"Base" D&D

35 posts / 0 new
Last post
There's still a lot of confusion about what "core" will mean in 4th Edition; WotC has stated:
Wizards of the Coast wrote:
The meaning of "core" will include expansions and D&D Insider materials, not just the first three books, when referred to by WotC.

Hence, I propose a new term to refer to the first incarnations of each of the 4E Player's Handbook, the Dungeon Master's Guide, and the Monster Manual: "Base D&D"

For definition's sake:
Base D&D = PHB1, DMG1, and MM1
Core D&D = Base D&D, plus any non-variant WotC published 4E expansions, source- & splat-books, and D&D Insider materials.
Non-core D&D = D&D which includes any of the following:
- Homebrew material;
- Setting-specific material;
- D&D material published by companies other than WotC (eg: Green Ronin publications);
- Material designed for games other than D&D, regardless of publisher (eg: material from Star Wars Saga Edition);
- Variant material or rules (eg: material similar to Unearthed Arcana in 3.5E).

Thoughts? Comments? I appreciate any input!

And yes, I am just looking to coin a new term!
There's still a lot of confusion about what "core" will mean in 4th Edition; WotC has stated:

Hence, I propose a new term to refer to the first incarnations of each of the 4E Player's Handbook, the Dungeon Master's Guide, and the Monster Manual: "Base D&D"

For definition's sake:
Base D&D = PHB1, DMG1, and MM1
Core D&D = Base D&D, plus any non-variant WotC published 4E expansions, source- & splat-books, and D&D Insider materials.
Non-core D&D = D&D which includes any of the following:
- Homebrew material;
- D&D material published by companies other than WotC (eg: Green Ronin publications);
- Material designed for games other than D&D, regardless of publisher (eg: material from Star Wars Saga Edition);
- Variant material or rules (eg: material similar to Unearthed Arcana in 3.5E).

Thoughts? Comments? I appreciate any input!

And yes, I am just looking to coin a new term!

I am assuming that by Homebrew you mean the different campaign setting also?
I like it.

Bel
Originally Posted by WotC_RichBaker In related news, I'm afraid I'm going to have to confiscate your 3.5 rulebooks, and force you to convert to the new edition. Where do you live?
Also non-core: Setting Specific Material.
Our group has always just called the 3 main books "Absolute Core". I think we will stick with that.
'Base' sounds about as good a name for the first three D&D books that I can think of. 'Essential' D&D is a possibility. There's also 'Fundamental' D&D, but that term may have its own issues.
But now WotC will announce that "Base" includes all supplements as well ;)
But now WotC will announce that "Base" includes all supplements as well ;)

All of your supplements belong to Base! :D
I believe this is exactly what WotC was against when they announced there is more to Core than the first three books.
Dismissing everything but the Big Three as negligible/ignorable/irrelevant is a direct insult to the devs.
Dismissing everything but the Big Three as negligible/ignorable/irrelevant is a direct insult to the devs.

I intend no disrespect to anyone involved in the development process; I love D&D, and I appreciate immensely the effort that everyone at WotC puts into producing this game that I enjoy so much.

However, I disagree with your assertion that dismissing products beyond the base set is insulting. My logic is based on WotC's assertion that D&D Insider materials will not be required to play 4E D&D and the assumption that, as in previous editions, only the three primary books - Base D&D - will be absolutely necessary to play the game effectively.

Thus, I add another definition of Base D&D:
Base D&D = the minimum products officially required to play D&D

Our definition of "core" in 4E already includes material that will be optional (D&D Insider). Hence the need for a new term: Base D&D.
However, I disagree with your assertion that dismissing products beyond the base set is insulting. My logic is based on WotC's assertion that D&D Insider materials will not be required to play 4E D&D and the assumption that, as in previous editions, only the three primary books - Base D&D - will be absolutely necessary to play the game effectively.

Maybe your point isn't, but I have seen hundreds of posts on this community about "everything outside of core is useless", "I only let core in my games" and "You have to be a fool to let the complete books in your games"*... Those are the insults I am referring to, and by redefining core I think the devs are trying to avoid.



*I'm guilty of that one to a degree myself, I believe the Complete books have a different base power level than any other set of books and only allow them in games dominated by options from the Complete books.
Maybe your point isn't, but I have seen hundreds of posts on this community about "everything outside of core is useless", "I only let core in my games" and "You have to be a fool to let the complete books in your games"*... Those are the insults I am referring to, and by redefining core I think the devs are trying to avoid.

Unfortunately, I think you're completely correct on this account, LoN, though I'm just as guilty as you are (as I'm sure most informed DMs have been at one time or another).

Take heart! On the positive side, product rejection by the customer base is a strong motivator to produce quality products, and I think few would disagree that balance is one major indicator of quality in D&D materials. Hopefully, the ongoing pursuit of our money is motivation enough to edit their products carefully.

I still think "Base D&D" is a great term. Take it, and use it wisely!
I still think "Base D&D" is a great term. Take it, and use it wisely!

I prefer the term Big 3, but thats just me. >,>;;
I prefer the term Big 3, but thats just me. >,>;;

Start your own thread, then :P lol
Dismissing everything but the Big Three as negligible/ignorable/irrelevant is a direct insult to the devs.

I would have to disagree. Many roleplaying games require only one book to play, and often that one book is much cheaper than any D&D book. It is perfectly reasonable to assume that we should be able to play a fun, balanced, and interesting game with "only" three books worth of rules. If you honestly feel guilty about not buying one of the supplemental books, then I have to tell you about this amazing bridge I'm selling, and how I will feel very insulted if you just dismiss it. ;)
I would have to disagree. Many roleplaying games require only one book to play, and often that one book is much cheaper than any D&D book. It is perfectly reasonable to assume that we should be able to play a fun, balanced, and interesting game with "only" three books worth of rules. If you honestly feel guilty about not buying one of the supplemental books, then I have to tell you about this amazing bridge I'm selling, and how I will feel very insulted if you just dismiss it. ;)

Thats not want I am saying. Not using the books and even not buying them is fine if thats what you want, but flat out insulting the expanded material as useless/broken/stupid is what I am commenting on.
As irritated as I am with WotC (put out a gazillion supplements, then cheerfully obsolete them all and make a new cycle), they're not the only ones guilty of this.

Palladium, Rifts especially, has a MINDBOGGLING amount of books out there.
Two words: White Wolf.
*hopes the board folks will ignore the targeted game company comments and not lock the thread*

No worries, keep playing 3.5 for a couple more years to get more use out of your books. Then when you are comfortable having put the proper mileage on your collection, try out 4E.
They keep saying that world. I do not think it means what they think it means.
PHB1 DMG1 MM1 = Hard Core
PHB# DMG# MM# = Soft Core
Everything Else = Delicious Chewy nougat
PHB1 DMG1 MM1 = Hard Core
PHB# DMG# MM# = Soft Core
Everything Else = Delicious Chewy nougat

That just sounds soooo dirty. \(O_o)/

I like this breakdown:

PHb/DMG/MM = Basic D&D (All that is needed to play)
Rest of the PHB/DMG/MM line = Core D&D (Easily added for fun and profit)
Everything Else = Advanced D&D (Don't use it without a little research)

...

Yay! for resurrecting old terminology for a new purpose!
I prefer the term Big 3

Ah, the Kenyan (safari) way.
Ah, the Kenyan (safari) way.

zmog*, i devise a new opinion of what things should be called and you quote my old idea >,>;; this is disconcerting.
zmog*, i devise a new opinion of what things should be called and you quote my old idea >,>;; this is disconcerting.

Was your old idea in Swahili?
Was your old idea in Swahili?

No, it was in my own derived language of hand gestures, guttural clicks and typed gibberish. Sometimes it comes across as painfully short posts in English. >,>;;
No, it was in my own derived language of hand gestures, guttural clicks and typed gibberish. Sometimes it comes across as painfully short posts in English. >,>;;

Sort of like the Fremen Battle language?
Sort of like the Fremen Battle language?

Yeah, but not as coherent.
How about we just keep using core and don't accept WotC's attempt to take control of our language by making it meaningless.
How about we just keep using core and don't accept WotC's attempt to take control of our language by making it meaningless.

Thats gonna be hard to do, Core is a D&D jargon term. WotC defined its older terminology as per D&D. It means what WotC wants it to mean within the confines of D&D 4th-edition and no amount of clinging on to nostalgia can change that. They are not taking our language, they are redefining the one jargon of the game, whcih they have every right to do so.
So you're trying to tell me that the term `core' is now the property of WotC? Pfft.

They've got every right to muck around with language and try and make words mean something they don't, and conversely we have every right to consider them manipulative ****wits deserving of no respect for trying to abuse useful language, and keep referring to core books as core books, and extra books as non-core.
So you're trying to tell me that the term `core' is now the property of WotC? Pfft.

In reference to D&D, it is. Its a Trademark.

They've got every right to muck around with language and try and make words mean something they don't, and conversely we have every right to consider them manipulative ****wits deserving of no respect for trying to abuse useful language, and keep referring to core books as core books, and extra books as non-core.

The reimaging of the meaning of the word core is to knock ****-poor DM's out of the CORE-ONLY ZMOG! RHAAAARHG! mindset. Just because options found in the Basics of D&D not only doens't mean its better than anything else, it does not mean its balanced either... Natural Spell anyone?

Where is this anger coming from? I understand the grieving/acceptance process has anger as a step, but damn, letting words, vernacular and jargon **** you off, really? Why are you so mad?
The only problem with calling them whatever you want, and especially using old edition language, is that all the new books will use their new terms. New players may become confused, and it might send you reaching for the wrong book.
Beside that, go ahead and buy your base books.
All your base are belong to us.
Give me your books.
So you're trying to tell me that the term `core' is now the property of WotC? Pfft.

They've got every right to muck around with language and try and make words mean something they don't, and conversely we have every right to consider them manipulative ****wits deserving of no respect for trying to abuse useful language, and keep referring to core books as core books, and extra books as non-core.

I hope then that your ok going out with things like Bards, Gnomes and Frost Giants in your game by sticking strictly to "core", because the devs are intentually spreading some of the more popular Monsters, Magic Items, Races, and Classes amoung all the PHBs, DMGs, and MMs and various supplements so you will HAVE to accept the new meaning of core to play D&D with all the goodies and badies your used to.

see http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4pod/20071005e16 minute 2:00 of the Podcast .......
Dismissing everything but the Big Three as negligible/ignorable/irrelevant is a direct insult to the devs.

They can take it. What do they expect?
They can take it. What do they expect?

Just because they can, does not mean they should have to.
Sign In to post comments