I had a weight thought on splat books

[danzibr]

And by splat books I mean anything non-core. Maybe I'm using the word wrong.

Anyways, so I was reading the playgrounders buy D&D thread and something occurred to me. At some point, *all* PrC's and base classes and feats were homebrew. Gary Gygax was just like, "Hmm, let's write some stuff up." I'm sure he talked to people and they got a little bit of balance going on, then published.

Splat books have lots of different authors, but they surely just thought of something cool, penned down some stats, tried to make sure it wasn't broken and published it.

This thread isn't intended to start any sort of conversation, just sharing my thought with the rest of the playgrounders. All D&D was homebrew once.

[Yora]

Yes.

So what?

[Honest Tiefling]

Now I wonder if TSR or WOTC ever had alignment debates...

[Solaris]

Now I wonder if TSR or WOTC ever had alignment debates...

Undoubtedly. A failure to agree on anything is likely why there's so much disagreement between the various books.

[Kalirren]

Yeah, you're right. Welcome to the light, friend.

People sort of take it for granted here for some reason, but there's this whole canonistic attitude towards a certain set of books, or text, that really goes against the spirit in which D&D as a pastime started. People used to run games out of random sourcebooks alone before there was a core at all...

[Yora]

There's this wonderful paragraph in a 2nd Edition PHB or DMG that say something like "these rules are just a basic framework, you're encouranged to add rules for things not covered here or alter or even drop other rules that don't fit with the style of play you want to run".

In 3rd Ed. RAW is God!

[SuperFerret]

There's this wonderful paragraph in a 2nd Edition PHB or DMG that say something like "these rules are just a basic framework, you're encouranged to add rules for things not covered here or alter or even drop other rules that don't fit with the style of play you want to run".

In 3rd Ed. RAW is God!

I wouldn't say that, the "rules are guidelines" spirit is still there. Really, the RAW is God attitude came with the internet.

[JonestheSpy]

I wouldn't say that, the "rules are guidelines" spirit is still there. Really, the RAW is God attitude came with the internet.

Yep. Published stuff tends to be valued on ye olde interwebs because they're a common frame of reference that's easier to discuss than comparing every DM's houserules, but that means there's been the unfortunate tendency to elevate them more than they deserve.

Everything is optional, but some things are more optional than others. The SRD is the foundation, what players can assume are going to be the rules unless specifically told otherwise. All the splatbooks are just suggestions, and choosing to incorporate them into a game is as much a houserule as any other change to Core.

[Ozreth]

There's this wonderful paragraph in a 2nd Edition PHB or DMG that say something like "these rules are just a basic framework, you're encouranged to add rules for things not covered here or alter or even drop other rules that don't fit with the style of play you want to

It's crazy how many people don't realize that almost this exact same thing is written in the 3.x DMG and I believe the 4e one as well and it is still how i play 3.5.

[The Big Dice]

I wouldn't say that, the "rules are guidelines" spirit is still there. Really, the RAW is God attitude came with the internet.

Actually it came with Gary Gygax writing AD&D articles for Dragon magazine.

[Pink]

Actually it came with Gary Gygax writing AD&D articles for Dragon magazine.

+1

I agree that the RAW is everything attitude more than likely came about less because of the internet, and more because the creators of the base stuff starting answering questions concerning aspects of the game, and their answers were taken as the authority on the game instead of 'When I GM'.

[danzibr]

Yeah, you're right. Welcome to the light, friend.

Thank you, friend. :P

This realization makes me much more willing to use homebrew stuff on the forums. And do RAI instead of RAW. I was always more of a RAW person.

... and my post is so simple it's silly. Reminds me of a story from my old chem teacher. His daughter asked him why a ponytail was called a ponytail and he responded, "Because it looks like the TAIL OF A PONY!" (voice rising in realization)

[Grendus]

I think the reason for the RAW is God attitude is that RAW is something that can be universally accepted. While a DM can say "no wizards in my campaign", they're less likely to say that than "no, you can't play a constitution based spellcaster, even if you were up all last night working on it."

Homebrew is almost always taken on a case by case basis. I personally don't like it, but then, I've seen way too many people try to pass homebrew that can cast miracle at level 5 or gets +80 to a skill before. Good homebrew, balanced for the party's level, is fine, but you have to be careful because of a lack of familiarity. Everybody knows what a wizard will do to the campaign (well, most people do). Nobody knows what a homebrewed monk can do until you play one.

[Hiro Protagonest]

I think the reason for the RAW is God attitude is that RAW is something that can be universally accepted. While a DM can say "no wizards in my campaign", they're less likely to say that than "no, you can't play a constitution based spellcaster, even if you were up all last night working on it."

Homebrew is almost always taken on a case by case basis. I personally don't like it, but then, I've seen way too many people try to pass homebrew that can cast miracle at level 5 or gets +80 to a skill before. Good homebrew, balanced for the party's level, is fine, but you have to be careful because of a lack of familiarity. Everybody knows what a wizard will do to the campaign (well, most people do). Nobody knows what a homebrewed monk can do until you play one.

What about the way to get a wish from sacrifice in BoVD? That's perfectly RAW.

Also, it's not a +80 bonus, but one of the monk fixes (which is still only tier 3 or 4) on the forums gives you a bonus on balance, jump, and tumble equal to your fast movement bonus, and it isn't even close to OP, considering that wizards can fly at fifth level with zero cheese.

[Tyndmyr]

Yup, and those classes may be playable. Or, the player could have grabbed the Lightning Warrior, and forever suffer the crushing lack of a familiar. There's no way to tell the brokenness without having a gander at it, since homebrew varies ridiculously.

So yeah, It's quite reasonable to start from the default position that homebrew is not allowed unless specifically reviewed and accepted. I do it all the time, and put some care into reviewing it, after that one game in which everyone heard the word "samurai" and didn't bother to examine the class that closely. FYI, the Tomb Samurai is broken as hell.

Yeah, RAW started as homebrew....but it got edited and reviewed. Sometimes even playtested. This didn't weed out all the mistakes, of course, but it did help. Not all homebrew gets this. See the D&D wiki for some examples of terribleness. And then, after publishing, the official books saw a LOT of use. So, the exploits for them are fairly available and well known. Generally findable with a quick google search. Things you can learn about without having them break your game are preferable to ones you don't see coming.

Lots of good reasons to use official material first, even if the designers of it are not special or better than anyone else.

[Gamer Girl]

I wouldn't say that, the "rules are guidelines" spirit is still there. Really, the RAW is God attitude came with the internet.

Oh no it did not...it came from Wizards. Most D&D books before 3E were full of ''the rules are just suggestions'', and ''no game should use all the rules'' and ''make up your own stuff'' type statements typed throughout the books.

When 3E came along, that all disappeared. Now your 'best buddy' Wizards made the rules for you, and you needed them all. Take the 3.5 E introduction of ''when in doubt, stick to the basics(the Core rules), and have fun''. Note no rules are just 'suggestions' is anywhere.

Naturally this is all done to sell books.....

[slaydemons]

Oh no it did not...it came from Wizards. Most D&D books before 3E were full of ''the rules are just suggestions'', and ''no game should use all the rules'' and ''make up your own stuff'' type statements typed throughout the books.

When 3E came along, that all disappeared. Now your 'best buddy' Wizards made the rules for you, and you needed them all. Take the 3.5 E introduction of ''when in doubt, stick to the basics(the Core rules), and have fun''. Note no rules are just 'suggestions' is anywhere.

Naturally this is all done to sell books.....

well I never read that part, I only played 3.5 and I thought like this "If I don't like this rule I don't have to have it, the dungeon master guide is just that a guide not a iron block of strict adherence. So that suggestion wasn't RAW but it was RAI, please note that this is the first time using both of those phrases in one sentence wooo happy days.

[Talakeal]

. So, the exploits for them are fairly available and well known. Generally findable with a quick google search. Things you can learn about without having them break your game are preferable to ones you don't see coming.

Out of curiosity, I tried a quick google search for a list of common exploits and broken material, and found this:

http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/Bokonon...ns_Version_3.5

I thought some the playgrounders might get a chuckle out of it, I sure did.

[Tyndmyr]

Aye, it's been posted before...it feels like a work of parody, but he did manage to peg one solidly powerful spell.

[Ozreth]

Note no rules are just 'suggestions' is anywhere.

Well I've already said it once in this thread but I'll say it again. The rules as guidelines/can be changed/whatever paragraph IS in the 3.x DMG's. This was never lost. Maybe overshadowed a bit, but it is there (I'll check the page later). I also think it is in the Rules Compendium.

[Jjeinn-tae]

Hmm, this inspires thoughts. Though probably not ones that you were hoping for with me.

Still, as Ozreth states, they are just suggestions, by what I can see, every RPG system encourages homebrew. I personally love homebrewed material, custom rules. I'd say often about half the stuff I use is either from my own head, or somewhere else "unofficial."

I'd say the most useful resource for me though, after learning the rules was the unearthed Arcana portion of the SRD, so many fun alternatives there for different kinds of players.

[Yora]

Out of curiosity, I tried a quick google search for a list of common exploits and broken material, and found this:

http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/Bokonon...ns_Version_3.5

I thought some the playgrounders might get a chuckle out of it, I sure did.

Finally someone who understands that soulknives are completely overpowered...

[The Big Dice]

Oh no it did not...it came from Wizards. Most D&D books before 3E were full of ''the rules are just suggestions'', and ''no game should use all the rules'' and ''make up your own stuff'' type statements typed throughout the books.

When 3E came along, that all disappeared. Now your 'best buddy' Wizards made the rules for you, and you needed them all. Take the 3.5 E introduction of ''when in doubt, stick to the basics(the Core rules), and have fun''. Note no rules are just 'suggestions' is anywhere.

Naturally this is all done to sell books.....

Long before then, you had Gary Gygax with his "My way or no way" attitude towards the rules. Seriously, the man was a tyrant about how AD&D should be played. Old Dragon magazine articles are filled with him telling the reader how it should be.

People look at the good old days through rose coloured glasses. And that's cool, even though nostalgia ain't what it used to be. But the truth is, the only real difference is, communities were more separated due to the lack of mass rapid communications. And of course there was only the letters page in a magazine instead of internet forums, so the turnaround of ideas tended to be much slower.

[potatocubed]

Finally someone who understands that soulknives are completely overpowered...

Didn't you know? The soulknife's versatility transcends all reason.

Gibber.

[Serpentine]

There's this wonderful paragraph in a 2nd Edition PHB or DMG that say something like "these rules are just a basic framework, you're encouranged to add rules for things not covered here or alter or even drop other rules that don't fit with the style of play you want to run".

In 3rd Ed. RAW is God!

There is a section on changing the rules on page 14 of the DMG. It starts with "Beyond simply adjudicating, sometimes you are going to want to change things. That's okay."
On page 4 it says "You are the master of the game - the rules, the setting, the action and ultimately, the fun."
On page 6 it says "...you're the final arbiter of the rules within the game. Good players will always recognise that you have the ultimate authority over the game mechanics, even superseding something in the rulebook.", and "Often a situation will arise that isn't explicitly covered by the rules. In such a situation, you need to provide guidance as to how it should be resolved."
And I'm sure there's plenty of other such lines dotted throughout the various books.
It might not be so encouraging, per se, but it's a long way from "RAW is God!"

[ken-do-nim]

Long before then, you had Gary Gygax with his "My way or no way" attitude towards the rules. Seriously, the man was a tyrant about how AD&D should be played. Old Dragon magazine articles are filled with him telling the reader how it should be.

People look at the good old days through rose coloured glasses. And that's cool, even though nostalgia ain't what it used to be. But the truth is, the only real difference is, communities were more separated due to the lack of mass rapid communications. And of course there was only the letters page in a magazine instead of internet forums, so the turnaround of ideas tended to be much slower.

The whole point of AD&D, to Gary, was to have a consensus version of the rules. But he didn't intend for people to stop playing (white box) D&D, which he viewed as the version to customize to your heart's content.

[danzibr]

Didn't you know? The soulknife's versatility transcends all reason.

Gibber.

Yeah, and Monkey Grip, plain and simple, destroys balanced combat. Man I wish I knew this sooner.

[mathemagician]

I'm with Tyndmyr here. The rules as written did receive a lot of attention, playtesting, and editing from a variety of sources. Also worth mentioning is that it's their job and business thats on the line here. I don't fully trust myself to catch every detail, think of every possibility, etc, so I certainly don't trust some schmuck on the internet to have done so. My players are not interested in homebrew for this same reason, so I don't have to deal with this, fortunately.

So yes, in some misleading sense you can claim that RAW started as homebrew, but to me the clear distinction between the two is the editing and publishing process. I wouldn't take a soap-box derby racer to the highway and expect it to perform like a BMW.

[Hiro Protagonest]

I'm with Tyndmyr here. The rules as written did receive a lot of attention, playtesting, and editing from a variety of sources. Also worth mentioning is that it's their job and business thats on the line here. I don't fully trust myself to catch every detail, think of every possibility, etc, so I certainly don't trust some schmuck on the internet to have done so. My players are not interested in homebrew for this same reason, so I don't have to deal with this, fortunately.

So yes, in some misleading sense you can claim that RAW started as homebrew, but to me the clear distinction between the two is the editing and publishing process. I wouldn't take a soap-box derby racer to the highway and expect it to perform like a BMW.

WotC never tested anything. If they did, they tested unoptimized sword 'n board fighters, trap rogues, healbot clerics, and blaster wizards. Just look at the class and race balance in 3.5.

[Gamer Girl]

Long before then, you had Gary Gygax with his "My way or no way" attitude towards the rules. Seriously, the man was a tyrant about how AD&D should be played. Old Dragon magazine articles are filled with him telling the reader how it should be.

People look at the good old days through rose coloured glasses. And that's cool, even though nostalgia ain't what it used to be. But the truth is, the only real difference is, communities were more separated due to the lack of mass rapid communications. And of course there was only the letters page in a magazine instead of internet forums, so the turnaround of ideas tended to be much slower.

What? Well, I was around in them good old days and can tell you Gary Gygax was not like that. He was more ''here are some suggested rules to use, but use them or change them or don't use them...it's all up to you.'' Now, granted, Gary was the original Tyrant DM, not the 'best buddy' DM you get today where the DM is a slave to the rules and everyone is equal. But that is not the same thing.