Do you allow 3rd party content? Why or why not?

[Dragonexx]

Basically yes. I use a lot of homebrew material in my games (and have written a lot as my signature shows). I haven't really taken a look at a lot of the homebrew like DSP and spheres of power looks to be broken.

I need to approve it's use first, of course, but I'm pretty leiniant. It's not that hard to adjust the challenges if it seems problematic.

[Mutazoia]

As a general rule, I am VERY picky when it comes to 3rd party content, as a lot of it can be broken quite easily...just look at some of the past postings on this board to see just how easily some builds can go extreme OP quite quickly.

I have yet to see any 3rd party stuff that was created with anything but itself in mind. When it is combined with other 3rd party stuff, or even the right (wrong) core stuff, there can be power implications that pop up unexpectedly in a campaign.

To that end, I tend to fully read any 3rd party material before deciding to allow it in my games, and even then, I'll usually house-rule the shine-ola out of it if I see any potential problems. I never allow 3rd party material I haven't read. Ever. And I veto a lot of stuff I have.

[stack]

A lot of first party material appears not to be written with first party material in mind, as far as 3.pf goes, so any flaws in that regard are hardly unique to 3pp.

End of the day, you need to know what is in play and either stop problematic interactions or play with people who won't try to sneak broken combos in. The systems get too big to account for every possible interaction even for the best meaning authors.

[overlordseamus]

Depends on the material.
As a general rule, no.
Reason? 1001 spells.
Worst decision ever.

[90sMusic]

I always specify before a game begins that 3rd party and homebrew content will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

First I check to see if their race or class actually makes sense within the world. I despise character concepts like playing fallen gods/demigods, playing robots or cyborgs or anything technological in a fantasy realm, playing aliens, and so on.

If the race and class seem like something that is plausible for the setting, i'll go deeper and evaluate what the race or class can actually do and determine if I think it is balanced or too strong.

I also don't like classes or races that introduce new rules or complex mechanics because it'll be something you have to frequently refer back to and read up on. The less deviation from what is normal the better.

I make up new races and classes (and combinations) far more often than allowing stuff made by other people. Ideas that would be crazy in some settings just make more sense in certain stories/settings. For instance I had one player who was a unicorn, which was really fun, I made a succubus character I use for NPCs that I allow players to use with the same rules and advancement, and even a playable (young) dragon that I modified as not to be more powerful than the other players.

Sometimes it's fun to do new and different things, but i've always found its better to make it yourself to ensure it will fit appropriately and not get too powerful or out of whack.

[Quertus]

Back in 2e D&D, I was not alone in making a lot of homebrew. Heck, half the modules included something never before seen, too. And my signature character Quertus, for whom this account is named, has invented more custom spells than there are published spells. So my motto was simple: I'll allow anything I understand - and, if I don't understand it, explain it to me.

Of course, the only reason I wanted to understand it ahead of time was because, unlike me, most of the people I game with don't enjoy stopping the game for a 4-hour rules debate. Well, that, and the not entirely unrelated desire to understand any interactions between various homebrew - if this item only affects X, are you an X?

This motto was fueled in part by the complete and utter lack of balance in earlier editions. Once 3e D&D came around, with its CR system, WBL, and pretense of game balance, I grew a little pickier on what I allowed in. Oh, the irony*.

From this, it's easy to guess how I'll respond in other systems: if the game has at least a pretense of game balance, I'll honor that pretense. If not, then anything's fair game.

* yes, I know that's not the correct usage of the word.

[Pugwampy]

I have no problem with players looking for cool options outside the official rules .

One cool reason is that I can to use it too . Missile Storm Spell from Neverwinter Nights game yay !!!

[Jay R]

Before I allow any 3rd party content, or even some splatbook content, the player needs to come up with a compelling argument that the basic game is not fun enough without it.

Me, I actually like D&D. I don't need to change it to enjoy playing.


[But I started with "roll 3d6 6 times in order, and then play a Fighting Man (sic), Magic-User, or Cleric". The Thief and Paladin were added on in a supplement. The idea of as many options as modern D&D has seems ... unnecessary.]

[Cluedrew]

I play home-brew systems so... yes, because everything is 3rd party content at that point. Well generally there is just one person that is actually creating the content, but we will absorb bits of ideas and inspiration from everyone else which may work its way into the system and setting.

* yes, I know that's not the correct usage of the word.

The irony.

[TheFurith]

It depends on what it is. If they want to use a race, almost certainly not. It's never going to fit the setting if there's just one person of one race. If it's a class, possibly, if it doesn't create new mechanics that nobody knows. If it's a feat probably, as long as it isn't something obviously overpowered. As far as spell almost certainly, because there's already a core spell to break every part of the game anyway so what's the difference?

I'd apply those first two to first part material as well though, so that's nothing against third party. Some third party stuff is actually written by people who previous worked on first party stuff anyway.

[Pugwampy]

There is a ton of cool stuff created by enthusiasts who roll with Dice Gods 24/7 in their minds when not playing for real .

On the other hand the official brand stuff are made by underpaid wage slaves who tolerate nothing DND after 5 PM .

How is using 3rd party content any different to DM,s making up a new rule because the handbook,s advice is too much admin , non existent or just plain stupid .

[Mutazoia]

How is using 3rd party content any different to DM,s making up a new rule because the handbook,s advice is too much admin , non existent or just plain stupid .

Because a DM knows what he/she is putting into the game, and has made the call that said new rule will make said game easier, or better in some way.

3rd party content is some one else creating a lot of stuff that is designed with no other material in mind, and often causes unintended (or intended, if the designer is a jerkwad) power interactions, when mixed with other material (even core), up to and including totally breaking one or more aspects of the game. Allowing said material into your game, in part or in it's entirety, with out knowing how every bit of it can interact with every other bit of material in your game, leaves you wide open for headaches galore. The more 3rd party stuff you allow, the greater potential you have for your game going completely FUBAR.

[Christopher K.]

I'd say a yes with an asterisk. Like Mutazoia mentioned, it's nearly impossible for a third party designer to write their content with everything else in mind. When I write, I don't consider third party content except for whether another source includes the content in question(if I like how that source covers what I'm aiming to discuss, I move on).

That in mind, I have a house rule which serves me well at my table: PHB + 1 book, and requiring the player to bring the character to me long enough before the game that I can read the character sheet and ask the player any questions I have about the build. This also takes care of a lot of the power creep and craziness that 4e had, what with the Character Builder having access to every book WotC was pushing out so quickly.

[Psikerlord]

For 5e the thing I've found with 3rd party material is... you usually simply dont need it from the player's side. Whatever the core books have it is usually plenty to choose from. Indeed, quite possibly too much already. Is there really a good reason to add more complexity to it from the player side? There's already something like 30 subclasses available, plus feats.

On the other hand, I love custom feats, but that's easily done between me and the player.

From the GM side, happy to change rules and use 3rd party stuff like crit decks, plot twist cards, etc - but it's all subject to GM revision/tweaking.

[Glorthindel]

Generally no to 3rd party, no to homebrew*, and usually no to any official splatbook I haven't personally brought to the table.

Ultimately it is down to opening the floodgates. Once you allow one thing (be it perfectly balanced, and completely fine), it will provoke people to bring their own things, and that can turn ugly very quickly if you say no later (to a completely insanely imbalanced option) because the player can (and often will) cry foul and favouritism. By applying a blanket ban, yes, a few cool options will get caught that could have been added safely, but it is worth it to save the hassle and aggro that opening the floodgates can bring.

*the exception here is homebrew created between me and the player. Homebrew brought from a website, forget it, I'm not taking on the barrel of outrageous bull**** that comes with that, but I will happily sit down with every player and craft something unique if that is what they want.

[Melcar]

I do a bit of design work myself (Pathfinder and 5e), so this is a pressing question for me. I've got a comic up on the subject this morning, and I genuinely want to know. If you don't use 3rd party content, what turned you off from it? If you do, what makes 3rd party stuff worthwhile for you?

I use it, when it makes sense compared to the concept I'm trying to build or when it adds some cool fitting fluff. I also use it, when it adds to the build in terms of power, but again only if it fits the build. If I'm trying to build a dwarven tank, and there's a PrC in Quintessential Fighter that adds AC or DR or the ability to use two shields I might ad that to my dwarven defender, likewise when there are nice social feats to add to my ambassador or spy I pick them out instead of or maybe in addition to skill focus (diplomacy).

I think there are a lot of cool things hidden in 3rd party. Both classes, feats and spells... while some are crap, I would ague that quite a bit of the official D&D 3.X content is crap too. Monk and Truenamer classes, Toughness and Combat Casting feats to just name a few...

So yes I use it, when ever it add some element that fits the build I'm trying to create and/or when it adds flavor in terms of fluff or abilities that I find cool or useful. I use it mostly when trying to go down some form of specialization which is not adequately covered by official content.

So in short; yes I gladly use 3rd party!

[Pugwampy]

The more 3rd party stuff you allow, the greater potential you have for your game going completely FUBAR.

All games go FUBAR eventually dude. But until then you are having a blast with your unbalanced nonsense .

Treat every game like its your last one ever .

[Ninja-Radish]

As a DM, I told my group no 3rd party material allowed when we started our campaign. Later on I realized that WOTC partners with 3rd party publishers on most of their 5E books, it seems.

If I had to do it over again, I'd allow material specifically from Kobold Press, Green Ronin, and other publishers that have worked with WOTC on 5E books. However, I still wouldn't allow homebrew stuff from DM's Guild and the like.

[Sewercop]

I tend to dislike Homebrew, 3 party, etc. Main reason is that most that brings that to the table are most often players who never got a grasp
on the mechanical side of the games anyhow. They just search for what they want to play and try to get it to the table. Not even for a second
considering what impact the mechanics have on the gameworld or or other characters.

That said, most of it sucks bad. I like punk music,rock etc but tell me that every band is good and ill laugh in your face.

In many games, the fact you bring homebrew to the table often means you didnt look up anything at all gamewise, just searched for what you wanted.

I dont like it, because most, almost all suck bad when implemented in a group.

[Solauren]

3.5/Pathfinder game: Yeah, I do. (Pathfinder is the core rules, Psionics is Dreamscarred with some case by case for classes, Wizards of the Coast is supplementary/setting specific, other books is case by case)

I have to have looked at it first, and if it doesn't work out, either we tweak it, or....

Character must be re-tooled to not include it (i.e classes, feats)
Magic items, spells, etc stop working (an a quick consultation by the local cleric with their god will reveal why "We wanted to see how it worked, we didn't like it, so we banned it. We're Gods after all..."

Usually, it's just some tweaking to let it work.

i.e Chronomancy based spells from Mongoose Publishing's 'Encyclopedia Arcane: Chronomancy' rrequire our house brewed 'Chronomancer' feat.
(it also catches other sources Chronomancy spells right now.)
i.e the Legendary Prestige classes from Fantasy Flight Games 'Path of' series require a minimum character level.

i.e 'Practiced Caster' can only be taken every 6 character levels, and requires at least 1 level of increase over last time it was taken. (Had someone use that to get a character with 1 level of Psion, followed by 19 levels of Swordsage, taking Practiced Caster at level 5, 9, 13, 17 to have character with the powers of a Psion 18, Swordsage 19 at 20th level.)


Also, I have a spreadsheet based on the system in Mongoose Publishings 'Quintessential Wizard II' for 3.5 that, with a little tweaking to the system, lets me rebalance spells nicely.
(also works wonders for converting pre-3e spells).

Fortunately, most 3.X/3.5 3rd party books line up with Pathfinders relative power increase (as compared to 3.X/3.5) so it's rarely an issue.

[Sewercop]

i.e 'Practiced Caster' can only be taken every 6 character levels, and requires at least 1 level of increase over last time it was taken. (Had someone use that to get a character with 1 level of Psion, followed by 19 levels of Swordsage, taking Practiced Caster at level 5, 9, 13, 17 to have character with the powers of a Psion 18, Swordsage 19 at 20th level.)

By reading the feat you wouldnt need to homebrew it. This is my stance on homebrew, how can you expect people to bring credible things to the table when
they dont understand basics.

[Mutazoia]

As a DM, I told my group no 3rd party material allowed when we started our campaign. Later on I realized that WOTC partners with 3rd party publishers on most of their 5E books, it seems.

If I had to do it over again, I'd allow material specifically from Kobold Press, Green Ronin, and other publishers that have worked with WOTC on 5E books. However, I still wouldn't allow homebrew stuff from DM's Guild and the like.

Just because a 3rd party publisher has "worked with WOTC", doesn't mean that their stuff is automatically ballanced to work with the core and/or other 3rd party stuff....

[Ninja-Radish]

Just because a 3rd party publisher has "worked with WOTC", doesn't mean that their stuff is automatically ballanced to work with the core and/or other 3rd party stuff....

Well, it seems like most of the 5E books have third party publishers credited in them. So, if WOTC is now basically contracting out alot of their products to other publishers, can they really be considered "third party" anymore?

[tomandtish]

Generally no, and Mutazoia and Christopher K hit on the key point.

You're doing well if third party content is balanced* with core. It usually isn't balanced with supplemental material WoTC has put out, and especially not with other 3rd party material.

Heck, even WotC can't really balance their supplemental materials with each other.

*Balanced being a highly subjective term that usually fails miserably anyway.

[Kane0]

Yeah I'm pretty lenient. I play mostly 5e now but i've done my fair share of 3.PF homebrew as well.

I think that lenience comes from an ability to roll up my sleeves and dig into the content to judge it for myself, which requires a certain amount of time and system mastery. Those with less of either (or both) are usually less willing to allow custom material unless they have someone they trust to do it for them (which is me in my current group).

RPGs are something that is made greater by creativity. Sometimes that can take away some of the fun but most of the time it adds to it, and I don't like to let a few bad eggs spoil everything. Plus there is some truly fantastic stuff out there, in the same way that some games have tons of awesome mods. It doesn't hurt to try.