PDA

View Full Version : RULES Compendium?!



Khoran
2007-07-06, 06:42 AM
So, WoTC is really grasping at all roots to come out with a new book. This morning, I saw something about a Rules Compendium. Now, maybe I'm wrong, but did I buy this when I bought the Player's Handbook and DM's Guide? I understand the business needs to make money, but how many new rules are there that it merits a whole new book?

Anyone else this is a bit desperate of WoTC?

Tormsskull
2007-07-06, 06:46 AM
Anyone else this is a bit desperate of WoTC?

Well, there are a lot of rules changes to be honest, but yeah, it is kind of an underhanded way to squeeze more money out of the consumers. The best thing to do is just make your own house rules when you run into issues in the core books, then write them down, and you won't have to spend another $20 or $30 each time WotC decides to push more material at you.

Dausuul
2007-07-06, 07:01 AM
Well, there are a lot of rules changes to be honest, but yeah, it is kind of an underhanded way to squeeze more money out of the consumers. The best thing to do is just make your own house rules when you run into issues in the core books, then write them down, and you won't have to spend another $20 or $30 each time WotC decides to push more material at you.

Eh, it depends on how much money one has to spend and how much time and effort one wants to put into remembering errata and making house rules. Besides, if you have players coming in and out of your group a lot, it might be nice to be able to say, "Okay, we're using variants X, Y, and Z from the Rules Compendium" instead of having to list off all the house rules.

'Course, it could also be a clever way for WotC to implement a new edition (3.75?) without making existing stuff officially obsolete.

TranquilRage
2007-07-06, 07:43 AM
You have to remember this is the company that managed to invert the relationship of "Power and Rarity define value" to "Value defines power and rarity". They screwed the game they created (MtG) in the search for bigger profits. Don't be surprised if they do the same to D&D.

Dausuul
2007-07-06, 07:58 AM
You have to remember this is the company that managed to invert the relationship of "Power and Rarity define value" to "Value defines power and rarity". They screwed the game they created (MtG) in the search for bigger profits. Don't be surprised if they do the same to D&D.

Define "screwed."

If you ask me, WotC was the best thing to happen to D&D in a long time. For all my beefs with the game as it exists today--and God knows I have a lot of them!--it's a hell of an improvement over 2E.

Kurald Galain
2007-07-06, 08:07 AM
Remember how TSR used to hunt down fansites with cease-and-desist orders? That says it all really.

Dausuul
2007-07-06, 09:03 AM
Remember how TSR used to hunt down fansites with cease-and-desist orders? That says it all really.

Sorry, I'm not clear--are you agreeing that WotC is an improvement over TSR, or suggesting that WotC will adopt the same tactics?

sikyon
2007-07-06, 09:08 AM
You have to remember this is the company that managed to invert the relationship of "Power and Rarity define value" to "Value defines power and rarity". They screwed the game they created (MtG) in the search for bigger profits. Don't be surprised if they do the same to D&D.

Actually, general consensus is that the current magic sets are some of the best. Ravnica was amazing actually. Though truth be told, the mirridion was wayyyyy too powerful and kamigawa was lackluster.

Also, I don't understand your statement. Power and Rarity DO define value. Powerful and relativly rare cards, such as dual lands, command high prices.

OzymandiasVolt
2007-07-06, 09:10 AM
It's a rules compendium.

It is not power creep.

It is not a required purchase. (Many people don't seem to grasp this concept)

STOP WHINING.

Reinboom
2007-07-06, 09:17 AM
Remember, at its heart, WotC -is- a business. Businesses live by money. Money is made by consumers purchasing products. There is a bit of a circle that eventually forms in this, and to me it's a "I don't care". If I like the book, I'll buy it. If I don't, I won't.
If the book is a quick rules reference only, well, I have other books that I need to get first (Quite a few of the complete series, MiC, MM2, and some others). If it is an optional rules compendium... well... I don't even own unearthed arcana yet (er, except the infamous AD&D one).


Actually, general consensus is that the current magic sets are some of the best. Ravnica was amazing actually. Though truth be told, the mirridion was wayyyyy too powerful and kamigawa was lackluster.

Something that should be noticed as well, wizards recovers themselves by printing bad while looking at what they did wrong.
Mercadian Masques, notably Prophecy, was quite lackluster. It had its few goodies (Lin Sivvi, Rishadan Port), but otherwise was yucky. Now look at the following set: Invasion. Awesome.

In these comparisons, Wizards appears more like a living entity to me, learning constantly, developing and fixing. It has to be careful on power because, although it appeals for money, money is from players- who play. Yeah.
On the other hand, I think they should apply a lot more of their research and knowledge between departments. D&D could use a LOT of the MtG player analysis typing.

Fax Celestis
2007-07-06, 10:37 AM
D&D is harder to use player-analysis on, though, because people play D&D differently everywhere. It's kinda hard to play M:tG differently: if you do, you're not playing M:tG, you're playing something else that happens to use the same cards.

However, D&D is built around the premise that the rules don't always handle everything and that they're not always the best method--and so you should change them to suit your needs. That's why the base mechanic is so simple: d20+Mods. If the base mechanic didn't have a baseline or if it were more complex, it'd be vastly more difficult to come up with a ruling on the fly. "I'm falling off a cliff, but I want to push off the wall and land on the back of the dragon that's gliding away. What do I roll, DM?" Totally not covered in the rules, but in D&D, situations like this can--and do--happen.

In M:tG, where the game is scripted according to what cards are available, there is a finite--albeit growing--number of interactions between the cards, and WotC only has to deal with the ones that break the game. In D&D, there is an infinite number of possibilities that could happen during gameplay (d20 modern character in feudal Japan; giant fish in bear suits attack Greyhawk; the PCs realize they're in a game; elves invent soda; dwarves invent nuclear physics; halflings invent kender), and it is quite literally impossible to prepare for--or even analyze--them all.

Keiichi
2007-07-06, 10:59 AM
"Tired of hauling all of your D&D rules supplements to the gaming table? Having trouble finding the rule you need? The Rules Compendium supplement takes all of the game's most important rules and presents them in a single comprehensive, easy-to-reference volume for players and Dungeon Masters. In addition to presenting the rules of the game, the Rules Compendium incorporates official errata as well as behind-the-scenes designer and developer commentary explaining how the rules system has evolved and why certain rules work the way they do."

Cut from the WotC page. not too bad in my opinion, it's not needed, doesn't introduce anything really new all it is is something for A) ease of use, B) collectors, and C) to squeeze a little bit of cash in. If people want to buy it for collections or lazies sake, hell why not? If Wizards can capitalize on the lazy gamers and rule layers good on them.

Quietus
2007-07-06, 11:28 AM
If the base mechanic didn't have a baseline or if it were more complex, it'd be vastly more difficult to come up with a ruling on the fly. "I'm falling off a cliff, but I want to push off the wall and land on the back of the dragon that's gliding away. What do I roll, DM?"

Slightly off-topic, but I'm curious here - what do you think this WOULD be? I'm thinking either a Tumble check to aim where you're trying to land, and maybe a Climb or Balance check to stay on the dragon's back - which it could then throw you off with a grapple?

Fax Celestis
2007-07-06, 11:35 AM
Slightly off-topic, but I'm curious here - what do you think this WOULD be? I'm thinking either a Tumble check to aim where you're trying to land, and maybe a Climb or Balance check to stay on the dragon's back - which it could then throw you off with a grapple?

Jump check to push off the mountain. Strength check to grab hold of the dragon. Climb check to maintain hold. Fortitude save to avoid broken bones. Opposed grapple to avoid being thrown off.

Jayabalard
2007-07-06, 01:55 PM
Anyone else this is a bit desperate of WoTC?No, it's pretty standard for WoTC....it's just how they do business.

Jimmy Discordia
2007-07-06, 02:10 PM
Well, remember when TSR (toward the end of their reign, if memory serves) was putting out huge compendia of every spell and magic item ever detailed for AD&D 2E? Wayyyy more stuff than your average gamer could ever possibly want to use, but I still thought it was really cool to have access to all of it, so I bought it. Granted, this is a little different from a "Rules Compendium" (one imagines a lot fewer superfluous/narrowly-focused/campaign-specific entries, for instance), but still, some people (me) are going to think "Lots of info in one place? IT MUST BE MINE!!!"

Kurald Galain
2007-07-06, 02:13 PM
Sorry, I'm not clear--are you agreeing that WotC is an improvement over TSR, or suggesting that WotC will adopt the same tactics?

The former.

Oh and yeah, what the other poster said about the TSR spell compendiums. Not to mention the skills & powers / spells & magic sourcebooks that were mainly intended to up the power level and have people buy it for that reason.

Nobody's forcing you to buy any of this. You can get by quite well from the 2nd edition books plus d20srd dot org.

Justin_Bacon
2007-07-06, 02:16 PM
So, WoTC is really grasping at all roots to come out with a new book. This morning, I saw something about a Rules Compendium. Now, maybe I'm wrong, but did I buy this when I bought the Player's Handbook and DM's Guide? I understand the business needs to make money, but how many new rules are there that it merits a whole new book? Anyone else this is a bit desperate of WoTC?

It really depends on what's in there. There have, in fact, been lots of rules published in the supplements.

If this is just a repackaging of some subset of material from the PHB and DMG, then, yeah, it's a ridiculous waste of time.

But if it packages together the rules from a large number of disparate sourcebooks, then it could very easily be worth the cover price.

Kizara
2007-07-06, 02:23 PM
Jump check to push off the mountain. Strength check to grab hold of the dragon. Climb check to maintain hold. Fortitude save to avoid broken bones. Opposed grapple to avoid being thrown off.

Melee touch attack to grab the dragon (which is including your Str mod).
:)
I also think having a climb to maintain hold AND a grapple is overkill. Just roll the grapple, since its just basically a charge (like a dive) unto the dragon. And there's no mechanic in RAW that says you have to save vs "broken bones" from large falls.
You could fall an infinate distance and still take 20d6 damage.

/ruleslawyering

EDIT: So in my version, its only 3 checks:
1) Jump to push off from the cliff and get enough distance to contact the dragon.
2) Dragon gets AoO, and you make a melee touch attack and you count as charging. (+2 attack, -2 AC)
3) Make opposed grapple checks to establish and maintain hold.

:) Simple is better.

TheGreatJabu
2007-07-06, 02:35 PM
Seems fair enough to me. If there are plenty of people who now consider the Complete series to be "core", so that means that the rules for D&D are spread out over 6-8 books total. It'll drastically speed up gameplay for people who own and play by all those books.

Granted, I'm stubborn and cheap, so IRL I don't play using any Complete. No Rules Compendium for me. :smallamused:

Neek
2007-07-06, 03:07 PM
I'm not sure what's different. That they release books with broken prestige classes and fluff that'll provide little use over all, or coming out with a book that's solely dedicated to crunch?

The effectiveness of this book will be determined by what it covers. If it gives clear distinctions and ideas on how to create on the fly DC checks, what skills and DCs to set, and give a number of good examples, while also filled wit a lot of open gaming content, it might be worth the money. It's probably going to be cheaper than most expansions, because it's just a rules coverage.

Right now, Rules Compendium doesn't seem any more a waste of money than Complete Champion. And even then, not having it won't make the game unplayable.

jamroar
2007-07-06, 03:36 PM
Seems fair enough to me. If there are plenty of people who now consider the Complete series to be "core", so that means that the rules for D&D are spread out over 6-8 books total. It'll drastically speed up gameplay for people who own and play by all those books.

Granted, I'm stubborn and cheap, so IRL I don't play using any Complete. No Rules Compendium for me. :smallamused:

A "Best of D&D Supplements" compendium is a completely reasonable and useful addition. It's just that from the vague description of it's contents, it could turn out to be no more than a "Complete Errata" and "The Making of D&D 3.5", which would be an utter gyp.

Fax Celestis
2007-07-06, 03:39 PM
A "Best of D&D Supplements" compendium is a completely reasonable and useful addition. It's just that from the vague description of it's contents, it could turn out to be no more than a "Complete Errata" and "The Making of D&D 3.5", which would be an utter gyp.

This is what reading the book in Barnes and Noble prior to purchase is for.

TheDarkOne
2007-07-06, 03:49 PM
If any modifications to existing rules published in new books are provided in the official wotc errata then I don't have any problem with the compendium books. Not updating the official errata is like a company selling a video game that has significant bugs in it, and then charging people for the patches to fix these bugs. It's my understanding that wizards isn't updating the official errata any more, which is kind of annoying.

TheGreatJabu
2007-07-06, 04:03 PM
It's just that from the vague description of it's contents, it could turn out to be no more than a "Complete Errata" and "The Making of D&D 3.5", which would be an utter gyp.

Hahaha! "Complete Errata". I'm going to be quoting you on that sooner or later; that was beautiful. :smallbiggrin:

Damionte
2007-07-06, 04:19 PM
Sorry, I'm not clear--are you agreeing that WotC is an improvement over TSR, or suggesting that WotC will adopt the same tactics?

I'm saying they're an improvement.

I really don't have any problem with the recent releases except for the timing on some of them.

I can forsee maybe 2-3 more 3.5 rules books. The last complete Book, and a hard bound errata book covering all of the others. Maybe a new Epic Handbook. Or a new planar handbook.

Aside from that there's nothign left to do with the basic rules other than campaign specifics.

After that they can focus on advenutres which at this point si all many of us need.

I don't forsee a need for a 4.0 edition anytime in the next decade. No 3.5 is not perfect but it's good enough. I can play with the current rules from here on out and won't need to update at all.

I would pay though for a yearly gazeter in a floppyback format. A collection of Feats, Spells, Monsters and abilities that come out in all of the adventures, and dungeon/Dragon magazines for the year.

Dragonmuncher
2007-07-06, 04:36 PM
My knee-jerk reaction was "What!? How DARE they!?!"

But then I thought about how every supplement had a few new rules- class variants, new uses for skills, and the like.

I don't really see how it can be a full fledged, stand-alone book, though.

Maybe if they include errata on EVERY 3.5 book published thus far, include EVERY extra little ruling, and a whole bunch of behind the scenes info... I'd be willing to let my friend buy it. Maybe.

No, you know what, I'll be generous. My friend can buy it, definitely.

Kurald Galain
2007-07-06, 05:30 PM
I can forsee maybe 2-3 more 3.5 rules books. The last complete Book, and a hard bound errata book covering all of the others.

You know, this got me thinking... in order for the Fourth Edition to be economically viable, it'd probably need some significant changes from the third edition - otherwise it'll just be 3.75 ed and many long-term players will ignore it or just download the changelog. I'm kind of wondering what stuff they'll change to other stuff.

Quietus
2007-07-06, 05:31 PM
Jump check to push off the mountain. Strength check to grab hold of the dragon. Climb check to maintain hold. Fortitude save to avoid broken bones. Opposed grapple to avoid being thrown off.

The jump check I can see - I'm sure I'd let a player talk me into that. Seems just as reasonable as tumble given the scenario. I was considering the grapple before in place of the climb check - was kind of a tough call. But a strength check to grab hold? Why not just include that in the grapple (touch attack)? And while I'm all for bringing in simple realism on the fly, a fort save vs broken bones? Isn't that already covered in the damage you take for falling, and the potential for a save vs massive damage if you fall far enough?

Fax Celestis
2007-07-06, 06:18 PM
I was thinking broken bones resulting from having your arms pulled out of their sockets as you go from downwards momentum to horizontal momentum. I didn't use a grapple check since you're not trying to pin the dragon, just grab on--and it seemed silly for the dragon's large grapple modifier due to size to be a bad thing in this case. However, if it wants to shake you off later, opposed grapples at that point work.

Starsinger
2007-07-06, 06:31 PM
I really hope it'll contain all the updates for skills from various supplements, because man is it obnoxious to run around asking, "which book had the rules for using tumble for avoiding attacks of opportunity?" Bad example, I know, but I couldn't come up with a better one at the moment. Especially since that will help people who don't have splat books, but want rules written by Wizard (some people have a thing about house rules...) for using skills to do things the PHB doesn't have rules for.

But what else is gonna be in it? But if it's anything like Magic Item Compendium, I'll love it. Somewhat unrelated, but is there supposed to be a Feat Compendium coming out?

Fax Celestis
2007-07-06, 07:25 PM
But what else is gonna be in it? But if it's anything like Magic Item Compendium, I'll love it. Somewhat unrelated, but is there supposed to be a Feat Compendium coming out?

There is. It's called Dandello (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/).

Overlord
2007-07-07, 12:19 AM
It's probably going to be cheaper than most expansions, because it's just a rules coverage.



http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/215397200

Nope. It's $26.95.

Fantastic. Its' probably worth half of that.



After that they can focus on advenutres which at this point is all many of us need.

Yeah! They could release a monthly magazine that had 3 D&D 3.5 adventures in every issue, along with a few articles of advice for DMs!

Oh wait....


Now, I'm not saying that WotC isn't an improvement over the later days of TSR. They are. They've brought a lot of great things to gaming over the years: D&D 3.5, the Open Gaming License and SRD, fresh new gameplay mechanics, and the revival of D&D as a whole.

But they've also screwed up several things: not getting D&D 3.0 right the first time, pulling the teeth out of DM arbitration, and now, in the last two years, they've steadily been releasing supplements that stink more and more of garbage. The first two don't irritate me that much, but the last one is extremely grating. And of course, let's not forget the fact that they cancelled two classic pieces of gaming history, only because they weren't getting enough money from the deal. The company's sheer hubris is astounding. Sooner or later, Hasbro's going to decide that D&D isn't making enough money to support its own weight, and they're going to do something about it. They're going to start releasing even more money grybbing supplements, release D&D 4.0 sans Open Gaming Content clause, in an attempt to drive sales from 3rd party companies to their own products, or sell the D&D license to one of those companies. Should they sell it, and Paizo can buy it, the whole industry, not to mention gamers, will benefit. Paizo is going in the right direction. Monte Cook is too, but Malhavoc certainly doesn't have enough money to afford the license. In fact, I'm bettign that the only companies in the current market who could afford to buy the license would be White Wolf, Paizo, or maybe Green Ronin (aside from the other non-D20 publishing companies).

Dragonfoxfly
2007-07-07, 02:29 AM
I don't know, it does seem a bit odd to make a rule compendium, desperate even. I think they are really running out of ideas and sooner or later will have to end with D&D (maybe they will first publish 4.0 and postpone the unescapable end for another 3-5 years). Maybe there will be more desperate attepts to make money, such as when they make 4.0, not including an SRD or making more of those compendiums.

I hope they sell is, then we can all keep buying first party stuff AND enjoy the luxary and greatness most of the WoTC books have long lost.

Kurald Galain
2007-07-07, 09:44 AM
But they've also screwed up several things: ... pulling the teeth out of DM arbitration, ... And of course, let's not forget the fact that they cancelled two classic pieces of gaming history

What do you mean by pulling the teeth out?

As for cancelling, I assume that one of them is Dragon magazine? What is the other?

Attilargh
2007-07-07, 10:15 AM
Probably Dungeon, the sister magazine of Dragon.


I was thinking broken bones resulting from having your arms pulled out of their sockets as you go from downwards momentum to horizontal momentum.
Why would a character have to roll to avoid broken bones if he grabs a dargon, but not if he lands on it?

Fax Celestis
2007-07-07, 10:16 AM
Because he'd take falling damage depending on how far he fell, which I forgot to note.

TomTheRat
2007-07-07, 05:35 PM
I'm kind of amazed that people aren't getting behind a book that jams all of the errata, updates and rules into the same place.

It seems like a great idea to me. My group doesn't exactly have all the erratas and whatnot printed out for easy reference.

Khoran
2007-07-07, 06:44 PM
I'm kind of amazed that people aren't getting behind a book that jams all of the errata, updates and rules into the same place.

It seems like a great idea to me. My group doesn't exactly have all the erratas and whatnot printed out for easy reference.
For me, it's rather simple. I don't want to have to buy errata. If the book offered something else besides errata (which I am pretty confident it doesn't), I might consider buying it.

my_evil_twin
2007-07-07, 08:35 PM
If the book is well indexed and cross-referenced, I might give it a chance. Right now there are rules I know are in the core books, but don't even know how to begin looking for.

TheOOB
2007-07-07, 08:55 PM
If you have the money to spare I could see this book being useful for the same reason the spell compendium is useful, it gathers all I need on one paticular subject into one book so I don't have to leaf through fifty books, and updates it.

I probably won't buy it, but I can see why some people would. If WotC wants to make money by publishing stuff they allready published, good for them, maybe that will get them enough scratch to make the next ToB or something.