When did the Monster Manual 2 become a core book?

[Piratecat]

3.5 has shown us the future. There will be more and more for the core.

This reminds me too much of "2nd edition product creep." Bleah; after explicitly saying that they wouldn't do this, I hope they don't make a habit of it.

 

[Mouseferatu]

This reminds me too much of "2nd edition product creep." Bleah; after explicitly saying that they wouldn't do this, I hope they don't make a habit of it.

I'd say it's a question of both definition and degree.

Does BoEM "require" the MM2 to be useful? Not at all. Two or three minor aspects of it do; the book itself does not.

To me, that's the best of both worlds. So long as a given book doesn't require another non-core book for overall use, I have no problem with a few minor details here and there for those who do want to go beyond the core three.

Now, when they start publishing books that you simply cannot use without MM2, or the Psionics Handbook, or the BoVD, then I'll agree we're seeing the 2E "product creep." (Nice turn of phrase, BTW. ) But right now, I just don't see this as qualifying.

 

[Aeolius]

I am reminded of the use of half-fey greenhags, utilizing a template from the Fiend Folio, in a past issue of Dungeon. Either WotC snuck the half-fey template into the SRD, or Paizo is immune to the OGL.

I am not opposed to this trend, used in a limited and focused scope; a series of adventures which assume the DM has every 3e WotC hardback and splatbook available and wants to use them.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I am reminded of the use of half-fey greenhags, utilizing a template from the Fiend Folio, in a past issue of Dungeon. Either WotC snuck the half-fey template into the SRD, or Paizo is immune to the OGL.

I am not opposed to this trend, used in a limited and focused scope; a series of adventures which assume the DM has every 3e WotC hardback and splatbook available and wants to use them.

Despite the fact that Paizo is no longer part of WotC, Dragon and Dungeon are considered "official" Dungeons & Dragons products, and aren't bound by the terms of the SRD or the OGL. They can write about anything from the game they want, as completely as if they were writing a WotC hardcover.

 

[DaveMage]

Of course, those who were in charge at the start of 3.0 are now long gone. Some of the designers remain, but they don't always get a vote in these decisions.

I like the idea of only needing the core books to buy any supplement. It allows a buyer to not worry that they "need" to have more than the core books.

 

[diaglo]

This reminds me too much of "2nd edition product creep." Bleah; after explicitly saying that they wouldn't do this, I hope they don't make a habit of it.

This so reminds me of 1edADnD product creep.

The FF, UA, MM2, etc...weren't core to me back then.


especially the "written for my kids so they can powergame until their hearts content" UA.

 

[Aeolius]

I like the idea of only needing the core books to buy any supplement. It allows a buyer to not worry that they "need" to have more than the core books.

Granted, that can cause an awkward mess, like the inconsistencies between the Manual of the Planes, Deities & Demigods, and Epic Level Handbook. Those books should have been written to work with one another, not against one another, which is how they present themselves; autonomous works that work with the core rules, to the exclusion of all others.

 

[Aeolius]

especially the "written for my kids so they can powergame until their hearts content" UA.

Aww...c'mon, what wrong with rolling up a fighter, double-specializing in the longsword and short sword (to be used simultaneously), switching over to become a thief and subsequently a thief-acrobat, then becoming a bard under druid tutelage (thus gaining access to the expanded level of druid abilities for levels 15-23)?

 

[Aeolius]

They can write about anything from the game they want, as completely as if they were writing a WotC hardcover.

I now know exactly what to do with my as-yet-unwritten underwater mega-adventure

 

[Psion]

I'm not especially sold on the philosophy of never using a non core book as a reference in a different book. While I agree it is easy to go too far, I think at first they were too conservative in this issue. I don't think BoED goes overboard.