If you were to DM a game...

[Boostaloo]

...which non-setting sources would you allow your players to use. I also want to add, that they must be official Wizards products...

[Kylarra]

Generally: Core, Completes, ToB, ToM, MiC, SpC is a decent enough starting point. I'm not hugely bothered by other stuff, but I'd prefer to minimize dumpster diving. Dungeonscape and HoH get potential nods for additional base classes.

[Boci]

Everything as a general rule, but obviously I have the right to ban/nerf/modify anything specific.

[Choco]

I generally allow everything that was put out, in book form, by WotC (no Dragon, etc.).

There are specific things I ban (like certain spells, Shivering Touch for example) and I do sometimes allow Dragon magazine or homebrew stuff in on a case-by-case basis.

Basically, as anyone who reads this forum knows, some of the most broken stuff is in core anyway. So I see no reason to restrict everything else.

Mostly I trust my players to not munchkin. Or rather, I tell them flat-out that if they want to escalate the power level of the game they can, but then they can't whine when the game deadlocks with their lvl 20 demiplane-having, astral-projecting, divination-abusing wizard up against a lvl 20 demiplane-having, astral-projecting, divination-abusing wizard. I make it a point to not use any cheap tactics against the players unless they do it first, else I could easily just TPK em in 1 round, what would the fun be in that?

[Telonius]

Allowed: PHB, MM, DMG, UA, ToB, BoED, Completes series, PHB2, MiC, SpC, Frostburn, Stormwrack, Sandstorm, Ghostwalk, Dungeonscape, Planescape, Races of Stone, Races of Destiny, Races of the Dragon, Draconomicon, Tome of Magic, and anything else they can show me in hardcopy form. As long as it makes sense for their character to have it, they can have it.

Allowed on a case-by-case basis: Heroes of Horror, Book of Vile Darkness, Libris Mortis. (Not everybody's comfortable with Evil characters in the party. If they are, sure, why not).

I reserve the right to ban and/or nerf anything that's obviously overpowered - and fix anything that's obviously underpowered - in any of those sources (including PHB/DMG).

EDIT: One other thing - Artificer is allowed, no matter what setting we're playing. I don't consider it setting-specific to Eberron.

[Dr.Epic]

I don't put restrictions on which books my players use. Just tell me. It's highly unlikely I'd say no.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Which edition? :smalltongue:

AD&D - PHB only; 'cause I never did cotton to kits.

3.X - PHB I only; 'cause I don't own any of the other books and I don't want to have to parse all that splat.

4E - Core & X-Power books, with other stuff allowed by permission.

[molten_dragon]

I allow any books published by wizards, although I generally try to steer people away from psionics, incarnum, and the tome of magic. I don't really know the rules for those and am too lazy to learn them.I wouldn't flat out say no if that's what someone really had their heart set on though.

[ericgrau]

I'd allow everything pending DM approval. I might only impose a limit if a player pulls material from a dozen different books and it becomes tiresome to sort through them all. But as it is tiresome for the PC too I think that's uncommon.

That said I have some opinions about power creep and might impose some minor nerfs on a few things, while banning some rare things... which are not so rare in char op threads. Most things would get through as-is but I'd keep an eye open for potential problems.

[Dralnu]

Any official WOTC material outside of Psionics and Incarnum because I don't know about those mechanics. I also reserve the right to ban anything I deem too strong or broken, which has never happened in any of my RL groups.

[Angry Bob]

Any books, up to and including 3rd party material, pending me checking it for balance. The only limitations are that you have to be able to show me the source and make sure we both understand how it's going to work in-game beforehand to limit how many rulings I have to make on the fly.

No Greenbound Summoning. Actually, you can take Greenbound Summoning, but those that do have been known to spontaneously melt with no save for no apparent reason.

[doctor_wu]

Anything in a book I had so I could check I am reading it right in 3.5 or 4th. I own core and complete adventurer.4th I would only allow phb I, II, or III.

[Comet]

If we're talking about D&D 3.5, core only, maybe SRD if the player really wants to. Because I don't have the money to go about reading all kinds of books and such, damnit. I'd like to try out psionics or Tome of Battle some day, though.

[DukeofDellot]

If I'm running DnD... erm... I guess I only own the Red Box (the one from the seventies) and Pathfinder, so for those I usually allow everything I own, plus if they really want a class from 3.5 (or 3.0) and they can show me in their own book I can make a few adjustments (if it's really needed, usually I don't do anything at all to them as if it's really bad I just suggest a similar class)... I also allow homebrew if they can show me a forum thread where it has been discussed in detail, either on this forum or DnDonlinegames (where I often game). If it has been playtested or looks professionally done, I'll allow it... but I'm usually very wary of it, especially if it's almost the same as something I already have (which many tend to be...) and I'm more likely to accept a homebrew Archetype than a homebrew class.

I used to allow anything on the SRD... but as soon as I saw the achievement feats... I decided that needed to change.

But usually I run GURPS... and... well... it really depends on the setting. Each and every game has a new list of what's allowed and what's banned, but as a general rule, you can't have your character's goal as "I was told by God to kill the other party members" no matter how many times they ask (true story). I usually discourage custom talents and prefer to build innate attacks myself, but if the setting is expansive enough I've allowed custom races (usually I build them on the spot, but if they want to give it a try I'll let them... however any disadvantages on their template will count against the disadvantage limit if I'm using one). Supernatural and Cinematic abilities are usually limited by genre and world, but if say... we were playing an Infinite Worlds game, anything goes (except maybe the M.U.N.C.H.K.I.N. (http://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=239055&postcount=216)) as long as you can explain it... and "because my character likes fire" isn't good enough to be able to shoot fireballs from his backside... but "it's a cybernetic implant that I got because I lost a bet" is!

[Zeful]

Core, XPH, ToM, and everything else on a case-by-case basis, with the excetption of the following which are always "No": Colligate Wizard, Celerity Line, Orb of X line, Anyspell line, Incantrix, Shadowcraft Mage, Wilding Clasps. The list may expand at my discresion without warning.

[Kylarra]

Core, XPH, ToM, and everything else on a case-by-case basis, with the excetption of the following which are always "No": Colligate Wizard, Celerity Line, Orb of X line, Anyspell line, Incantrix, Shadowcraft Mage, Wilding Clasps. The list may expand at my discresion without warning.Most of those I can see reasons why, but Collegiate Wizard's inclusion confuses me.

[Cheesy74]

I allow anything officially published by WotC besides BoED and BoVD, because I think both muddle things more than they contribute to the game. Setting-specific stuff are included on a case-by-case basis, and characters can't use more than three books (not including core) in their creation.

Rule zero is obviously maintained, but I don't see it come up a lot.

[WinWin]

Anything I have paid money for and have read a couple of times.

Setting specific material might be restricted or refluffed. Non specific material from sourcebooks would probably be given a pass.

[Calimehter]

I used to be core-only, but over the last year or two our group has expanded into the other sourcebooks. When I run, I generally allow just about anything from the completes, HoH, HoB, and some of the more 'generic' setting-specific books like Dungeonscape, Stormwrack, and so on.

I don't allow ToB, Incarnum, Psionics, or any other material that uses new mechanics. Mostly because of time issues. I don't want to spend loads of time learning new mechanics, and in all honesty our group gets together infrequently enough that we spend too much time double-checking the basic rules as it is. :smallsigh:

[Zeful]

Most of those I can see reasons why, but Collegiate Wizard's inclusion confuses me.

I have my reasons, not ones that this forum would accept (the least "biased" would be that I can see no good positives from allowing the feat in play, and many, many more negatives), but I'm not changing my mind about it.

[Sang Real]

Anything I have paid money for and have read a couple of times.
This. Anything that's not broken.

Also, why stop with non-setting specific? Is there a particular reason that genasi or whatever can't be part of a generic setting?

[Mastikator]

Everything as a general rule, but obviously I have the right to ban/nerf/modify anything specific.

Gonna go with a +1 on this.

[Tyndmyr]

...which non-setting sources would you allow your players to use. I also want to add, that they must be official Wizards products...

I allow them all. This includes setting specific stuff. I can invariably fit it in.

I ban tainted casting, and any infinite combos.



Kender may be on the ban list. Im not sure if it's strictly necessary though, as the players have learned to stab kender on sight.

[The Big Dice]

I allow them all. This includes setting specific stuff. I can invariably fit it in.

I ban tainted casting, and any infinite combos.
So Maho Tsuaki are fine, even though they are tainted casters. It's setting specific, but the mechanic is the same.


Kender may be on the ban list. Im not sure if it's strictly necessary though, as the players have learned to stab kender on sight.
I'm pretty sure the Kender are Dragonlance specific. That means they're 3rd party published material. And setting specific, too. Which puts them outside the scope of the OP's question, even if you do use DL stuff in your own games.

Edit: as for what I'd allow in a 3.X game,it goes by what I've got. Mostly core, Completes and Compendiums. But if it's on my shelf and you can persuade me, I might make an exception for you.

[Nero24200]

Any depending on the reason. Though if I think the mechanics are wonky I might talk to the player about changes, though I'm not likely to just ban out-right (unless I think the player is obviously trying to be antagonistic, such as trying to make pun-pun, though thankfully that's a very rare experience for me).

[kyoryu]

3.x? Probably stick to core, with *very* limited willingness to pick up other things on an approval basis.

GURPS would be much the same - depending on the scenario, a limited whitelist of materials, with anything else on a (rare) approval basis.

4e? Far more likely to allow additional stuff, as ease of acquisition is higher, and the balance is generally closer.

In any of these cases, I'd also disallow non-setting-appropriate material.

[Optimator]

I would allow any official source, any web stuff from the actual WotC site, any setting material, no 3rd party stuff, and very little homebrew.

[Callista]

Core only, any other stuff if approved, minus a few houserule bans (mostly stuff like Polymorph Any Object and similarly ridiculous things).

Might sound strict, but I do approve the vast majority of what people want to use. I just don't own a lot of books and I don't want to have people using mechanics I don't know about, so approving stuff lets me look at what the character has at his disposal before they actually spring it on me mid-session. Not that they don't come up with off-the-wall tactics as it is, but if they didn't it wouldn't be nearly as fun.

Dang, now I miss DMing... :smallfrown: *glares daggers at senior-level engineering coursework*

[Tvtyrant]

Oddly enough I only allow core and homebrew. I prefer people bring me a concept they like and then flesh out the mechanics myself then have them bring me something like the Hulking Hurler and go "That is what I want to be! :D"

For instance I had a sorcerer in the party who wanted more elemental powers rather then just spells, so I gave him a prestige class that allows him to fire a cone of cold, a line of lightning, a cloud of acid or a sphere of sonic once per day per elemental level. He also got full , but since he was a blaster anyway it didn't seem like it would unbalance the game to add a few extra blasts. It eventually let him fire off a barrage of blasts in a turn as a capstone.

[Endarire]

All of them unless specifically banned beforehand. This includes non-specific material from setting-specific sources. I may reflavor setting-specific stuff to work in my setting.

[Tengu_temp]

Why are you assuming I'd play a WotC game?

[Jyokage]

Heh, well this may not be quite in the vein of what you are asking, but in one word? Everything. Literally every book, every web enhancement, every dragon magazine article, and every 3rd party random splat every printed. All my players typically have some sort of thematic build they want to achieve, so most wonky stuff is fixed pre-game when I review their characters. After all, if I don't know what they are going for, then I can't plan certain nuances into the game. (Required guilds, or philosophies, or even demonic entities).

[PairO'Dice Lost]

I allow all official material--setting-specific, non-setting-specific, Dragon mag, and WotC website stuff, reflavored as needed. I'll probably allow 3rd party material as well, but if it's not Dreamscarred Press I'll need to read through it first and OK it.

[Remmirath]

AD&D: Player's Handbook only. I don't have many books. If somebody really wanted to use something else, they could show it to me and I would consider it.

3rd Edition: Core (+ Epic Level Handbook and Draconomicon if game high enough level/if they want to use the non-dragon stuff) + Expanded Psionics, with exceptions. They'd have to ask me about anything else.

[BG]

Anything I have paid money for and have read a couple of times.

Similar to WinWin, my requirement is that it has to be a book that I have access to. When I was a young and foolish DM, I let a player talk me into allowing a Dragon Magazine PrC. Most of his class features did not actually work the way he thought they worked.

Now that I have a group that I trust a little more, I don't really ban anything for crunch reasons (there are often fluff setting restraints, though). Mostly I just tell my players, "Please don't try to break the game," and they don't. That isn't to say they haven't inadvertently broken* a campaign, but they weren't setting out to do so.

*Broken is actually too strong a word. It's more they changed the course and tone of a campaign drastically from what I had planned.

[Magesmiley]

I allow pretty much anything my players can come up with, provided that I can figure a way to fit it into my setting (this is usually only an issue for prestige classes and races). Admitedly, most of my players don't build particularly optimal characters (and even when they do, they often don't really utilize their abilities terribly well). Quite honestly, I'd love to see them do some more optimization for interesting character builds.

My players know that I reserve the right to bar or revise stuff if problems occur too.

[Tael]

Here's a list:

# Player's Handbook II
# Dungeon Master’s Guide
# Monster Manual I
# Book of Exalted Deeds
# Miniatures Handbook
# Complete Warrior
# Draconomicon
# Unearthed Arcana
# Expanded Psionics Handbook
# Planar Handbook
# Complete Divine
# Races of Stone
# Frostburn
# Monster Manual III
# Libris Mortis: The Book of Undead
# Complete Arcane
# Races of Destiny
# Complete Adventurer
# Sandstorm
# Races of the Wild
# Lords of Madness: The Book of Aberrations
# Heroes of Battle
# Dungeon Master’s Guide II
# Stormwrack
# Weapons of Legacy
# Magic of Incarnum
# Heroes of Horror
# Spell Compendium
# Races of the Dragon
# Tome of Magic: Pact, Shadow, and Truename Magic
# Complete Psionic
# Player's Handbook II
# Fiendish Codex I: Hordes of the Abyss
# Monster Manual IV
# Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords
# Dragon Magic
# Cityscape
# Complete Mage
# Fiendish Codex II: Tyrants of the Nine Hells
# Dungeonscape
# Complete Scoundrel
# Magic Item Compendium
# Complete Champion
# Drow of the Underdark
# Monster Manual V
# Exemplars of Evil
# Rules Compendium
# Elder Evils
Just saying "Everything" is boring :P
Oh, and any homebrew from this site, WotC, or personally made as long as I vet it. Any 3.0 stuff must be vetted as well.

[chaos_redefined]

Read and learn, young ones: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19863926/OPTIMIZATION_TREATISE:_The_34;Everything_Goes34;_G ospels?pg=1

[Yahzi]

Here's my list:

PHB
DMG
World of Prime WorldBook

That's. It.

I have an extensive homebrew world. I can't build a world without knowing what is in it; and I can't know what is in all those splatbooks. There is room in my homebrew world for new classes and stuff, so on a case-by-case basis it's acceptable; but you can't just show up and say "Today I want to play a half-dragon half-tiefling ogre half-elf Red Wizard of Thay."

I mean, you can say that; and after four or five months I can incorporate Red Wizards of Thay into a part of my world; and then that would be a cool adventure. But the kind of people who want to play random-adjective character builds are not particularly noted for their long attention span. :smallbiggrin:

Seriously, role-playing isn't about character classes, other than the iconic approaches to problem solving, and those can be summed up by attributes, not classes (force it with STR, pray it with WIS, finesse it with DEX, charm it with CHR, out-clever it with INT, bull through it with CON). You got your sword, hiding skills, arcane magic, and divine magic. What else is necessary?

[Amphetryon]

If you have it in hardcopy (3.X), I'll allow it conditionally. The conditions are based on known broken stuff (Reserves of Strength, Taint, etc).

[Dingle]

Supernatural and Cinematic abilities are usually limited by genre and world, but if say... we were playing an Infinite Worlds game, anything goes (except maybe the M.U.N.C.H.K.I.N. (http://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=239055&postcount=216)) as long as you can explain it... and "because my character likes fire" isn't good enough to be able to shoot fireballs from his backside... but "it's a cybernetic implant that I got because I lost a bet" is!

I never noticed how horribly broken the rapid fire enhancement was.
X4 cost for X300 damage
How did noone notice that?
The range is fine (doing 1 damage to everything in the universe doesn't actually help you do anything)

[Earthwalker]

If I have the books you can use it.

So for DnD that means you can use

3.5 PHB
3.5 DMG

Or

Pathfinder Basic book.

[Coidzor]

Everything, with the proviso that they need to provide me with an electronic copy of the sheet and it must be approved in advance of the day we play. And hey, if they chose to use psionics or ToB or Incarnum, it'd give me the kick in the pants I need to motivate myself to gain basic system mastery over them.

For some reason I just can't seem to motivate myself to learning them by reading them casually in my spare time. :smallconfused:

[Psyx]

All core, without consent. The Complete line, Races of line (except Dragon), PHBII. SC spells are at GM's whim and rarer than PHB ones.

No stuff from UA, except racial Paragons. DEFINITELY no flaws.

Setting-specific fluff and Dragon stuff by special request.
No Psionics. No BoNS, No ToM, No Races of Dragon.

Anything can be vetoed, especially blaggy PrCs.

[Boostaloo]

There seems to be two camps forming. On one side the DM say anything goes, the other side seems to think that less is more. The universal agreement is that the ban stick is close at hand if needed...

[Brom]

I vary campaign by campaign based on fluff and thematic purposes.

I have one game where I banned anything considered a t2 or t1 class.

I have another where I banned arcane magic.

I have another where I required certain skills be known to the characters.

As a rule, I allow all books provided the sum total description can be shown to me. Honest players who are obviously working more for a concept than a build are given more freedom than ones who tell me they want a pixie rogue or a whisper gnome with darkstalker or a Wizard with Incantrix. Hell, I allow stuff that doesn't even exist. I have two players in two separate campaigns playing my homebrew Corpsechem Apothecary (which I made, and had widely recognized as a balanced and acceptable class that merely needed playtesting), and I let a player homebrew his own unique Warhammer inspired PRC with setting specific bonuses.

I like to say yes to cool player ideas.

I don't like cheese and game breaking though, and I'm shameless about retroactively removing something. I'll admit it: "I thought X was a good idea, and it's not. What I thought I was allowing then is less than what I wound up allowing. I was wrong to do so in the first place, and therefore must take it from you now."

If players leave because of it, I apologize to them for the time lost in their investment, but feel no shame. I often allow them to redo their builds. It's wrong, after all, to say, ''Double crossbows are allowed'' and then to take them away when they prove imbalancing, even though a player makes a whole build on it. More acceptable is to give the player the ability to retool into a new build.

Players usually get the idea. As long as it's relatively close in power level, I can tier a game to any power level and have a fun time doing so. Because of this, players often play what sounds most fun rather than what feels most powerful for what they're doing, and I scale a game to a less than optimized party. All good.

I'm working on stretching my boundaries and allowing ideas and mechanics from other game settings and rulebooks =D

[Yora]

I usually say PHB only, but if there's a player in the group who is interested in other classes, spells, or feats and has another book he wants to use, I have him show me the class or feat in question and decide case by case.
In the last 10 years I had exactly one such player, and he wanted to take the "Extra Rage" feat, which I allowed.

[EccentricCircle]

We have a rule called "Habeas Librus" which we usually translate as "produce the book" (apologies to anyone who actually speaks latin!)

in general I keep the Players Handbook, DM's Guide and Monster Manual, plus Rules Compendium, Spell Compendium and Magic Item Compendium on the table.
Players can use things from the Complete books and PHB 2 with my approval and I will usually have two or three sourcebooks which are relevant to the campaign which i'll have selected to be allowed and read in depth before hand.

for anything beyond that they have to produce the book and justify why they want it, subsystems such as Psionics or Tome of Battle will almost always be vetoed unless they were in the campaign sourcebooks pile. if they are not the focus of the game then they have no buisness being used however interesting the idea is.

stuff like feats will almost always be passed, races and prestige classes require more scrutiny to make sure that they fit, but I will try to make it work.

[Ormur]

I'd consider everything non-setting specific by official sources, including stuff from settings sources that are non-setting specific or easily adaptable. I might check out homebrew, third party and Dragon Magazine stuff for a good reason. But of course I reserve the right to ban specific things and suggest the players stick to a certain level of power.

These would be my guidelines if I were to start another campaign. None of this was actually mandaded beforehand when I first ran a game, my players just assumed it would be free for all and I did some studying to familiarize myself with the sources. I banned psionics because I didn't know it and didn't want to incorporate it into the setting, but I wouldn't ban it next time.

[Winter_Wolf]

Before anything else: I'm perfectly okay with not being DM, and if someone else wants to take on that role and allow whatever, it's fine with me.

If I'm put into the DM role:
My rules for allowed material are: it must be thematically appropriate and mesh with my campaign; and I must own my own personal hard copy of the book. If there is no hard copy (stuff from GitP for example), it's case-by-case, and there's no guarantee I'll allow it this campaign just because I did last campaign. Of course I reserve all rights to nerf/adjust/ban anything.

Anything I home brew is considered "in beta testing", meaning I can adjust or remove it if it's just not working. I'll try to work with the PC(s) using it, but you might just have to trade it for a different feat/skill/spell/whatever.

Like I said, if people don't like it, they can DM and I can be a PC.

[RndmNumGen]

Almost everything in the SRD would be allowed, though I reserve the right to ban anything that strikes me as particularly broken. Non-SRD would be allowed only if the player makes a compelling argument why they should have access to it that lines up with their backstory and roleplay. If the player was acting out a brute that loves to bash in heads and gulf down barrels of ale, there is no way I'm allowing a ToB class. On the other hand, if their character is a precise, martial exemplar who is focusing on perfecting his combat ability, there is a very strong chance I would allow it.

[big teej]

as DM my group allows all books as long as the following conditions are met*


1) we possess the book in hardcopy (no PDFs!)**
2) I have read through the whole book and approve it's use
3) it is from a part of a book I've okayed if I've decided we're not going to use it***


*assuming I am acting as DM
**the only exceptions to this rule are a Knight Class PDF and the SRD
***example: I read through the book of exalted deeds, hated it... however a player asked if he could take ancestral relic because he felt it he fit his character, the feat was allowed.

so thats my take as a DM

my players know that rule .5 is "don't break my game"

which is occaisionally placed as a subsection of rule 1 "don't be stupid"

but i digress

/ramble

[eepop]

Anything WotC. It is your responsibility to make sure that the book you are using is available while we play.

If you do something that sounds off, I'm going to ask to read it to make sure you aren't trying to take something thats vaguely defined and choosing to use a ridiculous interpretation.

[Lord.Sorasen]

As far as D&D 3.5, I'm good with everything except Tome of Battle/Magic, and the Incarnum stuff. It's not because I don't like the balance or anything - Honestly it's because I haven't yet learned the rules. I'd love to try out incarnum sometime, but I'm a bit antagonistic towards Tomb of Battle. I think it's due to seeing it suggested so frequently over the old noncaster classes, honestly. I know that's not fair at all.

Also, I see a lot of people bash Book of Exalted Deeds, to the point where it's not even mentioned sometimes "I see "of course I'm banning book of exalted cheese" alot". But I'm not seeing it.