Anybody Use just the Core Rulebooks? Why? Why not?

[Methos]

As I get ready to start preparing a new campaign from the ground up with all of the standard world - building things that a good DM does, naturally, one of the things that I need to consider is what races, classes, prestige classes (if any), feats, skills, etc., I will be allowing in the campaign. With all of the sourcebooks out there just from WOTC, there is so much to pick from. I seem to have far too many books to count these days, although in all honesty, I haven't been purchasing much from the third party developers in the past year or so, but probably 90% of my purchases have been WOTC. It got me thinking? Why wouldn't I just have a campaign (for a change) using just the "core rulebooks", meaning only PH, DM Guide, and MMI, II, III (I consider all 3 MM to be core).


Does anyone do this anymore? Or, do we generally cherry pick from different sources to make modifications from a "standard campaign". In my opinion even though I haven't DM'd or played in a "core D&D" campaign since 3rd edition came out 4-5 years ago, there is still enough material in those books to play a well-designed campaign if the DM does a good job with the world and story building ideas?

Any thoughts, opinion, experiences are welcome.

Cheers

Methos

 

[Crothian]

Some people do, but people also find out that the core books do not cover everything so they expand their books.

 

[Jdvn1]

In LEW (as per my sig) we use just the SRD (and a few house rules). Mostly the SRD, though, which is basically just the core rulebooks.

 

[MerakSpielman]

I officially allow players to use the Player's Handbook, the DMG (mainly for magic item shopping), and the Kalamar Player's Handbook.

Occasionally I allow external feats/items/spells, but each has to be approved on a case-by-case basis.

 

[Desdichado]

I don't. My own setting that I'm running has a very different flavor than the basic D&D assumptions, so I had to yank out most of the classes, the magic system, and all kinds of other things and replace them with stuff I had from other d20 sources. The game I'm playing in is Eberron, so it naturally uses Core + Eberron at least, plus anything else we can convince our DM to use. Not that we try anything outrageous, but I know the group's artificier has selected a bunch of spells from a Mongoose spellbook.

 

[Digital M@]

I find things only get wacky from strange bonuses when I allow 3rd party books. When my players use only the core books, I have less people with +10-20 bonuses on certain skills at first level. Plus, I don't care much about all of the options, so I only own the core books and 1 class book.

 

[TerraDave]

You should be able to use just the core rules, those three books have almost 1000 pages between them!

But no, we don't. We use the three core books, and the stuff in my sig. I do not use MMII and MIII--but get a few monsters from other sources. Actually, I may be using fewer hard backs then your proposed "core".

 

[VirgilCaine]

Right now I am, but thats because I'm just running modules for two players and not a full-fledged campaign for several people. I'd add more stuff (Crystalmancy, maybe some more feats and LOADS of spells.

 

[ThirdWizard]

My campaign is claimed "Core Only" but it really isn't. Nothing outside Core is allowed unless specifically okayed by me. And, I'm fairly lenient about allowing things, we've got substitution levels, PrCs, feats, spells, etc from all kinds of sources in the game. I also make up a lot of magical items, spells, etc. And monsters from any source are always welcome.

 

[Apok]

Depends on the game, but usually no; most everyone in our group has been gaming for over 10 years, and those that haven't are big on variety. Using nothing but the core ruleset gets boring quickly.