Core Books vs. Expanded Universe Books

[Bullgrit]

Howdy, y'all.

In all my time reading threads here, there is something that always confuses me. Some people refer to problems of D&D that I don't see, and I wonder if this is because I only play core D&D and they are talking about "expanded universe" D&D.

For instance, a couple days ago I read someone complaining about the varied mix of races in D&D cities (don't remember which thread it was). As most cities in my game are made up of only PHB races (with humans being by far the most common, as per the DMG demographics info), I don't see this problem.

Are most people using "expanded universe" stuff for there D&D games? When you think of/talk about D&D, are you automatically including all the various supplement/expansion books? Does anyone use just the core books for their game?

And this brings up another complaint that confuses me: Some people complain that there are too many options in D&D. Is this another example of people automatically using the extra books beyond the core?

Bullgrit,

Y'all come back now, y'hear.

 

[Turjan]

Welcome to the writing side of the board !

Well, "people" most often splits into DM and players. A DM might use some stuff from outside the core in order to bring something to the table that veteran players don't already know inside out when it shows up in game. Players often like weird concepts, and they bring this back to the DM to deal with it. The first point is nothing anyone here will complain about, the second one is often a conflict between the players' freedom of expression and what the DM sees as the consistency of his setting.

Another point is that "weird races" are already part of the core. Look a bit more closely at the Monster Manual. If you then take some published adventures from Dungeon or some of the 3.x classics, the whole bunch of half-this/half-that and dragon or demon templates enter your game. Of course, as a DM you can change that. It's just a bit of work.

 

[the Jester]

Heya Bullgrit!

In general, the 'core rules' are more thoroughly playtested, and they were created as a set. The stuff from all the supplements sometimes interacts in ways that nobody anticipates, because the designers don't necessarily think about the combo of prestige class A (from book X) with feat B (from book Y).

That said, I pick and choose what I use from 'other' books. You won't find most of the base classes and new races from the 'Complete' books imc, for instance- although they might exist somewhere far away from the core campaign area.

On the other hand, I am much more likely to include non-core feats, spells and prestige classes. The base classes and new races seem to require a lot more 'reimagining' of my setting to me than specialized bits or prcs (they seem to insert more easily).

 

[Jdvn1]

Howdy, y'all.

[Long time lurker, first time poster. Gotta jump in some time.

Yo. Welcome.

I'll try to take a more direct approach to your questions.

Are most people using "expanded universe" stuff for there D&D games?

I don't have numbers to back me up, but I think the majority of players use non-core material, whether third party or first party. Core-only games, in my experience, are hard to find.

Note: People use different words differently. I use the word "core" in two ways myself. Most often to refer to the three books that say 'Core' on them, but sometimes to refer to 'everything which is also in the SRD' which I consider the stock rules. Basically, "they're free, they're from the same company, they're useful--why shouldn't everyone use them as part of core?" This typically just adds Psionics to the mix, since I haven't seen the Divine material used very much. It also adds Epic rules, but I think that's also a minority of games.

When you think of/talk about D&D, are you automatically including all the various supplement/expansion books?

When I think/talk about D&D... hm. *thinks* I think of all the non-setting stuff WotC has published, at least the stuff I've seen. For in-setting material, I'd call that 'Eberron' or 'FR' (for example) instead of 'D&D'. When I use the term 'd20' I refer to in-setting material and third party material as well.

Does anyone use just the core books for their game?

Yes, but I've personally only seen a few groups that do this.

And this brings up another complaint that confuses me: Some people complain that there are too many options in D&D. Is this another example of people automatically using the extra books beyond the core?

Yes, probably so. I suppose this goes back a couple questions to the idea of what we think of when we think of/talk about D&D.

 

[Zappo]

For instance, a couple days ago I read someone complaining about the varied mix of races in D&D cities (don't remember which thread it was). As most cities in my game are made up of only PHB races (with humans being by far the most common, as per the DMG demographics info), I don't see this problem.

Yep. People use books that add new races, and then complain that there are too many races. People are weird sometimes.

However, for some players the PHB races are already too many.

Are most people using "expanded universe" stuff for there D&D games? When you think of/talk about D&D, are you automatically including all the various supplement/expansion books? Does anyone use just the core books for their game?

By default, when I think about D&D, I think about books that are published by WotC and are not setting-specific. But that's just a default. I find no problems switching my mindset to whatever context is required. I don't even own all of those books. For example, I tell players for each campaign what they can and can't use, and that they still need to get my approval for anything non-core, and that even if I do approve it, I'm still not required to know the rules about it. That's their job.

And this brings up another complaint that confuses me: Some people complain that there are too many options in D&D. Is this another example of people automatically using the extra books beyond the core?

Yes. They buy books of options, and then complain about too many options. Again, people are weird sometimes.

 

[Li Shenron]

Are most people using "expanded universe" stuff for there D&D games? When you think of/talk about D&D, are you automatically including all the various supplement/expansion books? Does anyone use just the core books for their game?

And this brings up another complaint that confuses me: Some people complain that there are too many options in D&D. Is this another example of people automatically using the extra books beyond the core?

The problem I see is that players buy optional books and pretend to play whatever they like from those books. This may cause a problem to some DMs who either accept every player's wish or disallow and start an argument which always detracts from teh fun of the game.

Not all material causes problem, usually it's only when it forces a change in the setting, primarily races and prestige classes. Feats and spells rarely require the DM to "fit" them into the setting for example (however they may occasionally raise balance issues).

The easiest solution IMO is that of telling the players since the start which races are available, and make no exceptions (including no subraces, no templates or bloodlines) beyond what you have specifically allowed, which may include non-core material if the DM wishes.
Prestige classes are more difficult to decide beforehand, but unless you start the campaign at mid-high level you can control which PrCl are available with roleplay and storytelling.