D&D: How Many Core Books

[Voadam]

The original 1e PH was what, like 128 pages? Throw in 128 pages of monsters, a bunch of magic items and the xp system, and you have a good core book.

A core book about 300 pages with reduced spell lists, magic items, and monsters is certainly possible with enough to play the game from levels 1-20 I would think.

 

[Crothian]

They need to gut the core books to get it down to one book. THen if there are people that want the extra stuff that makes D&D D&D like Psion that stuff can be placed in a second or even third book.

 

[Jdvn1]

D&D is not just a game system. It also contains a lot of metasetting that is a central part of it's appeal and legacy, that you couldn't just dispense and still have it be D&D. It might still be a playable game, but it wouldn't be the game I want to play.

Lots of DMs ban certain spells. Would you say that it's no longer D&D?

If you're okay with banning a couple spells, could they be trimmed from the book? Who's to say you couldn't trim a couple more after that?

Then again, some DMs ban certain races, classes, and feats as well. There has to be a line somewhere, but people will disagree on where it is. Personally, I think the PHB should be expanded, at least a little, to include concepts like Immediate and Sudden actions. Since CAr changed what a Quicken spell was.

 

[Gez]

Lots of DMs ban certain spells. Would you say that it's no longer D&D?

If you're okay with banning a couple spells, could they be trimmed from the book?

Let me propose something simple: cut off from the book everything that has been banned by at least, say, 1000 DMs.

Then you can sell the whole, total, entire D&D line as just one book. Within its cover, you'd have about 4 pages, consisting of 1/tenth the character creation guideline, about half the Human racial traits, the attack action, and the statistics for the longsword.

D&D is a game that is supposed to give you more stuff than you need, so that your work as a DM is mostly selecting what bits you'll use.

 

[Jdvn1]

Let me propose something simple: cut off from the book everything that has been banned by at least, say, 1000 DMs.

Then you can sell the whole, total, entire D&D line as just one book. Within its cover, you'd have about 4 pages, consisting of 1/tenth the character creation guideline, about half the Human racial traits, the attack action, and the statistics for the longsword.

D&D is a game that is supposed to give you more stuff than you need, so that your work as a DM is mostly selecting what bits you'll use.

You're too generous. I've seen people ban Humans and house-rule attack actions. I'd expect the new book to be the cover and a page for credits.

While I wouldn't recommend it, I think the core books _could_ be trimmed. I don't think that every spell in the book is necessary and I don't think all the feats are necessary. At least, you could condense stuff. You could have a feat that says, "Adds +2 to a save. Every time this is chosen, must apply to a new save." And most of the Improved and Greater feats could be, "this can be taken a second time to add an addictional +2..." or something.

 

[jmucchiello]

What else would you get rid of? Reduce the weapon and armor selection? Reduce the # of feats, skills & spells?

This is actually easy. Most people only play D&D between levels 1-10 so, only document 1-10 levels in the (dare I say) basic book. Then add level 11-20 in an advanced (or expert) book.

For the first 10 levels you have 5 spell levels, a bunch of (on the simple side) monsters (few outsiders), and a few VERY weak magic items. I think it could be done in about 400 pages. And thus cost around $50. The 11-20 book would be around 250 pages and be $30. So, players (never DMing) would have the price of entry raised $20. And DMs would save $10. Wait till WotC reads this thread!

 

[Desdichado]

I know this is just an example, but imho a poor one. I would personally be more than a little miffed if I were forced to purchase another book just for a decent complement of spells for my campaign. I say the core three books are fine as is. Even the DMG (though its possible to trim it down a bit) is a nice bit to have for those wishing to sit in the Dungeon Master's seat.

It's not a poor one at all, and your position is frankly rather ridiculous. All three of the first edition AD&D books weren't much larger than a single one of todays books, and it was certainly sufficient for play. The Basic rules, or the Old D&D rules, were even smaller, by a longshot, and were also sufficient for play. And all that's assuming you didn't like (since you ignored) my prior example of d20 Modern, which includes information for playing all kinds of different game styles.

Heck, with two books, d20 Modern and Urban Arcana you get not only a bunch of system, comparable to D&D, but a ton of setting information on one idea for how to play D&D in a modern setting, as well as a toolkit for playing all kinds of other types of games as well. If you add the Menace Manual to that, you've actually got a lot somewhat comparable page count to the three D&D core books, but arguably you have a lot more options and information to work with.

While I can certainly understand that most folks may well disagree with me, and prefer the big three book approach, to say something like you don't have a decent complement of spells, or that the games essentially unplayable (not your post, I know, but I'm responding also to the general vibe of a lot of other posts in the thread) without all the information we have is absurd, and we have the example of tons of other games, including other d20 games and other editions of D&D, to prove it.

 

[DaveMage]

It could certainly be made into 1 book and has been: the D&D Rules Cyclopedia for Basic D&D.

However, I wouldn't want it that way, because, to me, you'd have to give up what makes 3e so special (IMO), which is options, not restrictions.

You could reduce all monsters to a stat blocks with very little description, etc, and reduce the numbers of skills, feats, spells, magic items, and monsters and then you'd have it all in one book.

No thanks.

That said, however, I do think some reorganization is in order, and the DMG could be reduced significantly. I'd like to see creatable magic items in the Player's Hanbdook and all prestige classes and epic rules placed in a 4th (optional rules) rulebook. Expand the PH to 400+ pages to add the magic items.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Looking at the PHB again, I'd say we could safely get rid of the gnome, half-elf, and half-orc without too much outcry. Heck, the halfling, if not for the LotR, could probably be dropped as well.

Sounds like someone needs to make an OGL book. "D20"

 

[RFisher]

These days I find myself firmly in the core-should-be-one-book camp.

(I like the idea of separate player & DM core books, but probably 50% of the people I've ever gamed with DM'd or at least as aspirations to someday. Probably 90% bought the DMG, even many of those who never intended to DM.)

If I were designing a roleplaying game to be published, I would probably strive for something like this:

• The Core Book. The only book you need.
• The Introductory Book. A supplement to the core aimed specifically at those new to roleplaying games.
• The GM Companion. Advice on how to run the game. Mainly aimed at those who haven't GM'd any roleplaying game before.
• The GM Supplements. A series of small booklets or ebooks with tables & such to support adventure design & improv. (Especially improv.)
• The Companion(s). More monsters, spells, &c. Might be one big book or a series of booklets/ebooks.
• The Variants. Variant rules. Again, might either be a single big book or a series of booklets/ebooks.
• Modules. Of course.