• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D 5E What belongs in a $50 PHB?

Well, for my part, Pemerton, it sounds a lot like the iconic Dungeons & Dragons chromatic dragon, as originally fleshed out in the Dragonlance setting.

Really? Dl dragons were part of a highly organized society and were in control of entire armies. Granted that green dragon in Qualinesti was a powerful caster but afaik the other dragons presented were not really known for magical might.

Which is precisely how they were presented in 1e. Most dragons had only very low level casting abilities.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Content has nothing to do with it. A book of that size and specification costs that much in 2014. Thats the economic reality.
Maybe so, but people are arguing about whether it's worth it. Just because it costs X to make a book doesn't make it economically viable; people may not find it worthwhile and not buy the book. Maybe Wizards should have dialed down the artwork, or released thinner books with supplementary volumes, or whatever.

I read that the original white box was $10 in cira 1975 dollars. If you use the CPI (not a perfect index, but) that's in the low $40s. So this is a little more expensive, but not a lot. On the other hand, there was a lot more wow to the original than there will be for 5th edition. (That's not intended to be a knock on 5th edition -- there is no way that a sequel almost 40 years later, in what is a much more crowded marketplace, could have the same wow-factor.)

I can certainly afford it but will probably skip it unless it gets fabulous reviews.
 

I'm a bit divided on magical items being in the PHB. Some should be in there, like potions, scrolls, wands, some weapons and armor. Others should be in the DMG as they are his story telling tools, like curse items, artifacts, relics (yup, those), and maybe special ones like vorpal swords, holy avengers and Daern's Instant Fortress.
 

:yawn:Like I'm sure many others have stated ( sorry I only read page one ) I'd like to have one book that has all of the races, classes, equipment (including magic items), and core rules. Yes. Rules.

The DMG should be all of the extra stuff like building an adventure, world building, monster making, NPCS creation, race and class construction, etc.


EDIT: wow. I know I haven't posted much in the past couple years, but I could swear I had a lot more posts in all the years...
 
Last edited:

It boggles the mind the number of people that want a PHB with all of the rules/game in one.

Talk about supporting/promoting system mastery.

Yes, PF did it, apparently. Other games have done it, apparently. Why is there this conception that because other rpg's are doing something...it is something that D&D should be doing/has to do? The game has changed and, some would argue, "grown" over the passed decade or so. It has introduced and incorporated many concepts, altered many of its long standing traditions and elements. Some good. Some...well, let's just say, not so well received.

But saying the DMG shouldn't have the [bulk of] rules?!

Yes, all of the optional stuff/dials and altering the game for various preferences, obviously [it seems most folks agree] go in the DMG. But throwing all of the default game in the PHB, beyond what a PC would have access to? The PHB should contain the magic items for the player's to peruse and know about?! No. Just no. [Interestingly, I've seen several posts say "but not artifacts, those can go in the DMG." So every/any campaign now that is going to give the players a bit of mystery and awe is going to have to contain artifacts? No thanks.]

The trend seems to be [from this thread, anyway] that the DM is being/should be relegated from "Game Master" or "Referee" to nothing more than simple "Campaign/Adventure Designer"...depending on the post, sometimes with, sometimes without even the authority of dealing out XP (since if everything is in the PHB then the players can just tally stuff up themselves. No?)...and that, if they so choose to use such an "antiquated concept for level advancement as, pfft, XP. Who needs that anymore?"

I mean...everyone hates to hear it and will scream "One True Wayism"...but HOW is that game D&D? No, "cuz it'll have the logo slapped on the cover" is not a valid answer. The players will learn the rules...and certainly should know/have access to things like "How combat works. [allegedly we'll also get] How exploration and interactions work from the PC's side/pov. All the character creation stuff [obviously]. What spells are available. etc..."

But the DM should have lots of ins and outs that the players just don't: How various conditions work, what/how poisons and potions work/interact, magical effects/powers the PCs are not privy to, what potions and other magical devices there might be floating around the game world, [if you like] what monsters there are/what they can do...Along with all of the tips and dials and designery stuff.

Sure players'll pick stuff up on over time (and experienced players will already understand certain things). I hardly see that as an excuse to say "we don't/shouldn't need a DMG."

As a player, I don't want to know everything there is to know! There are things in the game world I, as the character and player, should have to figure out along the way.

I mean, I will end up knowing everything anyway, since I'm the DM most of the time...but that should be cuz I'll have the DMG! Not because I or anyone can just turn to p. 67 in the PHB.

In a game, even a "low magic" one, it should be clear that there are potions and scrolls (or at least, starting out, legends of such) in the game world, sure. My [certain] characters know or can learn how to use them and/or (eventually) make them. That understanding/assumption [in a fantasy genre game] should not include the rules for doing so.

Not to mention it's bad for business for WotC if every table, really, would only need 1 copy of a PHB to play the game. Where're their sales numbers going then?! "Yeah, come to the game with Friday. Don't worry about never playing/not knowing anything. Jimmy's got the book. We just all reference his."

At the very least...if you're going to combine stuff, wrap the starting/most common adversaries of the MM into the DMG and put out expansion monster books. Spells, traditionally, go in the PHB so the players know what they're casting. But, c'mon...you need at least TWO books! I could get over abandoning the "three book model", I suppose. I've got nothign against saving a few trees. But making the DMG an optional volume to play D&D?!?

'ADNESS, I say. Sheer and utter 'adness. [Big Bang Theory reference. If you don't get it, don't worry about it. I think you get the gist of the post without it.]

The DM as a superfluous guy[gal] whose only purpose is to roll stuff the PC's aren't doing, with no other authority or special/private knowledge of how something in the game might go down? That just a big no thanks.

Boggles, I tell you...is there...we need a "boggles" smiley. I guess this'll do: :-S

Happy Monday all. I, apparently, need another coffee...*rackin' fracka one book my shiny red mumble grumble racka frackin'...*
 

Really? Dl dragons were part of a highly organized society and were in control of entire armies. Granted that green dragon in Qualinesti was a powerful caster but afaik the other dragons presented were not really known for magical might.

Which is precisely how they were presented in 1e. Most dragons had only very low level casting abilities.

[Note: Take this all with a grain of salt, it's been at least a decade since I re-read the Chronicles.]

Well, the black dragon in Xak Tsaroth (or whatever it was called) had a ring [as I recall] that cast Darkness. The red dragon who helped Verminaard (grudgingly, again, as I recall) was able to assume human form...whether this was cuz he was so ancient he could cast Polymorph Self or by way of some item, I don't actually remember...I'm pretty sure it was by spell.

But yeah, the 1e era dragons were not the "innate sorcerer" dragons everyone thinks of today (and from what we've seen thus far, I would be very surprised if that perception isn't carrying over into 5e). They had to be able to speak, first of all, in order to use spells like anyone else. It couldn't really be argued however, that they weren't savy enough to use magic items from their own hoards...well, maybe the dunce-y whites weren't.

None of this disputes anything you've said. hahaha. Just remembered those other instances of dragons using magic in DL, after reading your post, and felt like sharing. :o

It also seemed to me, they were really only "organized" by their allegiance/devotion to(/fear of) Takhisis' wishes [to "same thing we do every night, Pinky...take over the world!"].
 

I like the 3x £25-30 / $50 format. If there were to be a condensed version then I think DMG and MM together but I like begin able to take only the MM in terms of books with me. Most of the time I don't carry the books around with the exception of campaign specific stuff (shadow fell, BOVD, FRPG etcRPGs don't make a lot of money. Frankly they should have continued supporting 3.5 and 4E rather than next. There's no point in fragmenting the tenuous community even further.
 

Yes, PF did it, apparently. Other games have done it, apparently. Why is there this conception that because other rpg's are doing something...it is something that D&D should be doing/has to do?

It's not just Pathfinder or some RPGs. It's the staggering majority of RPGs. As a rule, a person should only require a single product to play a game. D&D is an outlier here, and it isn't necessary. The rules are not complex enough to demand it.

That said, it doesn't impact me too much, as I will buy the three core books regardless. But for the health of the industry and the brand, the game should have a single, complete core product.
 

It's not just Pathfinder or some RPGs. It's the staggering majority of RPGs.

So D&D should just be a good little sheep and step in line, then, I guess.

I'll amend the question: "Why is there this conception that if 'the staggering majority of RPGs' are doing something it's something the D&D should be/has to do?

As a rule, a person should only require a single product to play a game.

That's a gaming rule?

D&D is an outlier here, and it isn't necessary. The rules are not complex enough to demand it.

Well, I believe 3e and 4e shoots the question of complexity out of the water. But regardless of that, as the originator of the whole RPG industry, I think I'll just continue to believe that D&D has the right (if not obligation) to remain an "outlier."

That said, it doesn't impact me too much, as I will buy the three core books regardless. But for the health of the industry and the brand, the game should have a single, complete core product.

Oh sure. I'll buy whatever they put out...just to have and be able to peruse, even if I never get a chance to actually play it. But I still believe the idea of a product called D&D with the DMG as an optional tool to play the game is completely foreign and utter madness.

It's like going to eat at a fancy steak house expecting a prime cut of porterhouse, stuffed baked potato, and iceberg wedge salad with chunky blue cheese dressing, but instead receiving a McDonald's burger with fries. What's the problem?! There's way more McDonalds places than fancy steak houses...so we're just doing stuff like they do. It's beef...there's potatoes and lettuce...we're even throwing in a pickle and kethcup for ya! [well, there's some percentage of beef is in there someplace...]

(I have got to stop posting to threads in the morning before I eat something. Excuse me.)
 

I like the three book format. Always have. It means they can have room to put lots of cool artwork in for monsters and not cramp everything up. I likes me some art and having three books probably means plenty of pictures... :)
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top