over it, rather than an in depth review upfront)

I think basically 3.x, not to mention late 2e, pretty well broke GMs of any lingering assumption that if something is published it's not a hot mess. 4e redeemed WotC itself on that score but most 3PPs? I would basically assume their stuff is borked until proven otherwise. We can argue about whether GMs should be THE gatekeeper, but I would never assume I can just bring in some content to a game unreviewed.

 

[mamba]

I would never assume I can just bring in some content to a game unreviewed.

if me allowing it once means I can never adjust after I would agree, but if I can either address it when it occurs or after the session (depending on severity), then I have no problem not doing a full review firsthand, at least for the 'bigger' 3pps and not some author on DMsGuild who never did anything else

 

[GMforPowergamers]

if me allowing it once means I can never adjust after I would agree, but if I can either address it when it occurs or after the session (depending on severity), then I have no problem not doing a full review firsthand, at least for the 'bigger' 3pps and not some author on DMsGuild who never did anything else

without a review how do you know it is a "bigger" 3pps? heck, how does the player know what you consider 'bigger' without telling you and showing you??