What would you rather see: core rulebook or traditional trilogy?

[foolish_mortals]

I'd like a duo-alogy. 2 books. A Players book and a Monster book. Should be able to play with just the P.book. The monsters you should be able to make up on the fly and it should be easy.

foolish_mortals

 

[Incenjucar]

Trilogy+1 here.

PHBs have what players need to know to generate and run characters.

DMGs have what a DM needs to develop and run adventures.

MMs have the creatures a DM can plug into an adventure, but only a few at a time.

Add in a Compendium for condensed rules for actual play, which should be all anyone actually needs for play.

As a DM who has to walk 20 minutes each way (and living in Seattle, the way back home is STEEP) to run the game, I am thrilled that we only ever need one tiny book at the table.

 

[TrippyHippy]

I think the necessity of Monster Manuals for the game, generally means there is always a split in the core rules to an extent. However, I would like a split between a (Basic*) Dungeons and Dragons Core Rules book, and an Advanced Dungeons and Dragons book.

So rather than the usual Players Handbook and Dungeon Masters' Guide, we'd split it up into a self contained, but streamlined system (about 200 pages or less) and the next book (350 Pages or whatever) would Advance the game with more complex rules options, more Classes, Races, etc.

In fact, if they want to go the whole multi-rulebook option like 4th edition they could make the Advanced Rules a series - Advanced D&D 1, Advanced D&D 2, etc..

In the Basic Dungeons and Dragons rules, I would include 4 Races (Human, Halfling, Dwarf, Elf) and about 10 Classes (say, Barbarian, Fighter, Wizard, Rogue, Cleric, Monk, Druid, Ranger, Bard, Paladin**). Magic for Wizards would be based upon the Vancian magic system, but there would only be limited lists. There would be a list of about 12-20 skills or so, and a rudimentary system for Feats. No tactical options for combat, or references to a grid. Classes might only go up to Level 10 say. Maybe a brief introduction to the history of the game, an introduction to the fantasy genre in general and a lot of focus on tayloring the game to relative beginners and/or games who like to keep it simple.

The Advanced rules would obviously build on this in different directions, but would all be optional.

* Although you could also have an even more basic version of the game - in a Box Set.
** I would consider another magic using class - my preference is for a Witch - as it provides another clear fantasy archetype and also, in some ways encourages female participation.

 

[trancejeremy]

I would like to see the trilogy kept, sort of.

But what I would do is break up the DM's Guide into a general GM's guide, and one that is more attuned to the setting in question (and combine that with the monster manual).

I mean, flipping through the 1st ed AD&D DMG you have stuff like NPC personalities, qualities of gems, mental illness, discussion of alignment, how monsters/dungeons adapt to PCs coming back after a week, tips on wilderness or underwater adventures. Just sort of general advice.

OTOH, you have more game related stuff that is probably more tied into the setting of the game you're playing. Nobility, types of mercenaries, magic items, commentary on spells, etc.

I would throw all that in with monsters into a book aimed at GMs for a given setting type.

That way you could basically make the books modular. Basically WOTC would publish alternate or parallel PHBs and DMGs that were attuned to a given setting or theme.

Like how 1st ed AD&D had Oriental Adventures - basically it was an alternate PHB. They also had something similar for Greyhawk and Dragonlance.

That way a player would only have to bring one book (the one with his class in it) to the game. And the DM would also have a corresponding book with both information relevant to the campaign as well as monsters. (The general GM advice book would probably be able to be left at home).

** I would consider another magic using class - my preference is for a Witch - as it provides another clear fantasy archetype and also, in some ways encourages female participation.

That has always been something that I've found D&D to be inexplicably lacking. It's common in basically all the source material that D&D was based on, from mythology to fantasy stories

 

[Raith5]

Rule Book and the PHB + DMG + MM

I cant help but think the resulting books are going to be rather long. Realistically, modularity that reaches out the various subgroups of D and D is going to take a fair amount of space. So I would like to see Rule Book with all the rules, a PH with 10 classes and 10 races. A DMG with advice for DMs and treasure/rituals.

 

[Nivenus]

Rule Book and the PHB + DMG + MM

I cant help but think the resulting books are going to be rather long. Realistically, modularity that reaches out the various subgroups of D and D is going to take a fair amount of space. So I would like to see Rule Book with all the rules, a PH with 10 classes and 10 races. A DMG with advice for DMs and treasure/rituals.

I could be wrong but I kind of took "modularity" to mean relatively slim core rulebooks with several optional rulebooks you could easily "opt-in." Adding things in seems easier than ignoring things you don't want - at least in my experience.

 

[Raith5]

I could be wrong but I kind of took "modularity" to mean relatively slim core rulebooks with several optional rulebooks you could easily "opt-in." Adding things in seems easier than ignoring things you don't want - at least in my experience.

Fair call. That is certainly an option - there could be a basic rule book with 4 classes and 4 races. It could be the case that the net could be cast wide in terms of covering various rules and options in the play testing.

 

[delericho]

I very much prefer the single Core Rulebook model.

Splitting the players-side and DM-side material is a good idea, but it has one major downside - it gives the designers loads of space to fill, and causes the game to bloat unreasonably. Even in the 3.0e Core Rulebooks, the game is already too complex, IMO.

So, go with a single Core Rulebook, and embrace the discipline that that forces on you. If you can't fit the entire game (with a small but representative set of monsters and magic items) into 250ish pages, it's too complex.

 

[Pour]

Honestly, I give more weight to the digital references. I am a DM that primarily DMs online or with the use of a computer. 8/10 times I'm looking up rules on the Compendium, developing sessions on Pages, developing campaigns on FreeMind, making maps on Photoshop and Illustrator, and getting inspired via the internet and PDFs. I'm building characters with the Builder, and designing my own content with Power2ool. So long as WotC sustain a digital presence, and certain fan developers support it, I'm open to the big, heavy Pathfinder-esque tome or the light, digestible 96-120 pages.

 

[delericho]

Honestly, I give more weight to the digital references. I am a DM that primarily DMs online or with the use of a computer. 8/10 times I'm looking up rules on the Compendium, developing sessions on Pages, developing campaigns on FreeMind, making maps on Photoshop and Illustrator, and getting inspired via the internet and PDFs. I'm building characters with the Builder, and designing my own content with Power2ool. So long as WotC sustain a digital presence, and certain fan developers support it, I'm open to the big, heavy Pathfinder-esque tome or the light, digestible 96-120 pages.

Can't XP you again, but I agree. Basically, everything should be available electronically.