D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[AlViking]

When it came to TSR era books we treated everything as optional. Including the PHB and especially the DMG. There were some odd rules, inconsistencies and Gygax sometimes had odd advice. We still made it work somehow of course.

 

[payn]

I look at d&d like I do classic transformers

I don’t need radical changes all at once. In fact I wouldn’t mind them going backwards (bring back pig faced orcs) as it would solve a lot

You play what you want! Go play pathfinder or daggerheart if you don’t like 5e plus. I’m dabbling in shadowdark as it’s fun

Now on to my transformers point. Spoiler they killed of the CLASSIC characters to try and sell a new generation of toys. Well guess what most preferred the original Optimus. If you like the new version he’s all yours



What is all this preaching “im sick of people holding me back etc etc. I release you

I dont think there is any going back...

 

[wicked cool]

I dont think there is any going back...

Still hurts lol

 

[MichaelSomething]

Right about now, some posters would be telling you about how their playstyle would turn these wretched games into utopia. How you would be stupid to resist. I'll tell you no such thing. The truth is, I want you to resist. I'm not here to save your game. I'm not here to spread the greatness of certain playstyles. I'm here because I enjoy this. To me, there is no greater pleasure then feeling the warmth of my posts drenched in EXP.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Bah, you guys had it easy. Our characters died while they were being created

You played Traveller?

 

[mamba]

My point being that the term "Core Rules" doesn't appear anywhere in 2e. Even the "Core Rules" CD included the Tome of Magic and the Arms and Equipment Guide. There was no such thing as "core rules" until the term was coined for 3e.

if all you meant is they didn’t use the term yet, then so what? Were you confused about which books I was referring to when I wrote ‘core books’? You didn’t sound confused

 

[Hussar]

if all you meant is they didn’t use the term yet, then so what? Were you confused about which books I was referring to when I wrote ‘core books’? You didn’t sound confused

Because I knew you meant it in the post 3e sense of the Core 3. But, in 1998, no one would have known what you meant when you said "core books" because the concept of "core books" didn't exist in D&D yet.

 

[kayakingpoodle]

Which became its own issue because a lot of 1e players just took 2e compatible stuff and back ported it to 1e. Which is why most OS memories are a jumbled mess of 1e, 2e, Basic and house rules held together with duct tape and gentleman's agreements.

How long before this is the case for 5e and 5.5e? It would be quicker had wizbro not revoked piece meal purchases when the book of many things was introduced on ddb.

 

[Edgar Ironpelt]

The aesthetics of the 3E books didn't age very well for me (especially in terms of readability)

The poor readability was the chief thing I ranted about.

 

[Remathilis]

Because I knew you meant it in the post 3e sense of the Core 3. But, in 1998, no one would have known what you meant when you said "core books" because the concept of "core books" didn't exist in D&D yet.

Well it did, but not in the context it was used for later. It basically meant generic material not tied to a specific setting. That was important because of 2e's nature of changing things (races, classes, etc) per setting.

For example, the cleric (not specialty priests, generic clerics) had different spheres of magic access depending on if you were using supplements for Ravenloft, Dragonlance or the Forgotten Realms (not to mention Dark Sun). So if I wanted to play a cleric in a DMs game, I had to ask what version of the cleric I was allowed because that really changed my spell access. After a while, the generic PHB version started getting called the core rules version to separate it from the versions in Spells and Magic, Faiths and Avatars, etc.