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

[IronWolf]

I use more than the core books in my campaign, but do restrict to WotC books. In the current campaign we are using the three core books, a plethora of Forgotten Realms books (it is an FR campaign), all of the Complete books and a smattering from Unearthed Arcana.

I restrict to the WotC books simply because my time and funds are limited. I have nothing against third party d20 books, I just have a hard time keeping up with all of them.

 

[Psion]

A vanilla campaign dors not do it for me anymore; those elements have been with me for years now and by themselves seem a little plain jane.

Of course, the GM is free to innovate, and I do, but my free time is not what it once was, and many creative minds are better than one.

 

[DM JOE]

In my campaign I will allow everything from the core books ( with a few exceptions ) while anything from a third party source must be approved of course. But to each his own, I have never had a problem with too many source books. Anyway the amount of books doesn't make a game bad or good the DM and PC's do.

 

[scourger]

I ran a core 3.0 game. It was great. The only hitch was that I called it Greyhawk and had a player who then brought years & years of "canon" to the table. But, the rules were more than adequate. I didn't even allow prestige classes. I think any character concept is attainable with the PHB.

My current D&D game does have some additions from other sources: Star Wars jedi; Judge Dredd judges; and Omega World mutants. I also allowed PCs to be aasimar paladins as in the MM but without the level adjustment (to encourage good guys). It's been interesting. Otherwise, it's core D&D.

I'm thinking of making my next game even more restricted. I would like to run the module Last Hero in Scandinavia with just 5 PCs: a barbarian, a bard (an arab), a cleric (of Odin or Thor), a fighter, and a rogue. The other classes just don't work for me with that module and for the type of game I would like to bring. Sort of 13th Warrior meets D&D. Hopefully, it could work into Mesopotamia as the survivors return southward. For that game, I would just use the core with the human sub-races and the new gods presented in that module.

The core really is more than enough game. A camapign setting can be fun, but I prefer it to be in a module or to add just enough different to make it interesting. Too many options are overwhelming.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I essentially use nothing from the DMG, although a player recently took a modified form of the assassin PrC from it.

I've gotten more use of monster books other than the MM1.

Conan the RPG and Arcana Unearthed provide as much or more PHB as the PHB.

So, no. I run almost a core book free campaign, but cannot imagine running a core only campaign.

 

[pogre]

Core books only, except what characters create in the campaign - custom spells, items, etc.

 

[S'mon]

I pretty much just use the PHB, DMG & MM - I don't have the other MMs. I'm not averse to using a monster from another 3e monster book (I have a few eg Creature Collections 1 & 2, Legions of Hell, Armies of the Abyss), but it rarely comes up IMC. I'm far more likely to use homebrew monsters to fill a necessary niche IMC (eg the Marrakeen Zeereshi War Lizards) or convert 1e monsters from my 1e Monster Manuals 1 & 2, 1e Fiend Folio, old White Dwarfs, etc. I've sold my player-oriented 3.0 splatbooks, they didn't have much of interest, I kept Quint Fighter & Quint Rogue but rarely use them. I have 3.0 Manual of the Planes and have used it for inspiration & explanation of existing campaign elements IMC (eg Moorcockian sphere-based planar arrangement, a spirit world that has some similarity to the MoP one), but not directly in play - eg there's a Planar Champion prestige class, I like the _idea_ of the planar champion for a PC IMC, but not the crunch. That goes for a lot of 3e in my experience - too much unnecessary crunch.

 

[cjdc1973]

We use any WOTC & Malhavoc Press published resources. When we first transitioned to 3.5E, my players quickly became bored with the limited options provides by just the core resources. They learned to enjoy all of the variable capabilities available to them by using other resources and asked me to include them all after a suitable review period. The extra crunch provided by these books (classes, feats, spells, skill use options, monsters, treasure) far outweighed any negatives from allowing new material. Ultimately, I wanted my campaigns to become more vibrant and less player confrontational. I found that by allowing players to do just about whatever they wanted within the frame work of published rules aloowed me the freedom to dictate hard rules pertaining to the actual story line.

 

[jasper]

Core or the door imc. Why? Because it keeps the available choices limited so I and the players can keep track of them. Also everything is in one place not more packing 9+books to the game. Finally after being burned by bad players and bad splat books in 2nd Edition I do NOT allow stuff from other sources without the person buying me a personal copy of the splat book and a probation period on the splat book. If I and the players can't find enough interest stuff to do with core something is wrong with us and why waste more money.

 

[TerraDave]

Our group is made up of players that have all played longer (with the exception of one guy's wife who only started playing five years or so ago. I think it says something that in our Eberron game, every single character is using a brand-spanking new Eberron specific race or class.

Sure. If there are new options people will want to use them, why else have them?

But you can do a lot with the Core rules, or with games that have even a smaller page count. And a large part of the "grognard" set seems to like less, not more.

Of course, I have a 140+ crunch filled player suplement...so I am not really "core" either