Core rulebook needed?

[Kae'Yoss]

Since campaign settings are going to get published, will the d20M corebook still be needed? If those settings have new classes, new feats & talents, new equipment etc, why still need the corebook? Seems like the very generic corebook is only a starter for publishers. Or won't the corebook & setting overlap so much?

That's simple: The campaign settings will post additional rules, rules that complement the core rules (and only in some places supercede them).

You will get new advanced classes and even prestige classes, but you'll still need the info about the base classes, and that won't be found in any campaign setting.

You will get new feats and talents, but they won't repring the old ones.

You will get new equipment, but you'll still need such mundane stuff like clothes.

Then there's the basic stuff like ability scores, the whole gamamastering part with rules on XP awards and the like.


It's just like the campaign settings we have for D&D, like Forgotten Realms, Rokugan, Ravenloft, and so on: You still need the core rules, and the campaign setting uses them as starting point and start from there rather than from scratch (If they did that, it would not be a d20 Modern campaign setting any more, but a different d20 Game, Like d20 Modern, Wheel of Time d20, Call of Cthulu d20, Spycraft...)

 

[Shadowlord]

Well, it's 3 books in D&D, not 4 or 5.

Not really. In practice, you'll need the MM2 too to have all the standard monsters. And then you've got only the rules; now you need a campaign setting too. That's 5 books.
Not too mention PsiHB if you want psionics, which are pretty standard in other RPGs; but I didn't count that in 'cause psionics aren't really that standard for fantasy.

About magic & monsters, compare it to a fantasy RPG, not modern. WoT for ex has all the spells & monsters necessary to fit into 1 book. Not to mention that it has probably a better magic system.

MD: don't forget fantasy has plenty of magic healing (modern doesn't) and swords deal less damage than guns. That said, I'd bet the MD rule would work even better in d&d than modern.

D&D does not have careers, it has only classes which are like starting occupations. They are much needed to define your character since the background should play a major influence in the campaign. The lack thereof is also the cause for a crazy amount of prestige classes.

No vehicles in fantasy??! You surely have heard of flying ships and such wich play a major part in fantasy!

On the non-combat notes: sure there have been many ideas published about these, BUT they are in supplements and not in corebooks. You could find many non-combat elements in the corebooks though, IF you look very well. Modern (and other RPGs) tend to have better skills worked out, rules for reputation and such, more uses for XP handling, etc...

Finally, modern isn’t as different from d&d and the revised books will hopefully “steal” some ideas from modern.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Not really. In practice, you'll need the MM2 too to have all the standard monsters.

Not really. We had to play without MM2 for a couple of years now, and we managed, right? There are enough monsters in that, too.

And then you've got only the rules; now you need a campaign setting too. That's 5 books.

Only if you don't create your own. If you do, the guidelines and examples of the core rules are enough. If you don't, you'll need another book - but you need that for d20M, too (Urban Arcana campaign setting is due may this year, afaik)

Not too mention PsiHB if you want psionics, which are pretty standard in other RPGs; but I didn't count that in 'cause psionics aren't really that standard for fantasy.

About magic & monsters, compare it to a fantasy RPG, not modern. WoT for ex has all the spells & monsters necessary to fit into 1 book. Not to mention that it has probably a better magic system.

Above, you were complaining that the critters from MM1 aren't enough, now you want to cut that number further to fit it in one book.

And to reiterate: I like D&D-Magic. I don't really know WoT magic, though.

MD: don't forget fantasy has plenty of magic healing (modern doesn't) and swords deal less damage than guns. That said, I'd bet the MD rule would work even better in d&d than modern.

A sword deals less base damage than a gun. 2d12 (13 on average) is more than 2d6 (4.5 on average), for the heaviest gun and sword, respecitvely. But the +3 flaming greatsword, in the hands of that half-orc barbarian (base str 20 at his level)in rage, wearing a belt of giant's strength, using 5 points of power attack, will deal 2d6+21 damage +1d6 fire (31.5 on average), the fireball of the wiz 10 will deal 10d6 (35) damage, and we haven't looked into the real high-level spells, crits with scythes, or the other high-level stuff yet. At about 5th level, it becomes quite possible for damage to exceed the CON score of the party tank, ab about level 10, it will be commonplace. You'll end up making a check for MD with every single attack!

D&D does not have careers, it has only classes which are like starting occupations. They are much needed to define your character since the background should play a major influence in the campaign. The lack thereof is also the cause for a crazy amount of prestige classes.

Starting occupations don't really offer career chances that standard classes in D&D don't: you have the SA: Doctor, and you can become a good Doctor. You have the base class Fighter, which enables you to become a good Fighter. Career isn't really tied to rules. It's tied to events within the game.

No vehicles in fantasy??! You surely have heard of flying ships and such wich play a major part in fantasy!

Yea, I have heard of flying ships. I have had a couple of them in the Fantasy stuff I watched and read. But I watched and read tons of stuff. The Fellowship was travelling on foot for the most part, and the rest was done on horse or boat (and the difference that brings to fighting stile can be created within D&D rules). The novels I read featured horses, too, or just plain teleporting. Vehicles don't play a major role in fantasy.

There are ships, I give you that. But I don't think that we really need more than a couple of pages (or even more than one) of the core rules dedicated to fighting with those (not just on those). It would take up spece for more important stuff, and if you need it for your game, you can make something up easily, or get a d20 product. Better that than to do without more important stuff most parties need, or get everyone to pay more for the books.

On the non-combat notes: sure there have been many ideas published about these, BUT they are in supplements and not in corebooks. You could find many non-combat elements in the corebooks though, IF you look very well. Modern (and other RPGs) tend to have better skills worked out, rules for reputation and such, more uses for XP handling, etc...

Finally, modern isn?t as different from d&d and the revised books will hopefully ?steal? some ideas from modern.

"Steal" is the wrong term. It would mean that d20 Modern "stole" the very core of its rules from D&D. Fact is that they put out D&D first, and the feedback of many thousands has brought them insights that even playtesting wouldn't offer. They decided to learn from that, and create a revision of the rules. They also, wisely IMO, decided that they could also use those insights for the other d20 Games they released.