D&D 5E 15 Petty Reasons I Won't Buy 5e

[evileeyore]

It must be a regional thing. But honestly, nobody I know would ever have assumed you could use something in unearthed arcana without DM approval. Everything in the core books was assumed unless the DM spoke up. That to me is what core means. Assumed or not assumed.

Previous to 3e there was no "core/not core" split, as Hussar explicitly said up thread.

Everything printed by TSR for D&D was simply D&D. You either used the rules or not, no "These books are core and everything else is optional" since everything was optional.

Do you grasp that concept? The only rules used were what the DM wanted to use (and in many cases what the players and DM negotiated to use).

It might be that 5e is the first game where nothing is core as opposed to 4e which proclaimed everything core. Though I'll add that even then I didn't know many DMs that automatically allowed stuff beyond the first three books. Perhaps old reflexes die hard.

No, 4e simply went back to oD&D, BECMI, and AD&D standards, everything written by WotC for D&D is a rule for D&D to be used or not at the DM option (or as negotiated between players and DM).

3e (because of the OGL) was the only edition of D&D to define "core" and "not core" and that was to avoid the nonsense of escalating splat books*.


* A term which didn't even exist until the mid '90's and arose from the intersection White Wolf's expansion book naming convention and the laziness of newsgroups posters.

 

[ccooke]

It must be a regional thing. But honestly, nobody I know would ever have assumed you could use something in unearthed arcana without DM approval. Everything in the core books was assumed unless the DM spoke up. That to me is what core means. Assumed or not assumed.

It might be that 5e is the first game where nothing is core as opposed to 4e which proclaimed everything core. Though I'll add that even then I didn't know many DMs that automatically allowed stuff beyond the first three books. Perhaps old reflexes die hard.

The problem is that you declared - in effect - that a number of the posters on this board (and a proportion of the wider community) either don't exist, have a number of false memories or are liars. This is the sort of statement that people can take exception to; I'm presuming that you didn't mean it like that?

As to 5e, the Basic is Core. WotC have said so repeatedly. I expect Basic+PHB to be the default game, with selected options from the DMG being group and/or campaign specific.

It's going to be interesting to see how things expand from here; setting books adding some setting-specific content, or new subclasses/races being added in adventures (it's probably going to happen eventually; presumably they would be collected in a compendium later). They have said they want to avoid the splatbook treadmill, but there are niches it would be reasonable to expect them to fill in the next couple of years. Dark Sun and Eberron would need their own books, for a start. I'm not sure you'd need a full book for Planescape if it's already in the default setting (although it would be great if they *did* create a full setting book), but a "Planar" book with Planescape, Spelljammer and Ravenloft material together would be really interesting (and the three of them fit quite well together).

 

[billd91]

Previous to 3e there was no "core/not core" split, as Hussar explicitly said up thread.

Everything printed by TSR for D&D was simply D&D. You either used the rules or not, no "These books are core and everything else is optional" since everything was optional.

Do you grasp that concept? The only rules used were what the DM wanted to use (and in many cases what the players and DM negotiated to use).

I don't think that analysis stands very well. The introductory section of the 2e Players Handbook refers to itself, the DMG, and first volume of the Monstrous Compendium as essential. Everything else is called optional. How is that really different from 3e's core/not core split? I think perhaps the concept of core/not core may have become more defined throughout the tenure of 2e (probably because of people's experiences with the Complete Handbook series) until it reached an explicit "Core Rulebook" label for 3e, but the idea was clearly there in 2e's intro through the labeling of some books essential and others optional.

 

[Umbran]

You've just lost what little credibility I was extending you. That statement was absurd on it's face and false to boot. As Hussar said, you should stick to your own personal experiences and stop trying to claim authority over everyone else.

Dude. Respect. Show some, or hold your post. Really.

 

[Pickles JG]

It must be a regional thing. But honestly, nobody I know would ever have assumed you could use something in unearthed arcana without DM approval. Everything in the core books was assumed unless the DM spoke up. That to me is what core means. Assumed or not assumed.

It might be that 5e is the first game where nothing is core as opposed to 4e which proclaimed everything core. Though I'll add that even then I didn't know many DMs that automatically allowed stuff beyond the first three books. Perhaps old reflexes die hard.

This is my recollection as well - I seem to remember psionics in the PHB being "more optional" too. Mind you it's a looong time ago.

I gave up D&D in 1981 when I discovered Runequest as it was "more realistic", or I guess a better sim as it would be described now. I could not come up with any rationale for HP that made any "realistic" sense to me. I still can't which is why I get so bemused when someone takes these as a true fact of the world the PCs inhabit & then claims other factors like fast healing are unrealistic in some way - it's the HP that make no sense in the first place.

4e D&D is a phenomenal sim of action movie realities though.

I returned to D&D & played it on its own merits as a game in the late 80s & thereby uncovered gamist tendencies (though I did not know it was called this for another 25 years)

 

[Emerikol]

Wow. I guess I need an "In my opinion" auto insert key.

Honestly until today I never met a person who thought Unearthed Arcana was official core material in 1e. And I am not limiting that opinion to just my own group. I've been in countless groups and met thousands of roleplayers. I've been to Gen Con many times.

I'm not calling you a liar so I apologize if that was how you took what I said. I suppose I stated it way too emphatically.

I'm starting to think that nothing about old school D&D is true at all. Every memory and every experience I've had or the many dragon magazines I've read is all just an illusion. That an entire counter culture existed back then that I was completely unaware of.

Again maybe it is regional. Perhaps I'm projecting the way it is in my part of the country out to the four corners. I just find it odd that things would break down by region if they are.

The core 3 has been a concept I'm familiar with long before 3e was even a glimmer in the eye of wotc.

 

[evileeyore]

I don't think that analysis stands very well. The introductory section of the 2e Players Handbook refers to itself, the DMG, and first volume of the Monstrous Compendium as essential. Everything else is called optional. How is that really different from 3e's core/not core split? I think perhaps the concept of core/not core may have become more defined throughout the tenure of 2e (probably because of people's experiences with the Complete Handbook series) until it reached an explicit "Core Rulebook" label for 3e, but the idea was clearly there in 2e's intro through the labeling of some books essential and others optional.

I don't have the 2e Player's Handbook. Anyone with an original that can post the relevant quote?

I ask because my 2e pdf was created after 3rd ed (it states as much) and does support billd91's definition (but I have suspicions as to it's accuracy to the source).


I clearly remember things a bit differently, but then I stopped playing D&D entirely in the early '90's* so I probably missed a lot of the conversations (those in Dragon and various newsgroups anyway).


* and didn't pick it back up till 3e.

 

[evileeyore]

Honestly until today I never met a person who thought Unearthed Arcana was official core material in 1e.

Until today I didn't know people spoke of pre-3e D&D in the terms "core/non-core". I missed half a decades worth of conversation on this topic...

And I am not limiting that opinion to just my own group. I've been in countless groups and met thousands of roleplayers. I've been to Gen Con many times.

Same here. Well... not Gencon, but local SouthEast cons. Maybe it's a SouthEast thing. We just figured everything after Rule 0 is optional.

I'm not calling you a liar so I apologize if that was how you took what I said. I suppose I stated it way too emphatically.

Accepted. I offer my apology in return.

I'm starting to think that nothing about old school D&D is true at all. Every memory and every experience I've had or the many dragon magazines I've read is all just an illusion. That an entire counter culture existed back then that I was completely unaware of.

Again maybe it is regional. Perhaps I'm projecting the way it is in my part of the country out to the four corners. I just find it odd that things would break down by region if they are.

The core 3 has been a concept I'm familiar with long before 3e was even a glimmer in the eye of wotc.

It's probably just regional.

For me the concept of "core" didn't gel until 3e made it explicit. Previous to that it was all optional. When White Wolf started with the splatbooks for it's lines the notion of "core rules" and "optional rules" started to get discussed, but my group(s) still rolled with Rule 0 and didn't get entrenched in any one position.

 

[Nagol]

Previous to 3e there was no "core/not core" split, as Hussar explicitly said up thread.

Everything printed by TSR for D&D was simply D&D. You either used the rules or not, no "These books are core and everything else is optional" since everything was optional.

Do you grasp that concept? The only rules used were what the DM wanted to use (and in many cases what the players and DM negotiated to use).

Pre 3e, optional/add-on products aren't called non-core; they are called supplements. The concept is the same.

 

[Sadras]

Honestly until today I never met a person who thought Unearthed Arcana was official core material in 1e. And I am not limiting that opinion to just my own group. I've been in countless groups and met thousands of roleplayers. I've been to Gen Con many times.

You're not alone here and I'm in a completely different country to you. Every group I have ever known did not consider Unearthed Arcana to be core*, but an optional/supplementary rule set which had to be ok'ed by the DM, much likes Psionics and the Anti-Paladin...etc

*Whether the term was defined much later matters not, I think everyone understands what I'm referring to.