D&D Rules Compendium (Hardcover) - October 2007

[DaveMage]

About a week back, I suggested that WotC needs to do a compilation of the stuff that is getting cross-referenced the most these days --- especially the more popular non-PHB base classes like the warlock.

Now here's a notion...what if all of this stuff is going to be released as open content?

It would be nice, but I'm not sure very many would notice (or care) at this point.

Is anyone even making rules-based print products for use with D&D anymore (besides WotC)?

Seems that there are only adventures and settings being made for D&D these days.

 

[Nellisir]

It'll certainly be fascinating to see what is actually included in this book. My best guess, based on nothing but what I've read in this thread, is that it will include feats, but only the feats the R&D crew feel are positive additions to the game as a whole (and thus not anything designed for only specific settings or unusual styles of play). I'd geuss it'll also have what they feel are the best other rules systems of the past few years, certainly including things from non "Complete" books.

Ditto.

I doubt it'll be OGC, though that would be incredibly sweet.

This actually encourages me regarding 4e - if 4e is being planned (and it surely is), this book will be much more valuable if it's mostly compatible with 4e. Which suggests "4e" will probably be very similar to, and compatible with, 3.5e. (I've seen alot of minor issues with 3.5, but very few system-wide ones).

 

[JPL]

It would be nice, but I'm not sure very many would notice (or care) at this point.

Is anyone even making rules-based print products for use with D&D anymore (besides WotC)?

Seems that there are only adventures and settings being made for D&D these days.

But given a whole new bunch of rules to riff off of, wouldn't a lot of publishers do their own swashbuckler book, warlock book, etc?

 

[Remathilis]

It could also have a partridge in a pear tree, but I bet it won't.

I think WotC is unlikely to gut the most popular elements from currently published books and put them all in one volume. And since when are Illumians a greatest hit?

Truem but most of that material is from 2004-2005. It needs Errata (some of it) or tweaking, or it was a major selling point.

Illumains a greatest hit? Not really, but why include goliaths and raptorans and leave out the third new race?

 

[DaveMage]

But given a whole new bunch of rules to riff off of, wouldn't a lot of publishers do their own swashbuckler book, warlock book, etc?

I doubt it - not in the current market.

 

[Jdvn1]

I don't even know if the (flavor-stripped & rules-only) content of the 3 core books would fit in 160 pages... and a cyclopedia would have to include the core as well.

Says who?

The Spell Compendium didn't have core spells as well, and I can see WotC using this as a 'Compendium Series' and possibly later coming out with a 'Compendium Boxed Set' with the Spell Compendium, the Magic Items Compendium, and the Rules Compendium.

 

[Scribble]

Maybe it's just a book that they haven't decided yet what the title will be.

 

[Li Shenron]

Says who?

The Spell Compendium didn't have core spells as well, and I can see WotC using this as a 'Compendium Series' and possibly later coming out with a 'Compendium Boxed Set' with the Spell Compendium, the Magic Items Compendium, and the Rules Compendium.

That's basically what I meant to say: I think the Rules Compendium is going to follow the same idea of the Spell Compendium and therefore it won't be a Rules Cyclopaedia like in AD&D (which, IIUC, contained core rules as well to be a fully-playable book itself).

 

[Li Shenron]

I doubt this will have any UA material in it. UA is all variants, whereas, I bet this book will be add-on rules that don't require any low-level changes to existing/core rules.

Incorporating ALL UA rules (not counting class/race variants, just real rules) into Rules Compendium indeed would make no sense at all. It's possible both that NO material from UA is included at all, or only some additions (or variants) form UA would.

Classes (obviously including both new base classes and prestige classes) can very much fill an entire Class Compendium alone, an opportunity that it seems strange to me that WotC would miss by putting only a few of them into Rules Compendium.

Feats may be more difficult to fill an entire 160 pages Feats Compendium, maybe more of them are needed, but it is not granted that such a book couldn't be slightly smaller, or otherwise select nearly all feats published, or even just be delayed another year down the line.

Equipment Compendium (non-magical) is also hard for filling 160 pages, but converting to 3.5 all non-magical entries from A&EG could help.

 

[Frostmarrow]

I think the Rules Compendium will be 'just barely D&D'. It will feature four classes* and four races** and be a stepping stone between Basic Sets/boardgames and fully fledged D&D 3.5. It will have feats, spells, monsters, and conditions in a limited fashion. I only wonder if the spells will be limited in level or in breadth? Oh and there will be new art, yay!!! And, alas it will be heavy on the minis.

It's just 160 pages because they do not dare have more for fear of scaring away newcomers. The point is to make the game available without the three core books.

Isn't $27 quite cheap? -Subsidised cheap?

* My guess is fighter, rogue, cleric, sorcerer.
** Human, dwarf, elf, half-orc.