A Homebrew Whitelist Thread

[PersonMan]

Due to the sheer amount of homebrew I've been reviewing as a DM for PbP games, I've decided to start a whitelist for homebrew, so I can build up a stack of stuff I can just outright say 'yes' to.

However, I considered that this might be useful to others, as well-if multiple DMs had whitelists and put them on one thread, it could be useful if, say, DM 4 reviews Homebrew X and says it's great, then DM 2 gets that same homebrew requested later.

I'm unsure, though-would this so in the PbP area(as it's primarily thought for PbP DMs) or the Homebrew area(as it's basically a list of homebrew)? I'm leaning towards the second, but I feel like I should check first.

[Eldan]

There was a "good homebrew" thread somewhere earlier. What I'd suggest is a system like it was there: someone has to nominate some homebrew, and someone else has to confirm it, so you have at least two opinions instead of just one.

[Emperor Ing]

Keep in mind that what is considered acceptable to DMs is very subjective.

I would suggest that in addition, there be a "greylist" for homebrews that there is no consensus on their balance. Alternatively, DMs make their own whitelists in the thread.

[PersonMan]

There was a "good homebrew" thread somewhere earlier. What I'd suggest is a system like it was there: someone has to nominate some homebrew, and someone else has to confirm it, so you have at least two opinions instead of just one.


Keep in mind that what is considered acceptable to DMs is very subjective.

I would suggest that in addition, there be a "greylist" for homebrews that there is no consensus on their balance. Alternatively, DMs make their own whitelists in the thread.

My plan is for the format to be as follows:

[link, name], type(base class, race, etc.), short description, power level accepted for, main strengths/weaknesses.

Potentially, comparisons with other classes could be used if it'd aid in a quick description.

[Seerow]

Honestly, I'm not sure how much use such a thread would be. While making a thread similar to the extended signatures thread would be decent (ie you make a list of your accepted homebrew, everyone else makes their list of accepted homebrew, no real need for interraction or discussion about what's acceptable), trying to make a more community wide project where you list what stuff the community finds acceptable is going to be futile.

If you have a vouch system where X vouches gets it whitelisted, you get pretty broken yet popular stuff added. (As a prime example: The Tomes). If you try to get a majority consensus, you'll end up with pages of arguing with no real consensus reached. I'm just not sure what it would actually accomplish in the end.

[Worira]

Didn't the good homebrew thread kind of explode in a giant mess of drama and egotism?

[Eldan]

Didn't the good homebrew thread kind of explode in a giant mess of drama and egotism?

Pretty much. The way I remember it, it was full of people complaining about "but X is way overpowered, it shouldn't be on the list" and "my homebrew is great, you have no idea what you are talking about!".

[Melayl]

Pretty much. The way I remember it, it was full of people complaining about "but X is way overpowered, it shouldn't be on the list" and "my homebrew is great, you have no idea what you are talking about!".

I didn't watch the last thread implode, but I think that the format he is suggesting
My plan is for the format to be as follows:

[link, name], type(base class, race, etc.), short description, power level accepted for, main strengths/weaknesses.

Potentially, comparisons with other classes could be used if it'd aid in a quick description. may prevent some of that. I can't be certain, of course. I didn't think he was looking for a forum concensus, but merely a list of what each person (who chooses to do so) feels is appropriate for what level/type of play. A review/reference for those who care to look at it, so to speak.

[PersonMan]

I didn't watch the last thread implode, but I think that the format he is suggesting may prevent some of that. I can't be certain, of course. I didn't think he was looking for a forum concensus, but merely a list of what each person (who chooses to do so) feels is appropriate for what level/type of play. A review/reference for those who care to look at it, so to speak.

This is my hope. Basically, if Class X is approved for someone's high-epic level 25 gestalt Tier-1s-everywhere game, it might not the the best for the low-fantasy low-level, low-magic game someone else is running.

As for a sort of 'good homebrew list', I sort of hope that it might eventually become that sort of thing(that is, if a homebrew is on enough whitelists it'd hopefully be very good), although it'd be more of a combination of self reference(hey, I know class X, but I don't really remember it) and community list-thing(oh, hey, the class I've been asked to evaluate has been whitelisted by those three DMs for the type of game I'm running).

[Tyndmyr]

Keep in mind that what is considered acceptable to DMs is very subjective.

I would suggest that in addition, there be a "greylist" for homebrews that there is no consensus on their balance. Alternatively, DMs make their own whitelists in the thread.

White list with tier rankings would be, I think, the way to go.

Some things are just unfinished or broken, and should not be allowed in any game. Some things are only appropriate in games of a specific power.

I like the idea of a centrally run homebrew whitelist, and I think PersonMan would be a good person to run it...he's got solid system mastery and I generally agree with his assessments of things.

[Keld Denar]

I totally remember seeing something against posting white lists (and consequently black lists). I did a quick Ctr + F of the forum rules and couldn't find anything, but I swear I've seen it somewhere. I also checked the PbP forum for any rules, and I still can't find anything. The general gist of it was exactly what was mentioned above. People get emotional about being ranked and rated.

I think it was aimed primarily at PbP recruitment, as in you are not allowed to publish a white list or black list for people to apply to your games, but I'd imagine such a rule would extend to other ratings of, essentially, people.

Gah, now I'm bugged because I can't find it. Maybe it was something mentioned in a red text ruling, or maybe I'm just delusional.

[Rockphed]

I would have suggested putting it in the forum relating to the game you are running. So, if you are running D&D3.5, it would get face time with DMs and players running 3.5. If you were running D&D4, it would get face time with players and DMs running 4e, though I don't know how much home brew there is in 4e, nor how hard it is to judge its brokenocity, coolocity, and actually-being-what-it-says-on-the-tinocity.

[Tyndmyr]

I totally remember seeing something against posting white lists (and consequently black lists). I did a quick Ctr + F of the forum rules and couldn't find anything, but I swear I've seen it somewhere. I also checked the PbP forum for any rules, and I still can't find anything. The general gist of it was exactly what was mentioned above. People get emotional about being ranked and rated.

I think it was aimed primarily at PbP recruitment, as in you are not allowed to publish a white list or black list for people to apply to your games, but I'd imagine such a rule would extend to other ratings of, essentially, people.

Really? That seems highly unusual. I would imagine that posting a list of OK sources is a pretty standard thing for pbp folks to do...I know I certainly do. Hell, it's in the big 18 questions.

I don't see why homebrew would be treated as better or worse than anything else in that regard.

[Mystic Muse]

Really? That seems highly unusual. I would imagine that posting a list of OK sources is a pretty standard thing for pbp folks to do...I know I certainly do. Hell, it's in the big 18 questions.

I don't see why homebrew would be treated as better or worse than anything else in that regard.

If I recall correctly, that was about whitelisting and blacklisting players. Whether the same thing is the rule for homebrew I don't recall.

[Serpentine]

I think sorta personal lists - as opposed to "consensus" or "group lists" - should be okay, and keep the controversy to a minimum. Especially if people posted a bit about what sort of games they run, and what they look for in accepted/rejected homebrew, it could be handy for DMs to browse through and see what other DMs include.

[arguskos]

If I recall correctly, that was about whitelisting and blacklisting players. Whether the same thing is the rule for homebrew I don't recall.
It was. I recall seeing it as well, and even commenting on it at some point, but you are right, it only applied to players. Still, I think the same logic would apply to homebrew, since it would rapidly become a way to rank people, which would seem to be banned behavior.

[Keld Denar]

Exactly. If I posted a PbP game recruitment thread and at the bottom stated:

Soft Serve, arguskos, and Serpentine need not apply!

That would be kinda...defamatory.

Then again, I've seen PbP recruitment posts that mention say "homebrew by X, Y, and Z is ok, all else by review" or similar. Thats kinda white-listing homebrew, which is more or less what we're talking about.

I still stand by my thoughts that I believe this will cause some hurt feelings though.

[Mystic Muse]

Exactly. If I posted a PbP game recruitment thread and at the bottom stated:

Soft Serve, arguskos, and Serpentine need not apply!

That would be kinda...defamatory.


Yes, but I wouldn't be applying anyway, because I've got far too much on my plate as-is.:smalltongue:

I don't know that there's anything wrong with personal homebrew whitelists. It's really just saying "These are automatically accepted in games I run" or "I think these homebrew are very well done" which doesn't seem to violate any rules. It's blacklists that sound like they'd be a problem, since they're naturally defamatory.

[Serpentine]

Yeah, like I said, I think as long as it's all personal lists, preferably with some note by the DM about what they look for in homebrew, it should be fine.

[happyturtle]

While making a thread similar to the extended signatures thread would be decent (ie you make a list of your accepted homebrew, everyone else makes their list of accepted homebrew, no real need for interraction or discussion about what's acceptable),

As someone who doesn't do homebrew, DM games, or play in PbP (which means my opinion can be discounted entirely if you choose :smalltongue:), I think this sounds like the most workable and efficient idea. Have one thread that's for lists by DMs only, and another for discussion of 'Why x was on my list'. DMs link to their own extended whitelist in their recruitment threads or sigs or whatever, and they can look and see what homebrews tend to show up a lot on the lists of other DMS.

[Tyndmyr]

If I recall correctly, that was about whitelisting and blacklisting players. Whether the same thing is the rule for homebrew I don't recall.

Oh, yeah, that seems like an entirely different sort of thing, I remember that. IIRC, lists of posters you liked/admired was ok, lists of posters you hated was deemed too much like flaming/trolling.

I don't think that'll be a problem for homebrew whitelists.

[Keld Denar]

The problem with a whitelist, is that while it sounds innocent enough, its actually just an inverted blacklist (inclusive rather than exclusive), and blacklists are bad. If you aren't "good enough to be on list X", that might be taken personally. Even if it was an innocent oversite in not including them. Or something.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: The recent experience with the homebrew monster rating thread demonstrates the problems with a community whitelist.

People are welcome to have a personal whitelist of things they use or allow. People are welcome to comment on others' homebrew and suss out whether it can be used or improved. But a community whitelist poses far too many problems with the criteria used, desireable attributes, crunch vs. fluff, writing standards, formatting standards, editing others works, administration, disagreements, posters exercising power over the process or one another, favoritism, etc.

I'd recommend against it.

As noted, community/public blacklists and whitelists of players has long been prohibited, though people are welcome to keep private lists for their own use.