|
9 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 1:07PM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Jan 10, 2012
|
so Gnomes are monsters, but not a player race? That' doesn't seem core to me.
Is that just a 4e cartoon or did gnomes not exist in 1e?
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 1:10PM
#22
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
so Gnomes are monsters, but not a player race? That' doesn't seem core to me.
Is that just a 4e cartoon or did gnomes not exist in 1e?
Gnomes were player races in the initial release of 1e and 3e, but not in the initial release of BECMI, 2e, or 4e. (Or OD&D.)
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 1:11PM
#23
|
|
|
At a certain point, what D&D needs is simply a robust mechanic to know how to hybrid races - and not a profusion and confusion of endless conflictive specifics.
Maybe it does and maybe it doesn't. But prior editions haven't, and it's the common threads between prior editions that we're talking about in this thread.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 1:17PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Jan 10, 2012
|
so Gnomes are monsters, but not a player race? That' doesn't seem core to me.
Is that just a 4e cartoon or did gnomes not exist in 1e?
Gnomes were player races in the initial release of 1e and 3e, but not in the initial release of BECMI, 2e, or 4e. (Or OD&D.)
Really, I'm looking at my 2e players handbook (original printing) and the gnome is there. What version of 2e are you talking about?
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 1:17PM
#25
|
|
|
At a certain point, what D&D needs is simply a robust mechanic to know how to hybrid races - and not a profusion and confusion of endless conflictive specifics.
Maybe it does and maybe it doesn't. But prior editions haven't, and it's the common threads between prior editions that we're talking about in this thread.
Sure, but the designers dont plan to simply copy-and-past texts from previous systems to frankenstein them into a monstrously self-conflicting 5e system. The plan is to make the authentic “feel” of previous editions possible, within a well-functioning 5e system.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 1:19PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
At a certain point, what D&D needs is simply a robust mechanic to know how to hybrid races - and not a profusion and confusion of endless conflictive specifics.
This is worth making a thread about.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 1:27PM
#27
|
|
|
I disagree with thespaceinvader about all mechanics being core. A game designer could come up with a mechanic for determining how slippery a surface is, but I really don't think that mechanic should be considered "core"
I like crazy_monkey's conception of "core". I consider the original 3 rulebooks for each edition to be the "core" of the game.
I like the idea of a hybrid-race mechanic. In 4e there are half human, half-elves and half-human, half-orcs. Why not a human-eladrin or an elf-eladrin or a human-dwarf mix? However, I agree with the TheCosmicKid that this diverts from crazy_monkeys key question.
I (like several other posters) would be very interested to know what weapons, equipment, magic items...etc are common between the "core" of the various editions.
What we really need is someone with access to all the original rulebooks who can do a thorough analysis of common elements. (I'm not that person.)
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 1:44PM
#28
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
so Gnomes are monsters, but not a player race? That' doesn't seem core to me.
Is that just a 4e cartoon or did gnomes not exist in 1e?
Gnomes were player races in the initial release of 1e and 3e, but not in the initial release of BECMI, 2e, or 4e. (Or OD&D.)
Really, I'm looking at my 2e players handbook (original printing) and the gnome is there. What version of 2e are you talking about?
Ooop! My bad. Gnomes are in the initial release of 1e, 2e, and 3e, but not BECMI or 4e (or OD&D).
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 1:52PM
#29
|
- VCL Emeritus
- The Inquisitor
|
I disagree with thespaceinvader about all mechanics being core. A game designer could come up with a mechanic for determining how slippery a surface is, but I really don't think that mechanic should be considered "core"
I like crazy_monkey's conception of "core". I consider the original 3 rulebooks for each edition to be the "core" of the game.
I like the idea of a hybrid-race mechanic. In 4e there are half human, half-elves and half-human, half-orcs. Why not a human-eladrin or an elf-eladrin or a human-dwarf mix? However, I agree with the TheCosmicKid that this diverts from crazy_monkeys key question.
I (like several other posters) would be very interested to know what weapons, equipment, magic items...etc are common between the "core" of the various editions.
What we really need is someone with access to all the original rulebooks who can do a thorough analysis of common elements. (I'm not that person.)
I am that person in that I have all of the core rulebooks (well, except OD&D and Homes/Moldvay Basic). I am not that person in that such an endeavor would take a lot of time (which I don't have). 
In going through the monsters, I was actually quite surprised at just how many are present in all editions. 2nd Edition had, by far, the most eclectic collection of creatures, but the Monstrous Manual was released four years in to the edition, with monster products prior to that being in the form of 3-ring binder pages.
Quentin Small
WotC Online Community Coordinator
All around helpful simian
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 2:08PM
#30
|
|
|
I wasn't thinking of you crazy_monkey.
I have the opposite problem; time but very few books.
Your second comment points to another wrinkle. The initial rulebooks aren't as well defined for the other edtions as they are for 1e, 3e, 3.5e and 4e (I'm not considering 4e essentials as a separate edition).
|
|
|
