Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="wingsandsword" data-source="post: 4065855" data-attributes="member: 14159">While WotC might be redefining what they call &quot;Core&quot;, the idea that what was in the original release of the game being central to it isn't likely to go away.&nbsp; Also, why should gamers have to wait years and pay more (a year, two years, how many years until the eventual splat release?) for materials that were central to the game in earlier editions.&nbsp; Until 4e a gamer could have a one-time outlay of less than $100 to have the &quot;core rules&quot; of the game and everything that every gamer would be presumed to have.&nbsp; Now that they are spreading out the term &quot;core&quot; they are cheapening it's meaning as a common ground that all D&amp;D players know well.&nbsp; Five years from now, will the typical D&amp;D player really have PHB's I through V and be conversant in each of them and the rules therein?&nbsp; Somehow I doubt it, while there are completionist players, most D&amp;D players I know are more along the lines of buy one PHB, or buy the core-three, or buy the core-three and the very occasional extra splatbook or setting book every couple of years if they really like it.In AD&amp;D 1e, AD&amp;D 2e, and D&amp;D 3e and 3.5e you could take the original Player's Handbook and create a Gnome Illusionist.&nbsp; In every edition except 2nd you could create a Monk or an Assassin.&nbsp; Now a race that has always existed, and classes that have existed for almost all editions are being removed and instead we get glorified lizardmen, a setting-specific niche race (tieflings), and a non-divine pseudo-cleric (warlord).Even if you try and offer up the excuse that rules will exist for using gnomes as PC's because of an appendix in the MM, the stigma of it being a &quot;monster&quot; race and not a &quot;player&quot; race will likely be strong.&nbsp; Many DMs that learn D&amp;D starting at 4e will no longer think of gnomes as a PC race, just as another monster race to be lined up for orderly disposal by PC's in groups of gnomes equal to the PC's.&quot;Sacred Cows&quot; is thrown around a lot, and it is a good metaphor for certain parts of the game.&nbsp; While some people see sacred cows as foolish and worthy of mocking, there are other people to whom they are very important and beyond question and it will start a huge controversy if disturbed.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="wingsandsword, post: 4065855, member: 14159"] While WotC might be redefining what they call "Core", the idea that what was in the original release of the game being central to it isn't likely to go away. Also, why should gamers have to wait years and pay more (a year, two years, how many years until the eventual splat release?) for materials that were central to the game in earlier editions. Until 4e a gamer could have a one-time outlay of less than $100 to have the "core rules" of the game and everything that every gamer would be presumed to have. Now that they are spreading out the term "core" they are cheapening it's meaning as a common ground that all D&D players know well. Five years from now, will the typical D&D player really have PHB's I through V and be conversant in each of them and the rules therein? Somehow I doubt it, while there are completionist players, most D&D players I know are more along the lines of buy one PHB, or buy the core-three, or buy the core-three and the very occasional extra splatbook or setting book every couple of years if they really like it. In AD&D 1e, AD&D 2e, and D&D 3e and 3.5e you could take the original Player's Handbook and create a Gnome Illusionist. In every edition except 2nd you could create a Monk or an Assassin. Now a race that has always existed, and classes that have existed for almost all editions are being removed and instead we get glorified lizardmen, a setting-specific niche race (tieflings), and a non-divine pseudo-cleric (warlord). Even if you try and offer up the excuse that rules will exist for using gnomes as PC's because of an appendix in the MM, the stigma of it being a "monster" race and not a "player" race will likely be strong. Many DMs that learn D&D starting at 4e will no longer think of gnomes as a PC race, just as another monster race to be lined up for orderly disposal by PC's in groups of gnomes equal to the PC's. "Sacred Cows" is thrown around a lot, and it is a good metaphor for certain parts of the game. While some people see sacred cows as foolish and worthy of mocking, there are other people to whom they are very important and beyond question and it will start a huge controversy if disturbed. [/QUOTE]

Verification