Paizo core, and vigour, lesser from SpC, plus any house ruled stuff.
Players are welcome ask about old 3.5 stuff but they should expect a polite "no, bugger off, it's broken" reply ;)
There's a reason Paizo made PF backwardly compatible with 3.5. For many, if they knew they'd have to throw out all of their 3.5 books and start over, they wouldn't be playing PF.
True, however PF 2 won't be me thinks.
when i occasionally dm a game i allow core bestiary(for races on case- to - case basis), house rules and apg when it comes out. i also allow 3.5 books on case-to-case basis. then again anything that isnt core or apg has to make sense for the pc in that campaign.
If you own it then you can use it. I want people to play with their toys. If something turns out to be too powerful then the enemies will eventually develop a means of countering it (I use a lot of intelligent enemies). My players also know that if they can use it so can I. For this reason I've never had a player use Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic or any wild magic/necromancy books.
I find it pretty disappointing to see so many people harshly restricting what their players can use. If you buy a book and want to use it, but can't because your DM doesn't take the time to understand it then you won't want to buy more books.
Can't expect Pathfinder to thrive as a game if you don't let your players spend money on it.
I respectfully disagree with Hexcaliber. In my own experience and with what I've read regarding others experience, the progression of 3.5 splatbooks proved to be an increasing "arms race." From what I understand, Pathfinder was specifically drafted to level the playing field and elminate the constant need to "trump" other players and the DM with new material.
While I agree that the DM can meet or crush any of the characters (I suspect that in the next 5 minutes I can create an adversary that can kill any and all characters ever concieved by any player), but I feel it is not the DM's job to continuously escalate encounters to challenge players running with classes, feats, items, and so forth that are generally regarded as out-of-balance (hence why would Pathfinder exist otherwise).
In my mind, it is not a question of harshness or economic investment. When I was in the Air Force, I went through a Rifts phase and now have roughly two linear feet of books that have some great ideas, some sub-par ideas, and some completely whacked ideas that will likely never see the light of day and view this as, "dude, why oh why did you ever spend that cash". I have yet to find a group playing Rifts in my area, have no intention of every playing Rifts, and therefore cull what concepts I can out of those books and let things go; I spent some cash, no DM is ever obligated to integrate a Deathbringer APC because I blew some dollars on the Coalition War Campaign."
As a DM, I make it clear at the beginning of campaign as to what will be acceptable in said campaign and don't feel particularly obligated to cater to the players' purchasing habits. While some may feel that this is harsh, I feel it is what is it.
Luckily, I've been blessed with mostly mature players who understand what I'm trying to create as a DM and also understand that a lot of the material produced in 3.0/3.5 was unbalanced and out-of-whack. In my mind, why jump on board with Pathfinder if you're immediately going to vet a slew of material that Pathfinder was specifically designed to bulldoze over.
Understandably, I'm running an entirely different campaign than other are and I respect all viewpoints, but I do have some problems when other DM's view my own approach as harsh, ignorant, or so forth. As always other viewpoints may vary, but this one is my own.
-Brooks
In my current campaigns, not counting house rules (which are generally campaign-specific)
I allow anything not golarion-specific from Paizo.
I allow anything else from Paizo n a case-by-case. (We don't use traits, for example, though you can take two traits for a feat slot)
I allow anything from Super Genius Games, no restriction.
I allow a lot of Rite Publishing stuff, including a lot of spells from their spell compilations and magic item books (but not all of them... they're feel for power balance and mine dont match perfectly), and some of their racial stuff (Wyrd, In the Company of Giants).
I have allowed a few feats from LPJ UNdeFEATed line case-by-case, but honestly I outlaw more than I allow.
I allow 4 Winds material on a case-by-case basis. (Luven Lightfinger's Gear and Treasure Shop gets more use from me than anything else of theirs, and they can be hit-or-miss, but when they hit they often hit big).
I'll look at any d20 source if a player wants me to consider it, but again I turn down more of that than I accept. For example, I have a player workng to create a tomb raider class from various version of the Star Wars scoundrel, and so far I don't like it for a fantasy Pathfinder game. But I'm happy for him to keep working on it.
Out of curiousity, what do you feel has been a miss by 4 Winds?
There's a reason Paizo made PF backwardly compatible with 3.5. For many, if they knew they'd have to throw out all of their 3.5 books and start over, they wouldn't be playing PF.
This is not a pathfinder issues however, it is up to a GM to decide what he allows. Some of use did not start restricting items just because we switched to pathfinder.
I ran mostly core only in 3.5 and I run mostly core only in pathfinder.I am not here to sale books, I am here to run a game. Not my fault if ya own every 3.5 book ever made.
