Exclusive Bruce Cordell interview

[Rechan]

I know, I'm all for them. Think maybe you should re-read what I wrote, because your response doesn't seem to map to what I meant to convey.

I see it flowing, I don't grok. You're using "Troll PC" and equating that to "Well it just doesn't make sense that we've got the halfling paladin on his riding dog and the guy with the lute on the sidelines, but the guy with the shaved head punching things doesn't fit", then the character's flavor doesn't fit, as opposed to his class.

The "Eek, people fearing the troll" can be done the same with a half-orc if you're going into a town where orcs have been maurading the countryside for some time, and thus are hated creatures. Should the half-orc not bein the PHB, to avoid such clunkiness? No, because the situation I just gave is purely a situational one and a stylistic choice by the DM.

If the monk is corralled to its own book, then it becomes even more focused on the Monk=Oriental Mystic Kung Fu guy, and less likely to fit into a game.

 

[rounser]

I see it flowing, I don't grok. You're using "Troll PC" and equating that to "Well it just doesn't make sense that we've got the knight and the witch but the guy with the shaved head punching things doesn't fit", then the character's flavor doesn't fit, as opposed to his class.

I'm not saying that - I'm saying that the amount of screentime given a race or class by making it a PC affects the tone of the game, most of all if you plonk it in the PHB, because then it gets all over every D&D campaign.

If trolls are in the PHB as playable races, then you bet the tone of the game would be affected, because suddenly every second game would have a PC troll in it. That affects the game much more than just having NPC trolls wandering around does (and yes, half-orc PCs do affect the feel of the game, and how it's played). Same deal with monks. Monks aren't monstrous, but they do carry some flavour baggage with them of their own. It doesn't bother me, but I recognise how it can be an issue for some, and suggest that their presence in the PHB isn't automatically justified. That seems to reflect the answer "murky".

 

[Rechan]

I'm not saying that - I'm saying that the amount of screentime given a race or class by making it a PC affects the tone of the game, most of all if you plonk it in the PHB, because then it gets all over every D&D campaign.

If trolls are in the PHB as playable races, then you bet the tone of the game would be affected, because suddenly every second game would have a PC troll in it. That affects the game much more than just having NPC trolls wandering around does (and yes, half-orc PCs do affect the feel of the game, and how it's played). Same deal with monks.

Except that the issue of having troll PCs in the book needs to be balanced and the flavor needs to be handled properly. It can work. It may not work for every game. But then, anything in the PHB may not work in every game - I may say 'No magic users, we're playing an Arthurian campaign'. Just as this Troll PC is flavor and setting dependent, so too are the other classes.

Monks aren't monstrous, but they do carry some flavour baggage with them of their own. It doesn't bother me, but I recognise how it can be an issue for some, and suggest that their presence in the PHB isn't automatically justified.

I could say the same about Paladins. Paladins don't have cultural baggage, but they have flavor baggage as well as Gamer Baggage, and I recognize how it can be an issue for some, and so their presence in the PHB isn't automatically justified. Maybe the Paladin deserves its own book, since it is such a niche class. One could even make the same claim for the ranger.

Nothing is justifiable except Fighter Cleric Wizard Rogue.

 

[rounser]

It can work. It may not work for every game.

Exactly. And by putting them in the PHB it sets them up as a default for every game. Yes, you can ban unliked classes and races from the PHB for all your campaigns, but it's bad design IMO if you're set up to do that because they've put something inappropriate in there (and if said thing is popping up in supplements all over the shop because of it).

 

[Rechan]

If that's the case, then it's just better design to put Fighter Rogue Wizard Cleric, and everything else be supplemental. That way it doesn't impede in anyone's campaign.

 

[rounser]

If that's the case, then it's just better design to put Fighter Rogue Wizard Cleric, and everything else be supplimental. That way it doesn't impede in anyone's campaign.

That's just crazy talk. Where would all the gimmicks which sell the new edition come from if they did that?

Which will sell more - good design alone, or "zomg, tieflings!"?

(I like tieflings, btw, though having them in there sans aasimar seems weird.)

 

[Rechan]

That's just crazy talk. Where would all the gimmicks which sell the new edition come from if they did that?

Supplements. "Want your favorite class? Buy another book."

Because in 4e, every PHB is considered core. So if the Monk or Bard or Psion shows up in the PHBII, then it is core, so we're right back where we started. The tone of the game is ruined because hey, psions and monks and gnoll PCs are in the PHBII CORE, so there goes your game.

 

[rounser]

The tone of the game is ruined because hey, psions and monks and gnoll PCs are in the PHBII, so there goes your game.

Not really. They say that, but I'd assume that you can still play the game without PHB 2 if you want to. You can't without PHB 1 (unless they've done something unpredictable, I guess)...so PHB 2 isn't core except in a marketing sense, and a "supplements from here on in will use it" sense, which is no big deal because that only affects NPCs.

 

[Rechan]

So because it's not in the first book it doesn't ruin your game? I don't buy that.

 

[rounser]

So because it's not in the first book it doesn't ruin your game? I don't buy that.

Well, try this: unless WOTC have done something truly novel, PHB1 will be required to run the game, and PHB2 and consecutive PHBs will not. If that's not the case, then the game won't be runnable until these other books are released, yeah?

We have a word for optional books: supplements. Calling them core is thus just marketingspeak. 2E had supplements referencing supplements, so this is nothing new (there was some book on elves that was notorious for it). The result was eventually a bit of a mess, which will of course justify 5E. Unless they do something revolutionary, that's probably going to be the nature of the train leaving the station...3E started with even more pure intentions than that, and look how it ended up.

I could of course be completely wrong and each PHB could be completely independent, and you could run a PHB3 only game, for instance (with no reference to PHB1), but that seems very unlikely. If they do in fact do it, I'll be surprised and impressed.