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

[Altalazar]

I have pretty much everything published by WoTC for 3E, and a huge chunk of 1E stuff (along with 2E, though I stopped playing for a while in there so didn't get most of the 2E stuff). I can find something useful in just about all of it. When it comes to players using stuff, I always look over things for pre-approval, even from the Core, though I've never found a reason to deny any of it from there.

In the end, I think after years of playing, just using the Core Rulebooks (and nothing else) is about as likely as just smoking one rock of crack and then stopping.

 

[Dark Jezter]

Every now and then, my group and I will take a break from our regular campaigns and spend an evening playing a random dungeon with PCs created specifically for that session. All of the material comes from the 3 core rulebooks only. It's a nice break.

 

[Quasqueton]

This is probably the lamest statement I've seen to classify someone else's playing style in a couple of years.

It's not a classification of playing style. It's a classification of attitude. "Jaded" and "bored" are not play styles.

A DM or player who has spent hundreds of dollars on D&D products and doesn't bother to use them to his own advantage, has just wasted their own time & money and appears to have a serious lack of imagination.

Well, it's that player's time & money to waste. For me, I enjoy reading the supplemental/optional books. They give me great ideas and concepts. But adding the extra crunch to my game is not worth the hassle. I've never seen a game that allows any and everything (even if just "official" material) stay balanced and enjoyable, or last very long.

Quasqueton

 

[megamania]

I could run with Core only but my games are either too specific (Darksun and Eberron) or too open (Strikeforce: Morituri- Planar travel). I like the diversity one gets by using books from various companies and campaigns. Though one must watch for the occational similiar feat of a different name. I've seen folks with Inititives of +12 or better at mid level which is a bit crazy.

 

[twofalls]

There seems to be a general flavor to the posts on this thread that suggest that there is something of an advantage or superiority to playing with "Core" material only. I have hundreds of D20 books in my library, many of them purchased specifically for my players (examples: the Fantasy Flight Path books, the 3.0 player splatbooks, and many many others). The great diversity of material out there lends itself to creating anything that a player might want to enjoy trying. As GM (and I've always been GM) I setup the parameters of the game after consulting with the players about what type of game we want to play, and then let them go to town and build what they want. And why not? Where is this implied advantage in sticking with the origninal three core books?

Edit: Reading more carefully it looks like power balance is the concern. I guess I'm lucky in that my players don't abuse the materials on hand to build power characters. We lean more to the theme of the game than indiviudal power mongering. It has happened once or twice in the past and the player in question was asked to create something more in line with the game and there wasn't' any arguement offered.

 

[S'mon]

I don't generally use splatbooks for N/PCs IMC, mostly because IMO they tend to be poorly done and, yes, tend to suffer from power creep. If a player wants something from a splatbook or elsewhere we can discuss it and modify it to fit the game. No player should be noticeably disadvantaged by not having access to non-PHB material, though.

 

[S'mon]

As GM I don't think I've ever used a splatbook to create an NPC, except one case where I gave the NPC levels in the Legend prestige class from Quint Fighter, but Fighter levels would have been fine. Generally there seems no need for them.