core plus one? or how do you all decide between sourcebooks?

[w15p]

I've read that AL rules are core plus one (eg, PHB + XGtE) and that's been the rule that my DM has used in campaigns. It seems reasonable but a bit constrained.

What do you all do for your games?

Everything published?
Everything including UA?
Core plus one?
Pick and choose?
???

[JNAProductions]

Anything I own is pre-approved, anything you can legally get to me for free is subject to review.

[Man_Over_Game]

I allow everything, plus some homebrewed rules that open up a lot of multiclassing options. I'll also try to work with you to change features if you feel that something isn't working right for you. If you want some kind of UA or homemade content, it needs to be cleared with me before you can use it.

Haven't had any issues, but my players are also very new and would be totally fine with the AL restrictions.

[Flallen]

I've read that AL rules are core plus one (eg, PHB + XGtE) and that's been the rule that my DM has used in campaigns. It seems reasonable but a bit constrained.

What do you all do for your games?

Everything published?
Everything including UA?
Core plus one?
Pick and choose?
???


I have done both the AL rules, expanded AL rules (Core+2), and all published books. It really depends on the situation. I did not own many 3.5 books when I was a teenager/young adult, so I restricted the number of books someone could create a character from because I could not keep up with all the optimization that I knew some of my players were planning for. I have also specifically banned books whose content either thematically didn't fit or I didn't want to have in my games (all of this was given up front).

This has been less of an issue with 5e since I can afford the books and there are fewer of them. That said, if we got to the point where there were so many different sources that it would become difficult to track what characters are actually able to do, I would probably go back to a system like each player can select a +1 and the pool of books that creates would be allowed for all characters.

[Willie the Duck]

Core +1 is one of those hard-fast rules I understand why they would implement (you need a fixed, easy to understand rule for keeping play between players and DMs who do not know each other on the rails). However, in my own games, I generally rule 'don't abuse my trust,' and 'don't make me have to learn three new subsystems just to what capabilities your character is capable.' And the later is assuming someone wants to use some third party product. With WotC-only material, it really is just 'don't abuse my trust.' There's just not that much wildly abusive stuff out there (that we haven't discussed to death here on these boards).

[Dork_Forge]

I allow everything with the following excpetions/changes:

-No Ravnica backgrounds

-Dragonmarks don't add spells to your list

-Negative stats are removed from Volo's Orc and Kobold

[D&D_Fan]

I asked once as well. It was an AL DM

The answer I got:
It makes it less complicated for the DM, because they don't have to think about as many things from outside the PHB. I suppose this is true for some people.

I really go with whatever I want to do, and usually anything new as well.

I don't know if the Core+1 is true for spells, but I have acted as if spells are unaffected by C+1.
I have probably broken a lot of AL rules as a player. I don;t really play AL anymore though.

[Man_Over_Game]

I allow everything with the following excpetions/changes:

-No Ravnica backgrounds

Small fix on that one, take away 1 skill and 1 language/tool from the caster background takers, and those that don't take a caster background instead get any +1 feat as a bonus.

So those that don't take the spells get 2 more proficiencies and a bonus feat, roughly the value of the additions to the spell list.

[HappyDaze]

In my Eberron campaign, I allow players access to the following:

Player's Handbook
Eberron: Rising from the Last War
Xanathar's Guide to Everything



That's it. Very notably, SCAG is not on the list.

[Democratus]

"Core plus one" is a great starting point.

Talk to the DM if you feel you need more than this for your character concept.

[KorvinStarmast]

"Core plus Xanathar's" is my go to, and I am good with most of the PC races in Volo's.
There are a few things that I don't have at my table.
Kenku and Yuan Ti PC PCs do not exist when I DM. Nor do Tiefling.
If someone likes something from SCAG, I am good with that.
I always allows Genasi from the EE Players Companion. I like those a lot.
Mord's: I am good with Gith and Eladrin from Mord's. None of my players want to be a gith yet, though.
Ravnica: nope. (I am, however, thinking of porting in Order Cleric)
Eberron: nope. I do have an Artificer. We started with UA artificer and then updated it to Last War standards, and the player is doing a fine job. Unless I desire to run an Eberron game, I have no interest in any of that book. Some day, I'd like to play in an eberron game as a PC, and I'll probably go dragon marked if I do.
Acq-Inc: nope. No interest in any of that.
Mercer's stuff: not interested.

Theros: still thinking through those; if any of the playes show an interest, we'll likely do a scrub first and see if we need to tailor it a bit.

[Dork_Forge]

Small fix on that one, take away 1 skill and 1 language/tool from the caster background takers, and those that don't take a caster background instead get any +1 feat as a bonus.

So those that don't take the spells get 2 more proficiencies and a bonus feat, roughly the value of the additions to the spell list.

My issue is with such benefit coming from a background at all.Backgrounds should only provide proficiencies, some token gold/equipment and a roleplay focused ribbon. Ravnica was needless powercreep that broke design convention.

[Lupine]

Anything I own is pre-approved, anything you can legally get to me for free is subject to review.

Yep, same here.

Although, I do not have any setting books, and would probably light ban them (ban until reviewed). I run a home-brew setting, and many of those books don’t fit.

[heavyfuel]

Everything is up to me. No source is automatically allowed. I don't care if it's from Core, a splat book, UA, or homebrew.

However, I am extremely allowing. If it's not on the level of cheesy dirty tricks that only casters can pull off (coffeelock, or any form of short rest abuse by the Warlock, magic jar shenanigans, etc), I'll probably allow it.

[diplomancer]

I would only allow a Ravnica background in a game either set in Ravnica or a homebrew game that heavily borrows from it. Similarly with Eberron Dragonmarks, though I believe those are, generally, more balanced than thw Ravnica Backgrounds.
UA- under my judgement
Everything else- yes, unless some race was a very bad misfit for my campaign world, and, in that case, it doesn't matter which book it comes from.

[Nagog]

I allow all WoTC content (including UA). Homebrew needs to be cleared by me beforehand, but as long as it isn't overpowered, I tend to allow it.

That said, the only thing I've had to disallow in my games is PAM/GWM comboing. The risk/reward trade off offsets each other to the point that with such a low risk, high reward option on the table, any build that doesn't utilize it won't stack up in combat. So to keep things balanced among players, I disallow that particular combination, and if somebody wants both they have to choose between using a Bonus Action 1d4 attack or using GWM on one of their attacks that round.

[Kane0]

There’s only 2-3 splatbooks to worry about, so i allow all books by default. UA and homebrew are by review/approval

[Yakmala]

Anything published that is designed for my campaign setting is legal.

UA Classes/Races are subject to review before I allow them.

Things that don't exist in my campaign world are not allowed. For example, my current campaign, while using homebrew adventures, is set in Faerun, so I do not allow Eberron, Ravnica or Wildemount specific races and backgrounds.

[LudicSavant]

I've read that AL rules are core plus one (eg, PHB + XGtE) and that's been the rule that my DM has used in campaigns. It seems reasonable but a bit constrained.

What do you all do for your games?

Everything published?
Everything including UA?
Core plus one?
Pick and choose?
???


Everything published.

[False God]

Any physical print products owned by one or more members of the table. They must be willing to bring the book in question to the session so that other people can use it and the DM can read it. No homebrew or UA.

*Sometimes selections will be limited for specific themed campaigns.

[Samayu]

I think it depends on your group. Our group is pretty reasonable. We ahve no specific restrictions, but it's pretty much Core + XGtE, with the occasional Volo's race. Even more rare is some UA stuff someone wants to try.

But if you have people you know will get as wild as they can, or people you don't know well at all, I recommend Core +1.

[Luccan]

I've honestly been debating banning everything outside core if it's clearly a setting book (unless I'm running in that setting). Too many races sprinkled with extra options to build a coherent fiction. Maybe even just core + EE Player's Companion* and Xanathar's Guide. Maybe let in the Eberron/Wildemount** Orcs and Duergar without completely opening the flood gates.

*I realize elemental evil is pretty explicitly written with FR in mind, but I like Genasi too much to ban it.

**Not really using the same lore, the stats are just more desirable than in Volo's

[w15p]

I only own PHB and XGtE - I checked out MToF from the library once -- should probably buy it and SCAG but I'm such a munchkin, it would just drive my DM to insanity...

interesting to hear the different perspectives.

I have to say, I don't DM much, but if I were to, I would probably limit half of the PHB content - never been a huge fan of dragonborn, tiefling, etc... but now I'm just showing my grognard underbelly.

[Zevox]

Our DM has never explicitly spelled it out, but in practice it seems like anything that's officially published is fair game (except Aasimar and Tieflings, which are disallowed due to not fitting in the homebrew campaign setting he currently uses). I also strongly suspect we could run things like UA by him and potentially get approval depending on what it was, though to my knowledge none of our current players have ever wanted to do that.

Personally, when I DM, I'm much the same. Would likely be okay with most officially published material aside from what may not fit in the setting (I've so far run games in the Forgotten Realms, so no Warforged, for instance), and would be willing to look over any UA or other options a player wanted to use, though that's never happened so far.

[SVamp]

Hard and fast? Core +1 works ok as a solution to stop power creep and prevent everyone from having ‘all the best’ options.

More in-depth, when I have time to bother nit-picking/carefully planning a campaign : whatever you want that adds flavour that doesn’t clash with the setting; nix’d if it adds a mechanical advantage.

You want the neato half elves from scag because they’d be ‘oh so thematic with your shadow blade sorc-paladin?’ Sure, as long as it isn’t the drow variant, and you can’t choose scag cantrips. Have fun ‘being thematic’ want scag cantrips? No shadow blade. (XGTE)

In that same boat I’ll carefully consider whether PAM & GWM works in the same round, or whether sharp shooter ignores some cover AND grants +10 damage. It will depend if other people in the party have DPS>= hexblade + EB or not.

[Waazraath]

In general I allow everything published, UA only on a case by case basis, and no Ravnica backgrounds & dragonmarked races. When I do my own world building I tend to limit the available races, it breaks versimilitude for me to have 2 dozen intelligent races running around (but in that case reflavouring is ok).

[Keravath]

If you are playing AL - the choices are constrained by the AL rules which are designed to minimize folks taking advantage of particularly powerful combinations that can be found by cherry picking the individual sources. Combinations that may not have been thoroughly play tested. I don't think there is anything particularly game breaking available by combining all the sources but there are some more powerful combinations - particularly between the races in volo's and the expanded character archetypes in Xanathars (Yuan-ti pureblood hexblade multiclasses among others).

When playing AL - the sources you choose are made to fit the character you want to play ... if you want a volo's race, you make choices from the PHB. If you want to use melee cantrips or play a bladesinger then it is SCAG+PHB. Otherwise, folks will generally pick XGtE for the +1 since it is the best generic source.

----------

In general, for my home games I allow the WoTC published content (keeping to genre so I might not allow Eberron classes or races in a FR setting for example ... though I might if a player had a compelling character concept they wanted to play). I tend to not use UA since most of it does not seem to be well balanced .. certainly not as well tuned as the published materials.

P.S. No Ravnica or the other options that are a bit over the top ...

[Spriteless]

I allow whatever as long as one party member doesn't make the others obsolete. Including PDFs and webpages put up by an author, but not wikis. I think if I get the vibe from players that balance matters, I will make the Ravnica backgrounds come with an additional cost, or else not grant spells.

[Sparky McDibben]

For me, everything's on the table as long as my player isn't trying to break the game. But my player operates in good faith. I ported over several Ravnica backgrounds into one of my homebrew settings, but amped them up a bit: I treat the spell lists more like a cleric's domain spells instead of an expanded spell list. I also grant auto-access to the cantrips to all guild members. However, I only allow those backgrounds in that setting.

Eberron hasn't come up yet, but I hope it will soon! Healing wizards sound amazing!

[Civis Mundi]

For me, everything's on the table as long as my player isn't trying to break the game.

Same, though at times we'll have wacky one-shots where part of the point is try to break the game in new and innovative ways.

Anything published is on the table for my table, and we're also big on testing out new Unearthed Arcana, though sometimes with tweaks. We're a pretty experienced bunch, all told, but we tend to optimize for flavor over raw cheese. We'll very occasionally use homebrew, though I don't have much taste for it myself. That's not really out of any inherent disdain, though it is rarely a well-balanced final draft. Mostly, I get a kick out of playing with the established system to do what I want rather than homebrewing something specifically for the purpose.

[Spiritchaser]

I've read that AL rules are core plus one (eg, PHB + XGtE) and that's been the rule that my DM has used in campaigns. It seems reasonable but a bit constrained.

What do you all do for your games?

Everything published?
Everything including UA?
Core plus one?
Pick and choose?
???


I don’t do core plus one, and haven’t played in a campaign that did.

In my campaigns anything formally published that the player group owns is fine, and mostly no UA, but feel free to ask, because some of it is good (Scout fighter for example)

Edit: no one in the group has the Ravnica book so banning Ravnica backgrounds isn’t something that I’ve had to consider. I have serious concerns with regards to martial/caster balance, but I’ll worry about that if and when it comes up.

[Lavaeolus]

Generally, as DM I'll allow anything officially published outside of UA by default -- but while I like to see a character sheet in advance anyhow, to check everything's right and to help plan any campaign hooks, if you want to play a race outside the PHB you have to quickly run it by me. It's mainly because, you know, not every race actually exists by default in any setting I'm running, so if you want to be a Warforged outside of Eberron I probably need to scramble up a vague place for them. To a degree that goes for subclasses as well, although I generally drop setting-specific race restrictions and let them be flavoured as the player wishes.

My last D&D setting was deliberately a pretty cosmopolitan place with a lot of races, but that's not quite a free-for-all Eberron / Ravnica mash-up. I'm still slightly annoyed that a player turned up with a dragonmark human, despite my homebrew setting obviously not having any Eberron houses in it. So what, what exactly are you? Just some guy who knows some extra spells? Well, alright.

While I use some homebrew and have pre-approved some UA stuff, generally speaking: if you want to use some homebrew or some old UA, you should really run it by me before crafting up a character. Not telling me and just assuming it's available is opening yourself up for disappointment. There's some pretty out-of-line or abandoned UA stuff out there, and obviously homebrew is pretty varied in both power and quality.

For better or for worse, some of my current players don't have much of a head for optimisation. One's running with all-odd attributes right now, in fact! The main concern in allowing anything too out there, then, is that they just completely misunderstand how it functions.

[Christew]

My group's base assumption is everything published. DM's discretion for any given campaign, but there is an unspoken agreement to explain your reason for banning published material (as opposed to "no UA"). Yuan-ti and Hexblade get banned a lot, but not technically assumed and kind of a moot point. I've yet to see anyone aching to explore the narrative of the Drizzt of evil poisonous snake abominations beholden to sentient shadow weapons in anything more than a brief hypothetical form.

Personally, I don't find any of the book interactions that problematic. I'm all for things like SCAGtrips that are cool, not game breaking, and open previously limited build possibilities.

[KorvinStarmast]

I have to say, I don't DM much, but if I were to, I would probably limit half of the PHB content - never been a huge fan of dragonborn, tiefling, etc... but now I'm just showing my grognard underbelly. It has taken me a while to grow to like dragonborn PC; I had though of them as a highly evolved branch of the lizardfolk family at one point, but after discussing it with the two guys in my group who were interested in one, we liked the idea of horny old dragons who changed shape or were somehow polymorphed breeding with humans.
Also had a friend play a dragonborn paladin in ToA; I appreciated drabonborn a lot more after his acid breath was the clincher to ending a fight with a troll ...

[Demonslayer666]

Core with a few restrictions, some stuff needs preapproval (dragonborn, tiefling, and drow).

Any published books are fair game, just run it by me first. (with the exception of races, they should be from the PHB)

UA is frowned upon, but might be ok, requires approval before we start.

Third party stuff is generally not allowed.


These rules are because I am not familiar with stuff outside the PHB, so I want to review it first and make sure something new doesn't overshadow the other characters being played.