|
3 years ago ::
Dec 25, 2009 - 3:01PM
#541
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2009
|
Am I still wrong for disallowing those? The Assassian, Monk, Ardent and etc are out until their PHB releases and I can review them with a Mk 1 eyeball (read: actually seen a book in my hands and read the final versions, with all their builds in place.)
-Sarena
I like where you're going with this Sarena. I wonder if those who are against the bans would also be against the DM who bans because he doesn't want to take time to learn new material. I knew quite a few DMs back in 3.5 who only allowed Players Hand Book material and the Prestige Classes in the DMG. That was it. The end of the line. They just did not want to keep track of all that stuff.
How about a DM who just blanket bans every thing but the Players Handbook in 4e? Is he a bad GM? I know I'd like a game where the DM was on top of things and had probably considered all the material from a given book while designing her campaign.
For me, it's a budgetary constraint. If the Players are want something in badly enough and are all willing to chip in and supply me a copy of said source material for my library, then I'm entirely willing to consider some or all of the material in question, once I've had time to review it. In my 3.x games, I had much the same policy. If the material in the end proved completely untenable, I would return the book in question, and give them their money back. I had a number of books in my 3.5 collection that were obtained in exactly that way and for that purpose, whether they were purchased by one or all the Players.
That said, I will for myself get copies of the initial core materials(PHB, DMG, and MM), and anything *I* think is cool and want to use. In one case, I arranged the purchase of a number of Eberron Player's guides to give the Players in advance of a hoped-for Eberron campaign. The discussion happened, they decided they liked TotRD better, and the books were returned with a minimum of fuss. One of the Players who liked it handed me the money to retain his copy, which he then used later to run an Eberron game of his own.
When I have the budget, I will get the books according to priority(Monster Manuals and Adventurer's Vaults being first). After that, I play it by ear. But I do give the Players an option of accelerating that process. Last edition, there were just so many books there was no way to ever catch up. This edition, if they want something, I really need a book that contains it, unless I introduce it myself as setting-specific.
Besides, if I have a book in my hands, I can stomp any stretching munchkinism before it gets started.
Oh, and going back to something someone else said, yes, the Assassian is considered Complete directly from Dragon. I'm still holding it in abeyance until I see a dead tree edition along with others from that Power source. I enjoy my subscription to Dungeon and Dragon magazines, but unless all the Players are DDI subscribers, then not everyone can have access.
-Sarena
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 25, 2009 - 3:32PM
#542
|
|
|
Besides, if I have a book in my hands, I can stomp any stretching munchkinism before it gets started.
Oh, and going back to something someone else said, yes, the Assassian is considered Complete directly from Dragon. I'm still holding it in abeyance until I see a dead tree edition along with others from that Power source. I enjoy my subscription to Dungeon and Dragon magazines, but unless all the Players are DDI subscribers, then not everyone can have access.
-Sarena
Makes sense. That wouldn't go over in my group, because between all of us we have all the books, whether physical or in digital form, and everyone has access to the character builder. Even if it requires hanging out with another part of the group. In fact, the DM insists that all characters be made on the builder and printed on his printer at home (where we pretty much exclusively play), and the DM is pretty much more used to doing things digitally than anyone else in the group, other than possibly me. (I prefer my books in pdf form by far. I'd much rather wordsearch for something than flip through a book if I need to check something real quick.) I, obviously, operate in the same way when I DM.
One of my other friends is starting a game soon, and he may not allow some things without a physical copy he can look at. Hopefully if I make my laptop with all it's DnD resources available to him he'll ease up, but if not, it is what it is.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 26, 2009 - 1:23AM
#543
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2009
|
Besides, if I have a book in my hands, I can stomp any stretching munchkinism before it gets started.
Oh, and going back to something someone else said, yes, the Assassian is considered Complete directly from Dragon. I'm still holding it in abeyance until I see a dead tree edition along with others from that Power source. I enjoy my subscription to Dungeon and Dragon magazines, but unless all the Players are DDI subscribers, then not everyone can have access.
-Sarena
Makes sense. That wouldn't go over in my group, because between all of us we have all the books, whether physical or in digital form, and everyone has access to the character builder. Even if it requires hanging out with another part of the group. In fact, the DM insists that all characters be made on the builder and printed on his printer at home (where we pretty much exclusively play), and the DM is pretty much more used to doing things digitally than anyone else in the group, other than possibly me. (I prefer my books in pdf form by far. I'd much rather wordsearch for something than flip through a book if I need to check something real quick.) I, obviously, operate in the same way when I DM.
Is there such a thing as a legal .pdf of anything Wizards has done beyond the SRD and the two magazines? I'd rather not get myself out on that particular slippery slope. Credits where credits are due, and if my Players want a particular thing, then they need to come up with the credits to pay the salaries of the people at Wizards, or wait until I do.
Easy as cheesecake, if not nearly as tasty.
-Sarena
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 26, 2009 - 6:08AM
#544
|
Date Joined:
Jun 25, 2008
|
As a DM, there are times that I don't allow certain races or classes because the campaign setting wasn't created with them in mind. I hate players that whine about it and ask to play those races or classes anyway, just because they bought a book and that race or class is in that book.
FYI, I advertise my campaigns at the local game store with clear cut rules for character creation that prospective players can read before signing up. So either they didn't read the rules and signed up or they read the rules and signed up anyway, knowing they couldn't play a certain race or class.
When it comes to powers that make game balance difficult... I nerf them as needed if they're causing a problem in my encounters. As for magic items, aside from bog standard +1 weapons and the like, I don't use any magic items from the books and create all new ones specific to the campaign setting.
"No." <-- Will always be a perfectly reasonable and valid response to players. As the DM, it's your job to make sure everyone has fun, including yourself.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 26, 2009 - 6:33AM
#545
|
|
|
Is there such a thing as a legal .pdf of anything Wizards has done beyond the SRD and the two magazines?
Yes. All of the 4e books were available in original electronic format up until April 2009 - they could be purchased from Paizo and others. In April WotC both stopped releasing their content as e-books, and revoked everyone's right to distribute the e-books. This was considered to be a bit of a jerk move by some, as even people who purchased the PDFs before April lost the ability to re-download them. Some people who had purchased them close to the end lost the ability to download before they even downloaded them for the first time - I don't know what WotC did to resolve that particular grievance.
Personally, I think it's a bad move as I no longer have any legal way to acquire the books in the format I want to use. Now I buy the books, but hard copies aren't really what I want - even the scanned PDFs I can find online are far more useful to me than my dead tree editions. "You can't grep a dead tree," as the saying goes (technically you can't grep a PDF either, but at least you can word search it). The only books that I prefer in non-electronic format are adventure modules.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 26, 2009 - 7:41AM
#546
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2007
|
Credits where credits are due, and if my Players want a particular thing, then they need to come up with the credits to pay the salaries of the people at Wizards, or wait until I do.
there's just one problem with that particular statement: DDI. you would not allow it, however the player in question could by WOTC's own terms pay for everything he gets there (including all the book content) easily.
Also, i find it rather strange for players to have to supply you with your OWN copy of a book if they want to play a class, and you only MIGHT consider letting them play it - sounds a lot like noone will ever do this under those circumstances, and might be a reason for repeatedly new groups (and new problems) cropping up.
---
Sidenote on 4e design: You really don't need the books to grasp any 4e character, or to judge it's mechanics. 4e has gotten so easy on the DM, that you just can take every item a player wants and review it within mere minutes. Also, the most broken characters are still rangers + orb wizards... found within the first core book.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 26, 2009 - 7:42AM
#547
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2006
|
From what has come up on the Community Business forum, the decision to revoke PDF sales and downloads was apparently due to some of those retailers under-reporting their sales to WotC and pocketing the difference.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 26, 2009 - 7:46AM
#548
|
Date Joined:
Nov 22, 2009
|
From what has come up on the Community Business forum, the decision to revoke PDF sales and downloads was apparently due to some of those retailers under-reporting their sales to WotC and pocketing the difference.
Ahhhhhh...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Patriot, crusader, and infidel.
“If we see somebody digging in an IED at the roadside, he deserves to die, and we’re going to kill him.”- General Hodges, United States Army.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 27, 2009 - 12:16AM
#549
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2009
|
Thus, the reports I'd heard about DRM issues. Gotcha.
Responding to the assertion earlier about DDI memberships, I don't expect everyone to have or want a membership. Requiring them to spend the moeny for one seems rather unfair to me. Having them obtain whatever book they want before I can buy it myself demonstrates not only their desire from whatever it is in there, but costs less in the long run. Dead tree editions FTW.
-Sarena
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 27, 2009 - 2:40AM
#550
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2007
|
Responding to the assertion earlier about DDI memberships, I don't expect everyone to have or want a membership. Requiring them to spend the moeny for one seems rather unfair to me.
Who said something about you requiring them? You have DDI, your player has - if he wants to play something from there, this should really not require him to buy the book as well - after all, that's WOTCs new business model, they are already gaining money from his subscription. and in the long run, a lot more money than if the player spent his money on just the two to three books he'd like to have.
I se eno reason disallowing such stuff - because it essentially is the same as with books: some players might not have access to, or might not have time to, some books, and thus they could not play a class that someone else is playing. But you're a group, right? (RIGHT?) Lending books or giving access to the CB once in a while is not such a big deal.
|
|
|
