Post/Author/DateTime	Post
shadzar 07-27-07, 07:03 PM	due to another thread i thought it would be interesting to compile an honest and non-humorous list of reason why DMs decide to leave things out of their games. lets not debate too much on these things and they dont have to be numbered, just space them out in your posts with an empty line between them so they can be read easier. of course feel free to number them if you feel you must. i will start this list off since i started the thread. #1) the DM just doesn't want it in his/her game.
Zarron 07-27-07, 07:03 PM	2.) Hasn't read it, no time to learn a new class/spell/feat/book.
Koofoo95 07-27-07, 07:14 PM	3.)Doesn't fit the campaign setting
Shaggy_Shaggs 07-27-07, 07:24 PM	4) The first one to request the thing is a player the DM is wary of.
queenfange 07-27-07, 07:47 PM	5) The DM is already using 3 other supplements, and has no desire to buy Player's Handbook 2 or whatever other book so she can look at the new prestige class the character wants to play. 6) She (or he) likes creating her own classes and races, and doesn't want people to bring them in from, suprise, DnD supplements. 7) Too many base options (race and class) make for a headache and add little to the game after a point.
Eridrau 07-27-07, 07:58 PM	8) Utter, irrational fear/hate of a given supplier of third party material. (Dragon Magazine anyone) 9) Previous bad experiences skew them against letting anyone play that race/class/combination again. 10) Insufficient skill to handle a 'role playing requirement' on an ability/skill/etc. 11) Fear of losing the proper PC power to Challenge Rating balance. 12) Fear of losing ANY form of control (Power-monger). 13) Refusal to fully accept and 'move forward' to 3.x (Either 3.x overall or, only the 3.5 'corrections) All of these I've seen in otherwise reasonable GMs. It's sad sometimes.
Caelic 07-27-07, 08:04 PM	14.) Totally rational and reasonable distrust of a third-party source. (Dragon material is not playtested; Dragon material has proven to be poorly balanced in the past; I do not have time to playtest Dragon material; ergo, Dragon will not be included in the campaign.) Since it seems as if we might be drifting in the general direction of "Disallow=Bad", let's just add this one right now: 15.) 'Cuz he's a mean, rotten, horrible DM who hates his players and doesn't want them to have any fun. There.
Grumman 07-27-07, 08:07 PM	16. Because it was broken in 3.0.
Caelic 07-27-07, 08:09 PM	17. Back pain from having to cart 30 books to the game.
Ebonarc 07-27-07, 10:37 PM	17. Back pain from having to cart 30 books to the game. As a future DM, I'm not looking forward to carting around the 26 books I own. And most of the carting around will have to be on foot (college student). 18. Because someone in a previous campaign imbalanced the game using it. 19. Because the DM personally hates something about that game mechanic or rulebook, even though there are no real issues with it. 20. Because it's technically NPC only (Dungeon Lord Prestige Class). 21. Because waiting for the players of spellcasters to pick spells (especially bad for players of clerics in a splatbook heavy game).
Talisman 07-27-07, 10:52 PM	14.) Totally rational and reasonable distrust of a third-party source. (Dragon material is not playtested; Dragon material has proven to be poorly balanced in the past; I do not have time to playtest Dragon material; ergo, Dragon will not be included in the campaign.) Mongoose! The "we'll publish anything" company. And Dragon rocks, BTW. 22. Because it relies on a specific interpretation of a race or monster that the GM has already fleshed out in a different way. 23. Because it relies heavily on a specific deity, for which there is no analogue in the GM's homebrew world. 24. Because of the "fighter with a hat" syndrome...there are so many variations of it, the differences blur until it's nigh-impossible to decide which are balanced and which are stupid, and the GM decides to limit th options. 25. Because the GM is trying out crazy house rules, and the [whatever] conflicts with them.
Cold Napalm 07-27-07, 11:06 PM	See I have no issue with dragon for the most part. Mongoose...*shudder*... 25) on that note, because it has teh words published by mongoose on it.
OleOneEye 07-27-07, 11:49 PM	26) Because it defies logical sense. For example, I once had a player want a longbow that had two full scimitar blades sticking out either end.
Talisman 07-28-07, 12:03 AM	What's wrong with that? :rofl: 27. Because the GM is more experienced than the player, and knows that that [whatever] is hopelessly underpowered.
Gryllmyre 07-28-07, 12:33 AM	28. The DM suspects that this special class/race combo that the player has in mind will become horribly overpowered with the addition of some seemingly insignificant feats later on.
Optimized_Commoner 07-28-07, 01:25 AM	29. It is from a 3.0 product that hasn't been updated yet. 30. It relies on a mechanic which has been replaced in this campaign's house rules (crusader in a game which uses wound points instead of hit points). 31. Its abilities would be useless in the campaign setting. (a specialist undead hunter in a world with no undead).
Optimized_Commoner 07-28-07, 01:30 AM	26) Because it defies logical sense. For example, I once had a player want a longbow that had two full scimitar blades sticking out either end. My friends and I once tried to design a way to make something like that work. The best we could come up with is a V-shaped metal sheaf around the wood of the bow, affixed only at the handle (so it doesn't prevent the wood from bowing) and sharpened at the front where it joins. Still, unless the metal you're using is adamantium, it's not going to prove very effective. After the first few parries or strikes the metal will bend pressing against the wood destroying its ability to function as a bow. Also it's not going to be a well-shaped or easy to use blade. Mostly it's not worth the bother, but it would be kinda cool.
Ell 07-28-07, 01:36 AM	32. DM refuses to read the supplement until the player reads and understands all his campaign material)))
JohnJohn 07-28-07, 01:40 AM	#33 DM spent a lot of time effort and money getting the books for 1st ed AD&D just to get them all and.... "We are proud to announce a new era in AD&D the 2nd ed." Value of 1st ed books went poof. DM starts collecting the 2nd ed books which varied wildly in quality. Players go crazy min/maxing rules from various handbooks and combining them with various kits. Skills and powers did not help matters as it turned the power gamers into godzilla sized power gamers /min maxers. DM goes broke trying to keep up with the flood of handbooks. DM gets caught up just in time to see "We are proud to announce a new era in AD&D, the 3rd ed which we shall call simply D&D." Having been burned twice DM goes hmm I am going to be way more selective in my purchases of role playing products. This gets justified when it is announced "We are proud to announce a new era in D&D as we are going to launch a new edition which we shall call 3.5." While there is much screaming and yelling on message boards about the new edition DM is not so upset because he didn't go broke on expansion books and fluffy stuff this time. DM decides to stick to core and very carefully examine anything before he purchases it and allows it into his game. After 3.5 releases about 40 or so expansion/ optional rulebooks /half dozen campaign settings/ player guides to every possible race and class combination imaginable... suddenly the rumors begin to spread about a possible 4E in the works. While everyone else is screaming about how all the rulebooks on their shelves are going to be worthless, about how they don't want to invest in another edition because of all the money they spent on 3.5, about how unfair it all is... DM is sitting back going ha ha. Been there done that... so glad I am not going through that again. DM can honestly say 4ed? Bring it on. 4th ed will get the same thing 3.5 got from me. I will get the core rule books, look at a couple of the settings and pick one to invest in to get the core products, will pick up a few of the monster manuals when they come out but thats about it. Very very picky about what I get and what I allow in my campaigns. Been there done that got burned both by players min/maxing powergaming and burned by having invested way too much in an edition to see it go poof at a new edition.
shadzar 07-28-07, 09:27 AM	"We are proud to announce a new era in AD&D, the 3rd ed which we shall call simply D&D." yeah, don't associate those as being similar cause they aren't. :mad: hackmaster was the comtinuation of AD&D sadly. but 3.x is something not even close! otherwise real funny thing you wrote into #33.
Kedami 07-28-07, 01:08 PM	#34 The DM feels that the players still don't have enough experience to stray away from the Core books just yet. #35 The DM fells that s/he isn't experienced enough yet to use other materials. ((That's experience as in the kind that you get from living, not the kind you get from slaying a monster or talking your way out of jail))
calronmoonflower 07-28-07, 04:33 PM	36). Doesn't like the fluff. "It's too anime." is an example. 37). knee-jerk reaction. "Psionics are broken." without doing the research is an example. 38). It's stronger than a fighter. Used time-to-time to disallow something that the dungeon master doesn't like.
zelf_gale 07-28-07, 05:50 PM	37) Because the DM would like the players to finish creating their characters sometime in the next hour, day, week, year, etc., which they won't happen if more books keep being allowed.
Callista 07-28-07, 08:46 PM	As a future DM, I'm not looking forward to carting around the 26 books I own. And most of the carting around will have to be on foot (college student).I highly recommend a bicycle and bike pack (it looks kind of like saddlebags. Ask at a bike shop.) Failing that, if one of your players has a car, you should be able to say, "Hey, I'm not brining all my books unless you drive them over for me." DM prerogative, just like the first slice of pizza. 40) Because it's obvious the player is trying to powergame--badly.
Ebonarc 07-29-07, 12:04 AM	I highly recommend a bicycle and bike pack (it looks kind of like saddlebags. Ask at a bike shop.) Failing that, if one of your players has a car, you should be able to say, "Hey, I'm not brining all my books unless you drive them over for me." DM prerogative, just like the first slice of pizza.Thanks for the advice. I'll look into that. 41. Because there is nothing in that splatbook anyone in the group finds interesting, and he/she doesn't want to deal with new players dragging it back out.
Talisman 07-29-07, 12:10 AM	42. Because it's from a different RPG system! 43. Because it's a houserule the player encountered somewhere and loved, and GM has all the houserules he wants, thank you very much. 44. Because the player is clearly trying to make his character into some sort of archetype the GM doesn't want in his campaign (e.g., a ninja). 45. Because the GM's houserules are a precariously balanced house of cards, and the new [whatever] would reveal their inadequacies and necessitate still MORE houserules.
Optimized_Commoner 07-29-07, 01:11 AM	30. It relies on a mechanic which has been replaced in this campaign's house rules (crusader in a game which uses wound points instead of hit points). 45. Because the GM's houserules are a precariously balanced house of cards, and the new [whatever] would reveal their inadequacies and necessitate still MORE houserules. LMAO... I think yours is a bit more honest. ;)
Talisman 07-29-07, 01:16 AM	I've seen both variations...the "legitimate houserule replacement" and the "house-of-cards, because-the-GM-says-so houserule."
Potato Weasel 07-29-07, 09:18 AM	Because it looks like it would make the character anti-party ie, evil alignments in a good party, frenzied berserker, etc.
Callix 07-30-07, 05:04 AM	47. Because the DM thought it would be more fun. Don't ask how being almost killed by rats is "more fun". It happened. To three of five party members. To make matters worse, he disallowed "casters". Yes. No cleric. No wizard. And the second fight of the day reduced the only healer (the crusader played by yours truly) to 0 hp. Not to mention the ECL 5 ambush where the fiendish goblin leader had a magic sword that gave him an extra attack at +0, who proceeded to roll nothing but crits for four rounds. On the swordsage. He went to -9. Stabilisation roll needed a 17 or higher... and he rolled... a 17. At the time, I was out cold too, and so was the barbarian. Fortunately, the fighter was a Dex-monkey with a heavy shield, so the goblin couldn't hit him, and we had enough helaing potions to get back up. Just.
Infernostrider 07-30-07, 06:20 AM	it's not humorous enough
Eridrau 07-30-07, 08:49 AM	48) Because he doesn't like the 'flavor aspects of the class. 49) Because another player has already been allowed to pick a diametrically opposed class. (I.e. Dragon Disciple and dragon stalker, or any other similar set up) 50) Because 'munchkin multiclassing' really really irks him. (Fighter 2/Rogue2/SwdSage2/etc...)
Aucturos 07-30-07, 01:57 PM	51) Because they read the Character Optimization boards and stand agape in awe and terror. 52) Because they read the "What's a Player to Do?" boards. 53) Because they read the "What's a DM to Do?" boards. 54) Because their players don't know they read these boards. >.> 55) Because sometimes, one more system is one too many (no Psionics in my campaigns, just not worth the effort for me). 56) Bibliophobic. 57) Because there's plenty to work with in the original 3 "Core" books. 58) Because sometimes one book will contradict another book, and they don't feel like tracking down the proper weight of an Ankhag's head through 6 different volumes. 59) Because it's a new group and starting things off complicated won't appeal to 'em. 60) Because it's an experienced group and everyone has forgotten what it's like to NOT be the Rogue3/Sorcerer5/Daggermage7/Ungodly Being12/Dancemaster1 Rank 11 Deity.
wadledo 07-30-07, 03:09 PM	61. because lvl 1 monks are sad :weep: 62. because the DM's girlfriend with a half infernal, half fey, half drow, dwarf character doesn't want the one class that makes her obsolete. 63. because JFK is not an available prestige class. 64. because I poisoned the wells of the capital city, and wanted the 4 evil clerics to take the "Leadership" feat to a whole different level.
shadzar 07-30-07, 03:20 PM	65. because the DM is trying to prevent a certain player from having anything in the game he would like so the DM doesn't have to bluntly tell said player that he isn't wanted in the game with himself as DM.
NightHawkFalconis 07-30-07, 04:17 PM	66. Because Dwyn_of_Selenthia grins too broadly when he tells me about it. (Cheers!) 67. Because it involves gaining Miracle or Wish as a supernatural ability. 68. Because it involves Nightsticks and Persistent Divine Metamagic. 69. Because it involves all the creatures in the Fiend Folio and #67.
Talisman 07-30-07, 04:42 PM	70. Because the GM gets too caught up in the story (i.e, the story inside his head) and can't be bothered with such mundane details as "rules" and "mechanics" unless he already knows them. 71. Because he assumes the [whatever] is virtually identical to a pre-existing [whatever] with minor cosmetic changes. 72. Because he assumes the [whatever] is virtually identical to a pre-existing [whatever] with minor mechanical changes that make it far, far superior.
Lethanic 07-31-07, 07:59 AM	Because its his campaign and the players don't have to play in that campaign if they don't want to? Because he does the work to put together the campaign and the players don't have an inherent right to mes it up just because they can't be bothered to be creative within the given restrictions?
Optimized_Commoner 07-31-07, 08:12 AM	73 Because its his campaign and the players don't have to play in that campaign if they don't want to? 74 Because he does the work to put together the campaign and the players don't have an inherent right to mes it up just because they can't be bothered to be creative within the given restrictions?
Leo 07-31-07, 10:41 AM	75-Because everybody else is happy with the current books and having to read 5 new books and test them for balance would delay the campaign for a year. 76-Because if a player asks for it, it's because it's probably stronger than the current options and will end up unblanacing the game. After all, if the player didn't think it was stronger, he probably wouldn't ask for it in the first place. 77-Because the DM is spending more time testing new materials and splatbooks than actually playing and preparing the campaign, and he's got a personal life also. 78-Because core rules alreay offer LOTS of possible combinations, and if you claim you already played with them all then you really have too many free time in your hands or your campaigns are awfully short, in wich case the DM or/and the players are doomed, splatbooks or not.
solbergb 07-31-07, 12:47 PM	79 - because whatever was asked for doesn't belong in the campaign world. especially true if lots of materials on what IS allowed and will fit into the campaign have been provided. 80 - because whatever was asked for is in the campaign world but it requires the PC to discover it (whether by finding the handful of other people who know how to do it or somehow researching it himself) - it isn't a "common" spell, PRC, feat or piece of equipment.
Mooncalf 07-31-07, 04:19 PM	81 - Because it possesses abilities that would make it especially overpowered against certain situations/opponents/etc, and the DM has prepared very many of those and does not wish to rewrite every encounter just to make it a li'l bit more challenging for them. (Example: A warlock against foes with bad dex and mostly just natural armor for AC. Eep.) Point of interest: I did in fact persuade my DM to let me play a Psion against his objections (those being roughly 'I don't know how it works and I think it's broken'). My argument was "I'll keep track of powers and power points and whatnot, I'll go over the relevant factors so you know I won't cheat, and you don't have to bother reading up on anything. I'll play for two sessions, and then if you still think it won't work, I'll bow out and replace him with a core-book character." He couldn't really protest against that. ...though he did freak a bit the first time I showed how many PP I had at my disposal. Heh.
Kursk 08-01-07, 12:15 PM	82: Because he wants to play D&D not some thinly veiled cartoonist computer game.
JasonOrlandoHawk 08-01-07, 10:55 PM	83. B/c the DM has spent forever in the DM's chair, and never gets to play. Thus, the DM hatches his greatest scheme, in which he slowly limits the material available until only the Core 3 remain and one player finally gets so sick of the limited content that they actually put together the effort to run a game (and discover the previous DM playing their game of Multi-Splatbook Terror!!!). :plotting: What? I don't have issues! 84. B/c they are honestly sick of CG misunderstood Half-Drow (or other similar characters). :teach: Seriously guys, you don't have to write the opposite alignment than what is standard for a creature every time you play!!! 85. (Variant on 84) To break a player's routine of playing basically the same character, over and over again, to the point of redundancy or annoyance. One more Halfling Paladin w/ borderline kender tendencies and I... :banghead:
shadzar 08-01-07, 11:31 PM	One more Halfling Paladin w/ borderline kender tendencies and I... :banghead: why? don't you like kenders? dont you find them most useful in parties? don't they gather plenty of information? aren't they great at diversions? do you like the question game as much as me? :angel:
wizarddog 08-02-07, 01:19 AM	86. Because in the great scheme of things it really doesn't matter ;)