D&D General Should D&D Rethink The "3-Core" Model?

[AlViking]

Sure, could be neat.

Though I will say, just as a personal preference, that I like having world  specific lore, especially if there's multiple variables, over world neutral lore. I get that the latter is more intended for world-building, but I find the former to be more valuable for that purpose.

Where world lore goes will always be a big question for me. I so my own world building but I've also grabbed bits and pieces from various sources. So for non human races I use Greyhawk (with a few tweaks). For humans I make my own and it varies by region - although most of my campaigns are set in an area that follows the same pantheon.

So I'd like a book dedicated to different religions, including some that aren't polytheistic. Something like the old Deities and Demigods. But I see that as a supplement, not a core book.

 

[Remathilis]

What if instead, the first one had all necessary options, and the other was simply the optional tools to create and expand?

You get three people to agree what's "necessary."

 

[saviirkad]

You get three people to agree what's "necessary."

Was not a statement about what is necessary in that way, but as in the current rules of 5e, you can't make a character from a book that only has Classes and Backgrounds, not Species.

 

[Corinnguard]

Sure, could be neat.

Though I will say, just as a personal preference, that I like having world  specific lore, especially if there's multiple variables, over world neutral lore. I get that the latter is more intended for world-building, but I find the former to be more valuable for that purpose.

Like 3e's Races of Faerun and Races of Eberron.

 

[saviirkad]

Like 3e's Races of Faerun and Races of Eberron.

Yeah like, if I'm trying to figure out how elves work in my own setting, I'd like to see how they work in Faerun, in Eberron, in Exandria, in . . . does the world of Dragonlance have a name? In that place, and so on and so forth.

Setting neutral options are fine when they add another option distinct from the others, but if it's one or the others, I'd prefer the option with multiples.

 

[Remathilis]

Was not a statement about what is necessary in that way, but as in the current rules of 5e, you can't make a character from a book that only has Classes and Backgrounds, not Species.

Sure, I get that. You'd still be hard pressed to get people to agree on what species, backgrounds and classes to have. Not that I think splitting them up is any better. Catch 22

 

[saviirkad]

Sure, I get that. You'd still be hard pressed to get people to agree on what species, backgrounds and classes to have. Not that I think splitting them up is any better. Catch 22

Sure, but I also don't see that agreement mattering that much. Like a discussion on our various preferences and interests has merit, but I don't think a consensus particularly matter whether it's achievable or not.

I'm just glad that we at our table are very comfortable with reskinning options as desired. We played an all-human campaign where our mechanical species were rarely human. I'm a huge fan of "planar" species such as genasi, aasimar, and tieflings, but man are the Goliath mechanics really cool and perfect for those other three. I have an aasimar zealot barbarian idea I'll be playing eventually that mechanically will be a stone goliath.

Point being I don't feel the "loss" of an option as that big of a deal, nor if the option is available but not as mechanically interesting as others.

 

[overgeeked]

i don't believe 'evil' as an alignment uses the common definition, much like how 'chaotic' doesn't just mean you character is 'LOL random WaCkY-InSaNe!'

IMO
-being good is being willing to put yourself out for others, prioritizing their needs, desires and wellbeing before your own (typically without intention of recompense when performing the acts).
-being lawful is believing that putting a structure of rules or principles before your own personal desires is the way to make things work.
-being chaotic is believing that the liberty of personal action and desires over rules or principles is the way to make things work.
-being evil is valuing and prioritizing your own (and usually also the people you personally care about) needs, desires and wellbeing over others to the extent that you would take or exploit others needs and wellbeing to content yourself.

by my definition being 'evil' by itself is not the only motivation needed to go around inflict random torture upon unsuspecting NPCs.

I'm not sure that definition works only because the incompatibility between lawful and evil. Lawful is putting the law first while evil has putting one's self first. They can't both be true. But clearly lawful evil is a thing. I get generally, in the game, that's using the law to one's own benefit. But that's not really a thing in your setup.

 

[Corinnguard]

I'm not sure that definition works only because the incompatibility between lawful and evil. Lawful is putting the law first while evil has putting one's self first. They can't both be true. But clearly lawful evil is a thing. I get generally, in the game, that's using the law to one's own benefit. But that's not really a thing in your setup.

Lawful Evil is knowing the Ins and Outs of the rules and principles that govern a single individual or a community of individuals and being able to exploit them for one's own benefit. Devils are probably the best example of Lawful Evil. They have spent untold millennia studying mortals and their systems of governance to make ironclad contracts that can't be easily wiggled out of.

 

[AlViking]

Lawful Evil is knowing the Ins and Outs of the rules and principles that govern a single individual or a community of individuals and being able to exploit them for one's own benefit. Devils are probably the best example of Lawful Evil. They have spent untold millennia studying mortals and their systems of governance to make ironclad contracts that can't be easily wiggled out of.

I always viewed lawful as having a strict code and set of rules to follow. It doesn't mean they follow the laws of the land they're in.

A hit man for the mafia can be LE. Killing is just business, nothing personal. Even a serial killer can be LE if bound to ritual and structure.