Will You Count "Roman Numeral" Books As Core?

[Alnag]

The problem is - mobility. I know, lots of players plays at home or have a car to transport half of their library, but I refuse to travel with six or more books in backpack just because someone in WotC thinks, it is good marketing trick. It is lame trick. And it won't work for me.

I love SW Saga. It is one book. Small one. If I take it, some minis, maps, prepared materials it fit into my small backpack. I used to run DnD games with just PHB because I didn't want to travel with two additional books around.

Now if you have to have PHB, DMG, MM and probably Campaign Setting plus current (bought) adventure, that is five books already. Add another trio - of PHB 2, DMG 2, MM 2 or whatever and we have 8 books. That is simply not acceptable.

Good adventure might get you rid of MM (the monsters have stats in the description). It might get rid you of CS, because you can usually check the important things at home. That leaves you with DMG (the last one was horrible so I didn't use it at all) and PHB. Two or three books. That is just the right amount, one can manage. Not any more.

 

[loseth]

At the risk of stating the obvious, it depends what's in them. Thus, I can't really answer a poll with only yes/no options.

 

[Mercule]

I will adapt to WotC's terminology, so technically, I'll call them core. I just won't mean the same thing as I do now, so I answered "no".

In 3E, I was very careful with my terminology on what "core" meant. Twenty-level classes were "base classes". Prestige classes were prestige classes. A "core class" could be base or PrC, it just had to be in the PHB or DMG. I don't know what the term I'll use instead of "core" will be (probably "first generation"), but it'll include only the PHB1, DMG1, and MM1.

 

[ThirdWizard]

In 4e, everything Non-Setting specific is "Core" so... yes, obviously. I plan on using 4e nomenclature when playing 4e. Anything else, I think, would just be confusing. And, whenever anyone else uses the term "Core" I will expect them to be using the 4e terms and not their own opinion of what "Core" means to them. So, as much as people want to say "No the DMG II won't be Core!" Yes it will be, no matter what you would rather the truth be.

That doesn't mean you have to use it, though. Core has never meant required, and it won't start to have that meaning. Feel free to not use spells and magical items out of the first PHB. Heck, classes even if you don't like them. Toss 'em. That's fine. But, it doesn't mean those things are suddenly not Core any more than stuff in the PHB II isn't Core just because you don't want to use that stuff. That's just the way it is.

 

[IceFractal]

Yeah, I'll consider them "Core", to the extent that I care about what's "Core". IMO, the only thing "necessary" to play the system is the basic mechanics; the PHB classes are a good general selection, but they are no more "fundamental" than ones from the various expansions.

So making in/out decisions based on what book something was in has always felt like a hack to me - something to use when you're short on time, but for a long-running campaign material should be allowed or disallowed on its own merits.

 

[Flynn]

If their basic content is included in the SRD, I will consider it core. If it isn't added to the SRD, I will not.

I, too, am of this opinion. Or rather, ultimately, I will be of the "SRD is Core", and make my limitations from there (because I'm not a fan of psionics in my fantasy, as a matter of personal taste and gaming experience.)

Ultimately, I'll probably be of the "Core Three" philosophy, simply because of what will likely be in the SRD, assuming 3E is an example of what 4E will follow in terms of SRD updates.

But I hope I'm surprised about content updates from WOTC, despite their track record under 3E. I really do.

With Regards,
Flynn

 

[Varianor Abroad]

My largest concern is that the material in the later expansions will not be nearly as well tested as the original set, and problem rules will slip in through the cracks....

Given how much testing it appears the first three books will get (i.e. not much), this may not be so much of a concern. That said, what I think you're really saying, and I agree with, is the "book creep" phenomenon. Many later products from D&D 3.5 have considerably scaled up the powers from what was originally available. Not always in a positive way. So I would expect by the time PH VIIII comes out that the characters, feats and whatnot in that will excell compared to PH I.

All I see here is a continuum of play experience melded with a continuum of sales to me and my players. Sorry, I want to be able to pick and choose, and I want the players to have the same options. Yes, technically, it's still an option to buy or not, but it encourages strongly the feeling that you "have" to have everything to be complete.