Is it legal to add material from one setting to another setting?

[gogogome]

I always thought if you were in Eberron, you ban all Faerun books and vice versa. But a lot of these books contain content that is independent of their setting. Regional feats, dragonmarks, Prcs, and the like are obviously tied to the setting but a lot of other stuff like spells and feats are not.

So do the rules say it's ok to add the non setting specific stuff like class, feats, spells, etc. from one setting to another setting? Or is that illegal?

With spells I can easily "import" them by letting my players research those spells, but there's no research for feats.

[Eldaran]

Uh... Illegal? Everything is legal in D&D, it's all up to the DM.

[gogogome]

Uh... Illegal? Everything is legal in D&D, it's all up to the DM.

I am the DM but I like to play a no house-rule/homebrew game.

[Celestia]

Legal? Sure. I've never come across a rule saying you couldn't. Most tables don't allow setting books unless they're playing in that setting, but that doesn't stop you from allowing whatever you want.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by gogogome
So do the rules say it's ok to add the non setting specific stuff like class, feats, spells, etc. from one setting to another setting? Or is that illegal?

I’ve done it, and I haven’t had any Inevitables show up at my door. :smallsmile:

I don’t think there’s any rule as such that you absolutely can’t mix material between settings. A lot of people, and probably most people in the Playground, borrow liberally from sourcebooks irrespective of setting.

There are certainly DMs who won’t accept material outside of the particular setting they’re using, but that’s a personal preference rather than a formal game rule. I had one DM who wouldn’t accept a single item, feat or spell from any Forgotten Realms sourcebook, because his campaign wasn’t set in the Forgotten Realms. That would probably be considered an extreme approach by a lot of people, but it was his game and his call.

Some feats won’t operate outside of a given setting because they’re tied to some aspect of that setting—dragonmarks being a prime example. And you might have trouble using the Warforged Juggernaut PrC in a setting with no warforged. But of course some people will see these examples as challenges rather than strictures.

So if it's your game and you want to include something, by all means grab it. It's your game.

[Elkad]

I am the DM but I like to play a no house-rule/homebrew game.

I don't see how that is even possible. There are too many typos, vague statements, and just flat broken things in the rules. The DM has to correct and clarify all those things, and his interpretation won't match any other DMs rules exactly.

[umbergod]

Your example is a bad one OP, since Eberron states specifically "if it exists in other dnd settings, it has a place in eberron". Beyond that, no there arent any rules against using setting specific bits in a different setting

[gogogome]

Your example is a bad one OP, since Eberron states specifically "if it exists in other dnd settings, it has a place in eberron". Beyond that, no there arent any rules against using setting specific bits in a different setting

Do you have a page number and book name for that quote? Because that quote is exactly what I'm looking for. I am away from books atm so I'll need to look it up online if you give me the information.


I don't see how that is even possible. There are too many typos, vague statements, and just flat broken things in the rules. The DM has to correct and clarify all those things, and his interpretation won't match any other DMs rules exactly.

Gentleman's agreement gets rid of all the flat broken things. As for the other things, extensive rule lawyering does bring things to a conclusion.

[Thurbane]

No, you can't do this...the Inevitable of cross-setting contamination will come after you! :smalltongue:

http://granbluefantasy.jp/en/theater/images/monsters/detail_monster_18.png

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Thurbane
No, you can't do this...the Inevitable of cross-setting contamination will come after you!

And here I was just trying to think what that Inevitable would look like. I had an image of a mechanical skeleton armored in iron plates, each one deeply stamped with a page of rules text from the DMG.

[RoboEmperor]

Do you have a page number and book name for that quote? Because that quote is exactly what I'm looking for. I am away from books atm so I'll need to look it up online if you give me the information.


If it exists in D&D, then it has a place in Eberron.
A monster or spell or magic item from the core rulebooks
might feature a twist or two to account for Eberron’s
tone and attitude, but otherwise everything in the Player’s
Handbook, Dungeon Master’s Guide, and Monster Manual has a place
somewhere in Eberron. Also, this is the fi rst D&D setting
built entirely from the v.3.5 rules, which enabled us to
blend rules and story in brand-new ways.
Eberron Campaign Setting p.11

Unfortunately it's not as clear cut as you'd like it to be. The first sentence covers everything, but the elaboration only includes core rule books.

You can always rule lawyer that the core rule books are just an example and focus only in the first sentence.

[Celestia]

I don't see how that is even possible. There are too many typos, vague statements, and just flat broken things in the rules. The DM has to correct and clarify all those things, and his interpretation won't match any other DMs rules exactly.
Nah, it's fine. We don't need house rules. The monk is already powerful enough as is; why give it proficiency in unarmed strikes? A melee class with medium BAB and a -4 penalty on all attack rolls makes perfect sense.

[Florian]

So do the rules say it's ok to add the non setting specific stuff like class, feats, spells, etc. from one setting to another setting? Or is that illegal?

D20 is build to be modular, so (most) everything works based on the core system.

It´s not illegal, but rather a thing based on style and taste. What do you want to import, fluff or crunch? When the fluff has meaning, then going setting x-over is a no-go. When it´s all about the crunch and you're into refluffing, the all is fair game.

(Remember, WotC did this to sell you more books)

[gogogome]

D20 is build to be modular, so (most) everything works based on the core system.

It´s not illegal, but rather a thing based on style and taste. What do you want to import, fluff or crunch? When the fluff has meaning, then going setting x-over is a no-go. When it´s all about the crunch and you're into refluffing, the all is fair game.

(Remember, WotC did this to sell you more books)

Well my player wants to use some stuff in Races of Faerun, but adding that book to Eberron or Greyhawk is out of the question since that book is full of region specific stuff tied to FR, and the races in there are really tied to the region specific stuff. But some of the feats are not tied to the setting in anyway, but a lot of the feats are.

So like allowing the book is a no, taking only small parts of it feels iffy, and as much as I like to accommodate my player, I just can't get over this OCD of mine so I'm reaching out to this forum to see if there is a way to make everyone happy.

[BWR]

Well my player wants to use some stuff in Races of Faerun, but adding that book to Eberron or Greyhawk is out of the question since that book is full of region specific stuff tied to FR, and the races in there are really tied to the region specific stuff. But some of the feats are not tied to the setting in anyway, but a lot of the feats are.

So like allowing the book is a no, taking only small parts of it feels iffy, and as much as I like to accommodate my player, I just can't get over this OCD of mine so I'm reaching out to this forum to see if there is a way to make everyone happy.

It's your game, your table, your players: you know more about what will work than we do.
Personally, I draw the theoretical line at fluff differences. If a certain piece of mechanics is tied to fluff that doesn't fit in my game, it's not allowed. Sure, you can refluff things and sometimes it works but usually it just feels weird and uncomfortable. If you don't want to allow stuff from a book, that's fine. There are good and bad reasons to disallow stuff in a game, and "I don't like it" is a good one. "it doesn't fit in the game" is just about the best reason you can have.

[RFLS]

So I think the important thing to note here is that mechanics and fluff are by and large separable. Some mechanics imply the existence of an organization or god. For example, Jade Phoenix Mages (iirc) have their own, semi-defined organization within their rules text. However...you could easily slot them under the Church of the Silver Flame in Eberron. Not a particularly difficult lift.

The point being - D&D rules are all compatible (*glares at Serpent Kingdoms*). Occasionally fluff will seem to get in the way. Don't let it. If someone wants something that seems setting specific, let them take it, but add something to the setting you're playing in. It's more fun that way anyway. We're playing make believe anyway (ish).


I’ve done it, and I haven’t had any Inevitables show up at my door. :smallsmile:

+1. I chuckled.

[Marlowe]

No, you can't do this...the Inevitable of cross-setting contamination will come after you! :smalltongue:

http://granbluefantasy.jp/en/theater/images/monsters/detail_monster_18.png

I want one.

[RoboEmperor]

I'd like to add that d&d specifically says to refluff everything to your campaign. Check out every PrC ever made. Every single one of them says "Adapt this to your campaign by removing the race restriction, remove the organization restriction, change ___ and ___ to be more evil" etc. etc.

So if the feat exists in a different setting and is not tied to particular fluff, just put it in your game because
1. It is official
2. It is "balanced" since it's official
3. There is no homebrew because it's official.

If it is tied to a fluff then you refluff it because by RAW, you the DM, have to refluff it.

[RFLS]

2. It is "balanced" since it's official.

Heh. Good one. *further glaring at Serpent Kingdoms*

[RoboEmperor]

Heh. Good one. *further glaring at Serpent Kingdoms*

Waht. I put it in quotations!

[Florian]

Heh. Good one. *further glaring at Serpent Kingdoms*

Why? 3.5E players have developed a very unhealthy obsession with being empowered to use any kind of material, as longs as it´s WotC. That's extremely bizarre when it comes to "gm books" like BoVD or Serpent Kingdoms.

[RFLS]

Why? 3.5E players have developed a very unhealthy obsession with being empowered to use any kind of material, as longs as it´s WotC. That's extremely bizarre when it comes to "gm books" like BoVD or Serpent Kingdoms.

I was cherry picking, to be honest. In reality, even sticking to, say, Core + Races + Environment books + Completes + Setting Cores (Eberron, Faerun) is enough to allow some characters to snap the game over their knee, if the player so chooses.

[EldritchWeaver]

I was cherry picking, to be honest. In reality, even sticking to, say, Core + Races + Environment books + Completes + Setting Cores (Eberron, Faerun) is enough to allow some characters to snap the game over their knee, if the player so chooses.

Fixed that for you.

[hamishspence]

Well my player wants to use some stuff in Races of Faerun, but adding that book to Eberron or Greyhawk is out of the question since that book is full of region specific stuff tied to FR, and the races in there are really tied to the region specific stuff. But some of the feats are not tied to the setting in anyway, but a lot of the feats are.

Given that Faerun has had "armies of construct soldiers" in its own history (the Raumathar Empire had them) refluffing a Warforged to be one of those soldiers (or, a construct built by some other group who has access to Raumathar magic, like the Witches of Rashemen), is not that hard.

I played a Warforged in a 4e Faerun game.

Similarly - Greyhawk has more than one elven race - so there's room for giving Greyhawk's "highly intelligent elves" (called gray elves) the Sun Elf racial feats, region rules, etc, or Greyhawk's own "wild elves" some of the stuff Faerun's wild elves have.

[KillianHawkeye]

I think it would be helpful to stop thinking of it as allowing or disallowing entire books. For most books, it doesn't make sense to think of them that way (the exceptions being books that basically just have rules for a new system like XPH, Tome of Battle, Magic of Incarnum, ..., since those are very focused around their particular schtick).

Instead, you should start by figuring out a list of things you'll definitely allow and definitely won't allow in your games, and everything else you should evaluate on an individual case-by-case basis. So it becomes your players' job to find something in the gray area that they might want to use, and you just have to look at the feat or spell or item (or whatever) in question and decide if it fits in your game or not.

That way, you can (for example) allow the dwarf-related options from Races of Stone without opening up goliaths and whisper gnomes as player races if you don't want to. Or you could ban all the martial initiator stuff from Tome of Battle but still allow players to take the Superior Unarmed Strike feat.

[GrayDeath]

I always thought if you were in Eberron, you ban all Faerun books and vice versa. But a lot of these books contain content that is independent of their setting. Regional feats, dragonmarks, Prcs, and the like are obviously tied to the setting but a lot of other stuff like spells and feats are not.

So do the rules say it's ok to add the non setting specific stuff like class, feats, spells, etc. from one setting to another setting? Or is that illegal?

With spells I can easily "import" them by letting my players research those spells, but there's no research for feats.


Its usually a case by case decision.

For your specific example of using Races of Faerun Stuff on Eberron, I`d say those that have a very similar equivalent of culture/Region on Eberron should work well.
Those that dont fit because of X dont.

Everything in between can be argued one way or another, but honestly, the "Races of... Books are some of the smaller offenders balancewise, so it should not be a big problem unless, as mentioned above, it REALLY clashes with the fluff. ;)


No, you can't do this...the Inevitable of cross-setting contamination will come after you! :smalltongue:

http://granbluefantasy.jp/en/theater/images/monsters/detail_monster_18.png


Lovely pic. ^^

[Psyren]

I just can't get over this OCD of mine so I'm reaching out to this forum to see if there is a way to make everyone happy.

I'm saying this out of pure regard for your long-term well-being: your best route by far is indeed to get over it. Adjusting your game so both you and the players maximize your fun is far more important than what books you use to get there.

[emeraldstreak]

Anything that requires GM intervention (refluffing included) isn't readily available to the players.

[Inevitability]

Remember that many settings are connected. For example, the Plane of Shadow holds a link from Eberron to the Forgotten Realms, allowing characters to have feats and such from both worlds (and even membership in organizations of both).

[legomaster00156]

I am the DM but I like to play a no house-rule/homebrew game.
Oh, my poor friend. If you run everything Rules as Written, you will have a nigh-unplayable mess of a game. :smallsmile:

[flappeercraft]

Well no rule says you can't but then again none say you can. I decided to avoid that mess completely and just homebrewed my setting which literally is just a combination of all other 1st party setting cosmologies and has an additional material plane where everything from those settings including regional feats, monsters, PRCs, etc can be found there.

[Troacctid]

Such material will often require adaptation to fit the new setting. That's within your purview as a DM. Personally, I'm very comfortable doing this in generic or homebrew settings, but would be more hesitant if I were trying to be faithful to an existing setting. Use your best judgement as to what will fit in the world. Master Inquisitive, for example, is an Eberron prestige class that could easily fit into another setting; Windwright Captain, on the other hand, might prove more challenging.


I don't see how that is even possible. There are too many typos, vague statements, and just flat broken things in the rules. The DM has to correct and clarify all those things, and his interpretation won't match any other DMs rules exactly.
Interpreting the ambiguities in existing rules ≠ homebrewing new rules.


I think it would be helpful to stop thinking of it as allowing or disallowing entire books. For most books, it doesn't make sense to think of them that way (the exceptions being books that basically just have rules for a new system like XPH, Tome of Battle, Magic of Incarnum, ..., since those are very focused around their particular schtick).
Hey, not even! XPH has plenty of non-psionic feats in it, like Stand Still and Greater Manyshot. Tome of Battle has some general combat stuff like Duels of Will. And Magic of Incarnum...well, okay, fair enough.

[KillianHawkeye]

Hey, not even! XPH has plenty of non-psionic feats in it, like Stand Still and Greater Manyshot. Tome of Battle has some general combat stuff like Duels of Will. And Magic of Incarnum...well, okay, fair enough.

I mean, yes, even those kinds of books have some things that are more generally useful. I even used Superior Unarmed Strike as an example. My point was just that if there are any books that seem like they could be opted in or out in their entirety, it was the sort of books that introduce new subsystems and mostly focus on things that support or relate to the new systems they introduce. There are certainly items in most any book that should be examined on their individual merits, but it's still fair to say that the content of some books are at least 90% based on a certain rules plug-in.

[gogogome]

Remember that many settings are connected. For example, the Plane of Shadow holds a link from Eberron to the Forgotten Realms, allowing characters to have feats and such from both worlds (and even membership in organizations of both).

Do you have a source on this? Because if you do it would solve my OCD.

[Psyren]

Interpreting the ambiguities in existing rules ≠ homebrewing new rules.

Agreed, they're not the same - but that doesn't change the underlying point, that you're still customizing/defining your game in a way that other tables might disagree with when you make such interpretations. So there is nothing to be gained by hewing to this ideal of chasteness and purity in a collabarative tabletop game.



Hey, not even! XPH has plenty of non-psionic feats in it, like Stand Still and Greater Manyshot. Tome of Battle has some general combat stuff like Duels of Will. And Magic of Incarnum...well, okay, fair enough.

Even Incarnum has universally appealing material. Not the feats, but the Soul Crystal psionic power is extremely useful and doesn't require any of the trappings of an incarnum game to function.

[RoboEmperor]

Do you have a source on this? Because if you do it would solve my OCD.

Manual of the Planes p.43-44. It specifically says alternate campaign settings are alternate material planes reachable via the plane of shadow.

Despite the difference in cosmology, it's all d&d 3.5 so if a feat exists in one cosmology then it should still function when the character enters a different cosmology, therefore you can mix setting specific books.

[RFLS]

Fixed that for you.

Yeah, that's fair XD I just wanted to completely cover my bases.

[unseenmage]

Faerun has Spelljamming which can cross campaign settings.
The Manual of the Planes details the Region of Dreams wherein just about anything can happen.

Sigil tge City of Doors from Planescape canonically connects to anywhere at anytime.

The Dark Powers and their Mists of Ravenloft canonically can steal anybody from anywhere.

Some tables even let the Gate and Planeshift spells breach alternate prime material planes (also known as campaign settings).

And Wish will certainly allow one to transport from anywhere to anywhere.

Additionally, some realms canonically connect to our world or an alternate reality version of it. Golarion has the Rasputin Must Die adventure and Baba Yaga's Hut both of which connect to our past/alternate past.
And the gods of Faerun have transplanted entire human civilizations, pantheons and all, from our world.

And finally, both new spell research as found in the DMG and custom Epic Spells could either link campaign settings or transport stuff between.


I have this metaplot I'm always working on wherein regular dude is transported to D&Dverse and uses his metaknowledge to scour the campaign settings for ways to get back home to his family.

Additionally, I always wanted to run a game the mimicked the plot of rhe tv series Fringe where Faerun and Eberron were the alternate worlds and an airship crash replaces the initial plane crash.

So yeah, compining campaign setting elements can be loads of fun. Enjoy it!

[Sejoran]

Like unseen mage said, a good example is Sigil. Anything that counts as a door or archway can count as a type of gate. Anything can count as a key. e.g. you're humming a tune while walking out of the hole you cut into that beastie from the inside out. Suddenly you're in Sigil.

If you play with the Planescape setting it really just amounts to what the DM will and will not allow because every setting becomes open at that point.

[Pex]

Actually, it is illegal. Your first offense is a fine of $1000. Your second offense is a fine of $2000 and confiscation of all your D&D books. If you do it a third time you get 10 years in prison.

[Celestia]

Actually, it is illegal. Your first offense is a fine of $1000. Your second offense is a fine of $2000 and confiscation of all your D&D books. If you do it a third time you get 10 years in prison.
Oh, so that's why the police are banging on my door. I thought it was about the dead stripper, but this makes more sense.

[PrismCat21]

I thought it was about the dead stripper,

And who do you think was the one that tipped them off?
You should know better by now...

[Falontani]

Oh, so that's why the police are banging on my door. I thought it was about the dead stripper, but this makes more sense.

And who do you think was the one that tipped them off?
You should know better by now...
sighs That was a crazy night, PrismCat21 don't you agree?

[PrismCat21]

sighs That was a crazy night, PrismCat21 don't you agree?

From what I heard. As soon as I heard someone mention Spellfire in Eberron, I nope'd out of there quick-like and in a hurry. ...I can't have another mark like that on my record...

[Yogibear41]

My DM allows basically everything, even third party books(subject to him reviewing it first of course)

The only Hard No's so far in his game are:

No UR-Priests (because of their fluff not their power)
And we follow 1st edition's rules on Divine spells: No Godless clerics/Paladins (1st-2nd level spells come from training, 3rd-5th come from outsiders/servants, etc. 6th+ come directly from the deity.
(So yes you can be a godless cleric/paladin and only cast 1st and 2nd level spells, technically)


People have commented that his game must be broken, when I have said this in the past, and no its not even close to being broken. Mostly because just because you can do broken things doesn't necessarily mean you will, and also if you can do it, an NPC has probably already done it before you.

[Sejoran]

My DM allows basically everything, even third party books(subject to him reviewing it first of course)

The only Hard No's so far in his game are:

No UR-Priests (because of their fluff not their power)
And we follow 1st edition's rules on Divine spells: No Godless clerics/Paladins (1st-2nd level spells come from training, 3rd-5th come from outsiders/servants, etc. 6th+ come directly from the deity.
(So yes you can be a godless cleric/paladin and only cast 1st and 2nd level spells, technically)


People have commented that his game must be broken, when I have said this in the past, and no its not even close to being broken. Mostly because just because you can do broken things doesn't necessarily mean you will, and also if you can do it, an NPC has probably already done it before you.

And if you have a good DM he can break the game back at you just as hard. Just gotta watch out for those Beholder mages or Illithid savants(depending on the interpretation of them of course.)

[Yogibear41]

And if you have a good DM he can break the game back at you just as hard. Just gotta watch out for those Beholder mages or Illithid savants(depending on the interpretation of them of course.)

DM also told me he hides a ring of three wishes in almost every dungeon we have ever done, starting at even low levels. Been playing in his game for years, I have found a wish ring once. :smallfrown:

To be fair though, the group(s) throughout the years, have been notorious for starting dungeons, then never finishing them.

[Tectorman]

DM also told me he hides a ring of three wishes in almost every dungeon we have ever done, starting at even low levels. Been playing in his game for years, I have found a wish ring once. :smallfrown:

To be fair though, the group(s) throughout the years, have been notorious for starting dungeons, then never finishing them.

Easy way to do that. Find a pile of gold that no one’s looked through yet, dig around until you find the wish ring, put it on, and then make your first wish.

“I wish that I had found this ring in that pile of gold thirty seconds ago.”

Best part is, the wish can’t possibly be misconstrued becuase it already wasn’t.

[redwizard007]

Oh, so that's why the police are banging on my door. I thought it was about the dead stripper, but this makes more sense.

Nothing a little necromancy can't take care of. The necromancy of looooooove.

[bobisyoung]

Nothing a little necromancy can't take care of. The necromancy of looooooove.

Steve Miller Band?