New Core Rulebooks Every Year - A Mistake

[Christian]

Also note that these 'core releases' include sequels to the PHB, the DMG and the MM. By that reckoning, there are nine 'core' books for D&D 3.5: PHB 1 and 2, DMG 1 and 2, and MM 1-5 ...

I imagine that there will still be more MMs released than PHBs or DMGs. Possibly not by as wide a margin as in 3.5, but still more. (Maybe alternating PHB/DMGs with MMs on alternate years or somesuch.)

 

[JVisgaitis]

I'm really confused by the more PHB's= less supplemental material...

If PHBI covers martial, arcane, divine and skills as power sources then PHBII covers psionics, incarnum, technology and biological power sources...

You're telling me this creates a situation where there are less splats like Complete Arcane, Complete Biological, etc. Why? I just don't see how this reasoning is logical. All it really does is create more power sources that can in fact have more supplemental (oops, I meant "core")material. This doesn't in any way seem like a conclusion based on logic.

Well, its all hypothetical. I can see all of the new power sources being introduced in the various Player's Handbooks and having all of the rules there and contained in one place. Granted in the 3e era this would mean more supplements. Maybe we won't get that as much and we'll get supplemental material on the DI.

I do like the idea of introducing a whole boatload of stuff in another PHB as opposed to a bunch of complete books. If I had a choice, I would rather buy one core book a year with everything in it then picking and choosing from a bunch of other books and only getting what tickled my fancy. I hope its that way, but I could be wrong.

 

[Thurbane]

IMHO, a neverending stream of PHBs is a very bad idea, as is designating all non-campaign specific books as "core".

It makes it somewhat awkward for those groups (like mine), who like to run a simple, core only (PHB/DMG/MM) game, especially if we want to integrate new players. Sure, it can be done, but it makes the whole "core only" concept murky, at best...

Yet another reason I don't think I'll be moving to 4E any time soon.

 

[Tewligan]

The duskblade provided a gish...

You just made my list.

 

[Mighty Veil]

I think it would be a good idea. The main 3 core books have their brand identity. It's much stronger to release a book with new races, spells, and classes related goods in the strongest brand name. PHB is stronger that any splat book series name you're going to come up with, like the Complete series.

Not sure if every year requires all 3 to be released.

Also the books Unearthed Arcana and Fiend Folio can be added into the mix, with their own identity. UA I feel would be a good book to have new house rule ideas and to focus more on the races and classes from the current released PHB. Maybe turn FF into a book for options for monsters and pre-generated stat blocks for encounters. I'd leave the Planes book for a future DMG with the next MM for its monsters and PHB for its player's side of things. So a DMG II is released which focuses on the Planes for the core rules, core world and other supported game worlds. PHB III has its players related stuff. MM III has the monsters. UA has the crunchy options and creamy stuff to how the Planes can effect current releases. In this scenario it'd be for PHB (core), PHB II (let's pretend that's psionics), PHB III (Planes). And so on..

Maybe game worlds should get their own core books too. Realms gets its PHB, DMG, MM, UA, FF.

 

[Branduil]

My thinking, and only time will tell how close to the mark I am, is that we will see fewer supplements dedicated to a class or a race. Some people buy just about everything published, but others think "I never play a dwarf, I don't need a dwarf race book."

If they instead gather these ideas into a single book, they hope that sales of the book will be stronger, because it will contain something for just about everybody. Since the production cost of a single, larger book selling at higher volume is lower than several smaller, lower volume books, they hope the annual rulebooks will generate better profits. They may not have as many releases over the course of the year, but with D&D Insider generating a steady revenue stream, they might be in a better position to not have a book release in some months.

The smaller book releases over the course of the year, I predict will primarily be setting specific books.

I agree, and I hope this is how they do it. I almost never buy splat books, because I don't want to buy something with limited use, but a more general expansion could be very appealling.

 

[breschau]

I think that the problem is that an "adequate" product really takes tomes with higher page count than can be economically, developed and sold or practical to use. I don't believe all that great information will fit into a book that have a price tag we'd be willing to accept, nor are they likely to be able to afford all the up-front development work that'd be required to produce it.

What you are seeing here is pretty much the same model modern software uses - in development, they must make choices about what goes into the product. More features go into later point releases.

Exalted, 2nd Edition. 400 pages, $40.
PH, 3rd Edition. 306 pages, $20.
PH, 3.5 Edition. 320 pages, $30.
PH1, 4th Edition. 288 pages, $30.

If they did a 400 page, $40 PH, I'd buy it. Do it right the first time. +112 pages for +$10 that's a great deal. Hell, if I could just buy the pdf, I'd still send them the $40.

 

[airwalkrr]

What's the difference between them calling it "Player's Handbook II" and "Complete Warrior"? It's all just a question of how the material is presented. If this gives us fewer, bigger and more useful supplements, I'm all for it.

Assuming you were replying to the OP (me), then you should note I said if their intent with these new "core" books is simply to replace things like Complete Warrior then this is a good thing. I agree with you there.

 

[airwalkrr]

You just made my list.

Get over it. I'm not particularly fond of the phrase either, but everyone knows what you are talking about when you say it.

 

[Dire Bare]

You just made my list.

What list? Your gish list?

I hope you get everything you gish for.

Gish, gish, gish, gish . . . . GISH . . . gish gish . . .