Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6311402" data-attributes="member: 1465">Definitely! To me "core" is not a meaningless word. My XP is mostly confined within 3ed, but there it was immediately clear whenever someone said "we play a core-only game", that they meant PHB+DMG+MM.To be more specific, it didn't necessarily mean everything from those books was going to exist in the campaign, and instead nothing outside was ever going to exist, but still the idea was soundly understood, that character material outside those 3 books was going be at least scrutinized before being allowed, but even that was not guaranteed (i.e. the DM may not even look at it, and if you agreed on a "core-only" game then you had to accept that possibility). Saying "core-only" at least settled everybody expectations fairly clear within certain limits, even if each DM often said some 'no' to something, maybe a Haste spell here or a pearl of power there...The news in 5ed is that "core" probably now means Basic. That is going to be quite different, and as a DM it actually feels very relaxing to me, exactly because of what [MENTION=64497]Ruzak[/MENTION] says: with the "core" being really small, less stress is put on the DM to include stuff into the fantasy setting. Almost every classing setting has humans, dwarves, elves, halflings, fighters, clerics, rogues and wizards. But already if you think half-elves, gnomes, half-orcs, warlocks, sorcerers, bards... well there's already a few more people that aren't comfortable with them (not necessarily against the idea, but maybe against a specific take on the idea). Only really the few most common characters are guaranteed.</blockquote>

Verification