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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 6277609" data-attributes="member: 92511">It boggles the mind the number of people that want a PHB with all of the rules/game in one.Talk about supporting/promoting system mastery.Yes, PF did it, apparently. Other games have done it, apparently. Why is there this conception that because other rpg's are doing something...it is something that D&D should be doing/has to do? The game has changed and, some would argue, "grown" over the passed decade or so. It has introduced and incorporated many concepts, altered many of its long standing traditions and elements. Some good. Some...well, let's just say, not so well received.But saying the DMG shouldn't have the [bulk of] rules?!Yes, all of the optional stuff/dials and altering the game for various preferences, obviously [it seems most folks agree] go in the DMG. But throwing all of the default game in the PHB, beyond what a PC would have access to? The PHB should contain the magic items for the player's to peruse and know about?! No. Just no. [Interestingly, I've seen several posts say "but not artifacts, those can go in the DMG." So every/any campaign now that is going to give the players a bit of mystery and awe is going to have to contain artifacts? No thanks.] The trend seems to be [from this thread, anyway] that the DM is being/should be relegated from "Game Master" or "Referee" to nothing more than simple "Campaign/Adventure Designer"...depending on the post, sometimes with, sometimes without even the authority of dealing out XP (since if everything is in the PHB then the players can just tally stuff up themselves. No?)...and that, if they so choose to use such an "antiquated concept for level advancement as, pfft, XP. Who needs that anymore?" I mean...everyone hates to hear it and will scream "One True Wayism"...but HOW is that game D&D? No, "cuz it'll have the logo slapped on the cover" is not a valid answer. The players will learn the rules...and certainly should know/have access to things like "How combat works. [allegedly we'll also get] How exploration and interactions work from the PC's side/pov. All the character creation stuff [obviously]. What spells are available. etc..."But the DM should have lots of ins and outs that the players just don't: How various conditions work, what/how poisons and potions work/interact, magical effects/powers the PCs are not privy to, what potions and other magical devices there might be floating around the game world, [if you like] what monsters there are/what they can do...Along with all of the tips and dials and designery stuff.Sure players'll pick stuff up on over time (and experienced players will already understand certain things). I hardly see that as an excuse to say "we don't/shouldn't need a DMG."As a player, I don't want to know everything there is to know! There are things in the game world I, as the character and player, should have to figure out along the way.I mean, I will end up knowing everything anyway, since I'm the DM most of the time...but that should be cuz I'll have the DMG! Not because I or anyone can just turn to p. 67 in the PHB.In a game, even a "low magic" one, it should be clear that there are potions and scrolls (or at least, starting out, legends of such) in the game world, sure. My [certain] characters know or can learn how to use them and/or (eventually) make them. That understanding/assumption [in a fantasy genre game] should not include the rules for doing so.Not to mention it's bad for business for WotC if every table, really, would only need 1 copy of a PHB to play the game. Where're their sales numbers going then?! "Yeah, come to the game with Friday. Don't worry about never playing/not knowing anything. Jimmy's got the book. We just all reference his."At the very least...if you're going to combine stuff, wrap the starting/most common adversaries of the MM into the DMG and put out expansion monster books. Spells, traditionally, go in the PHB so the players know what they're casting. But, c'mon...you need at least TWO books! I could get over abandoning the "three book model", I suppose. I've got nothign against saving a few trees. But making the DMG an optional volume to play D&D?!?'ADNESS, I say. Sheer and utter 'adness. [Big Bang Theory reference. If you don't get it, don't worry about it. I think you get the gist of the post without it.]The DM as a superfluous guy[gal] whose only purpose is to roll stuff the PC's aren't doing, with no other authority or special/private knowledge of how something in the game might go down? That just a big no thanks.Boggles, I tell you...is there...we need a "boggles" smiley. I guess this'll do: <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/worried.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":-S" title="Uhm    :-S" data-shortname=":-S" />Happy Monday all. I, apparently, need another coffee...*rackin' fracka one book my shiny red mumble grumble racka frackin'...*</blockquote>

Verification