D&D General Wildly Diverse "Circus Troupe" Adventuring Parties

[Remathilis]

I wouldn’t necessarily call excluding something written for another setting an “arbitrary” line.

But then again, I’ve played at tables with DMs who disallowed core classes & races because they don’t like them and don’t want to deal with them in their game.

It does create a very arbitrary line when one thing is generic enough to be in the PHB (Knowledge domain) but shunted off to the Forgotten Realms book, and now you get a bunch of bad interactions, such as DMs calling it Realms exclusive or lumping it in with spellfire sorcery or Scion of the three rogue (which is very Realms specific) or often carte blanche banning the book because they don't want the headache of figuring out where genie magic or spellfire fits in their Eberron game.

I'm just saying it would be a lot easier for everyone if it was all designed for one setting and the DM didn't have to worry about if something "fits" in an official D&D world.

 

[Necropolitan]

It does create a very arbitrary line when one thing is generic enough to be in the PHB (Knowledge domain) but shunted off to the Forgotten Realms book, and now you get a bunch of bad interactions, such as DMs calling it Realms exclusive or lumping it in with spellfire sorcery or Scion of the three rogue (which is very Realms specific) or often carte blanche banning the book because they don't want the headache of figuring out where genie magic or spellfire fits in their Eberron game.

Has that actually happened enough that it's a real problem?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It does create a very arbitrary line when one thing is generic enough to be in the PHB (Knowledge domain) but shunted off to the Forgotten Realms book, and now you get a bunch of bad interactions, such as DMs calling it Realms exclusive or lumping it in with spellfire sorcery or Scion of the three rogue (which is very Realms specific) or often carte blanche banning the book because they don't want the headache of figuring out where genie magic or spellfire fits in their Eberron game.

I'm just saying it would be a lot easier for everyone if it was all designed for one setting and the DM didn't have to worry about if something "fits" in an official D&D world.

That’s still not arbitrary on the DM’s side- they’re just saying “don’t use anything from this campaign setting” or “only use stuff from X,Y & Z”. I wouldn’t expect for a given DM to know and thus distinguish between things in every setting that’s generic vs hyper specific. Hell- I’m somewhat of a completist, and I know I don’t know enough to distinguish between those categories for the stuff I own…much less the stuff I’ve not bought yet (and might never).

Instead, blame WotC for putting something in a campaign-specific product as opposed to one that’s systemwide ready, or not republishing it a subsequent product. (There’s several things in 3.5Ed that got republished in multiple books.)

NOTE: Republication & “system bloat” raises its own issues. In 3.5Ed, there’s 2 different feats called Sacred Healing, and they do two very different things. And no, the subsequently released one is NOT a replacement for the older one- I actually contacted WotC. Somebody simply missed the existence of the older feat somehow.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

They just keep homebrewing their own setting just like they already do and absolutely nothing changes, because you can't somehow stop DMs from creating their own settings. For whatever my experience is worth, my estimate would be 90% of the audience

The problem being discussed here is unsolvable because it's not actually a problem.

And they're definitely not going to get mad in the slightest that their preferred setting has been kicked to the curb?

I wish I had as much faith in humanity as you do.

 

[Remathilis]

And they're definitely not going to get mad in the slightest that their preferred setting has been kicked to the curb?

I wish I had as much faith in humanity as you do.

BIrthright 2027

 

[DrJawaPhD]

Has that actually happened enough that it's a real problem?

Blanket answer applicable to this entire thread: No it has not.