Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 5772058" data-attributes="member: 32536">I honestly do question this. I've often wondered if the PHB system was the best model for D&amp;D. Certainly, the entire concept of &quot;dials&quot; they're advertising for 5E is a very different paradigm than what has come before, and it might require an equally different method of presentation.Imagine a system where there are multiple PHBs that contain entirely different content, but could each independently serve as a &quot;core rulebook&quot; that contains all the rules you would need for a game of D&amp;D. For example, a classic D&amp;D book with a number of the usual races and classes, an alternate rulebook with a much more exotic set of races and classes, and a &quot;modern D&amp;D&quot; book that contained rules for modern play that was 100% compatible with medieval fantasy D&amp;D, with each book containing all the rules it needs to serve as a player's first D&amp;D book. Such a system would be really interesting for a lot of reasons, and it would dodge most of the problems of establishing a &quot;core&quot;.I'll accept that as a possibility. Still, it does strike me that 4E really evolved out of many of the later 3.5 supplements like Tome of Battle that many &quot;core only&quot; players openly despised, while Pathfinder actually embraces a lot of the rhetoric of those disagreements (such as making a formal distinction between core classes and base classes in its terminology).Certainly, I myself was a &quot;abandon the core&quot; player in the late 3E era, and moved on to greatly prefer 4E's ideals over Pathfinder's. It might be a mistake to think that others were like that, though.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TwinBahamut, post: 5772058, member: 32536"] I honestly do question this. I've often wondered if the PHB system was the best model for D&D. Certainly, the entire concept of "dials" they're advertising for 5E is a very different paradigm than what has come before, and it might require an equally different method of presentation. Imagine a system where there are multiple PHBs that contain entirely different content, but could each independently serve as a "core rulebook" that contains all the rules you would need for a game of D&D. For example, a classic D&D book with a number of the usual races and classes, an alternate rulebook with a much more exotic set of races and classes, and a "modern D&D" book that contained rules for modern play that was 100% compatible with medieval fantasy D&D, with each book containing all the rules it needs to serve as a player's first D&D book. Such a system would be really interesting for a lot of reasons, and it would dodge most of the problems of establishing a "core". I'll accept that as a possibility. Still, it does strike me that 4E really evolved out of many of the later 3.5 supplements like Tome of Battle that many "core only" players openly despised, while Pathfinder actually embraces a lot of the rhetoric of those disagreements (such as making a formal distinction between core classes and base classes in its terminology). Certainly, I myself was a "abandon the core" player in the late 3E era, and moved on to greatly prefer 4E's ideals over Pathfinder's. It might be a mistake to think that others were like that, though. [/QUOTE]

Verification