I've had this question kicking around my head for a while now. What is "offical" D&D to you? Is there such thing?
I used to play a lot of warhammer and in that scene it's pretty obvious that what's in the rulebook IS the rules. No-one would expect someone to deviate from the RAW in warhammer, though playing contrary to their spirit for advantage is another thing entirely ;)
But among many D&D players there is and always has been a strong sense of "if you don't like something in the book, don't use it." This makes it hard for people to transfer their PCs from one DM to another, or to play competitively. The way the game is written the DM is a tyrant who is free to ignore anything they feel like. But at the same time there are hundreds of rulebooks (including 3rd party books) and things like Dragon and Dungeon available to be plundered.
So I'm just interested to know. If someone were to ask me where the official, unchangeable rules for D&D are to be found I'd honestly have to say there aren't any. The game is designed to be tailored to each group. I guess the PHB, DMG and MMs are pretty universal, but no-one says you have to use them either. You can drastically alter the PHB etc and still call what you and your mates play "Dungeons and Dragons."
So if you joined a new group, what rulebooks would you assume they have to acknowledge as official in their entirety? Wierd question I know but it's a funny old game we have here.
I personally would consider the three core rulebooks official. If there is any change to the rules as written therein in a group I joined (aka house rules), I would need to know, preferably before joining, if the changes are more than minor details. The DM says what other books and rules he or she allows, and how the rules are interpreted (every rule leaves room for interpretation) at the table. And if alternate books are used as core rules, that would be very important, of course.
That said, I don´t think that any gaming round (besides perhaps RPGA, and even there are modifications, I think) uses the RAW. This may be minor modifications, like changes to the skill system, or major ones, like exclusion of races or classes, or the way the classes work, but I think that every gaming round has its own modifications.
Stefan
I'd argue that it's the contents of the SRD, anything written in a licensed product, errata, and the Sage articles in Dragon. That would be the kind of thing I'd imagine would consitute RAW in terms of competative play or whatever.
Just ask your Dm before you start.
i would consider the core three books. PHB, MM, and DMG,
after that if you want a specific class , prestige class or feats from any of the other books ask your DM first.
If you are bringing a character from another dms game ask him to look over your sheet and say its ok,
don't be offended if he says no or you can't have such and such. each DM like player is different. accept their decisions , if you don't like the way they dm or the rules they use join another group
If you're going by "official" -- The Three Core Rulebooks, and then every other book published by WotC, plus Dungeon and Dragon, and the SRD -- That's a lot of offical rules, but it's all technically "official."
Now if you want my take on it... Something like Warhammer (I've only played in two games of that, unfortunately), and even Second Edition are something people either like or hate. There were just hardcore rules for the most part -- That's an orc, that's what it does. The beauty (and horribleness as well) in third edition is the insane amount of customizability.
Coming into the new millenia, I think they realized that most people have seen orcs and every basic fantasy stereotype in existence. So the new rules seem more like guidelines than anything in stone. It gives a general rule, and you can use it at face value, or you can go in and change and customize it all to your whims.
But you're right; going to any other DM with your PC tends to be troublesome unless they both use the same rulebooks/errata/etc. The only way around that is to customize your character to their campaign and house rules. It's more like... "Whatever you want to do, as long as you try and follow the mechanics and guidelines..." is the motto. Love it or hate it, it's the way it is. The way I see it, as long as you're having fun, who really cares what it's called to the outside world?
I've had this question kicking around my head for a while now. What is "offical" D&D to you? Is there such thing?
Anything that WotC and paizo publishes is official. That said, "official" doesn't mean squat to me. The idea that a game, especially an rpg, needs to conform to it's official rules is absurd.
So if you joined a new group, what rulebooks would you assume they have to acknowledge as official in their entirety? Wierd question I know but it's a funny old game we have here.
None.
The idea that a game, especially an rpg, needs to conform to it's official rules is absurd.
Absolutely right. Only if you want some measure of comparability, you need to have a common base of rules to work from. If using RPGs as a kind of tournament makes any sense at all, is a matter of personal taste, but if you want to do that, you need rules to judge by.
Stefan
I consider official D&D to use anything as written out of any of the books; materials, magizines, errata from Paizo or Wizards of the coast. Any importing of anything else from any other d20 system or any tweaks by a gm or players in not official D&D in my view; but certainly playable and perhaps fun. I run a quasi official game in my view as all materials except monsters are per the book; monsters i change to fit my world and scenarios. Per the DMG any gm can alter things as he/she deems fit for his/her game without fear of mocking or retribution though it would no longer be official, but, really, who cares out being official; hehe its not like were gonna run out and buy a t-shirt; "I run OFFICIAL D&D" hehe; interesting question though.
Your right about some other games like Warhammer; the rules there are extremely important as powers are derived from breaking the traditional ruleset.
So if you joined a new group, what rulebooks would you assume they have to acknowledge as official in their entirety?
As Sunrise said, anything published by Wizards is "official," but that doesn't mean squat. If I joined a new group, I wouldn't assume that any particular "official" rule (much less an entire book of them) was going to be followed; the first question I would ask is "What are the house rules?"
Now, if the answer to that question was "None," I'd assume the core rulebooks were going to be followed in their entirety. But I also wouldn't be surprised to find out that the group had some house rules that they didn't think of as (or didn't realize were) house rules.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I would consider the PHB, DMG, and MM to be "official" and everything else to be optional. If I joined a new gaming group, I would expect to be able to play any core class in the PHB and use any feat from the PHB as well as choose any PrC from the DMG. The setting/campaign should only impose logical limitations on players. For example, an urban campaign should probably not allow barbarians or druids (but you COULD). Also, an all-good campaign should not allow blackguards and assassins (unless one of the players got corrupted somehow). Barring setting restrictions though (since we're talking about just core rules), anything in the PHB and DMG should be expected to be permissable in a normal D&D game, imo.
My thoughts are the same as others - PHB, DMG, and MM. Everything else is gravy.
I can't say that I've ever seen such a beast (Official D&D). All the games I've run or participated in were bastardizations, and that's the way I like.
Part of the fun is messing with the rules. Why would you deprive yourself of that? ;)
"Finite players play within boundaries. Infinite players play with boundaries."
|
I used to play a lot of warhammer and in that scene it's pretty obvious that what's in the rulebook IS the rules. No-one would expect someone to deviate from the RAW in warhammer, though playing contrary to their spirit for advantage is another thing entirely ;)
This is an interesting observation. While Warhammer does have some similarities with roleplaying, I think that the biggest difference is that Warhammer is player vs. player with one winner while D&D is typically more of a "team" effort with player interaction rather than beating each other. If people were getting together to "win" as individuals, there might be a stronger need to follow the RAW. In D&D, the players are ALL heroes and so it is rather expected that they will all "win". The fun is about the "danger" involved in "winning" and how the group ends up "winning".
D&D is an elaborate method of story telling. It's about imagination and creativity. Try telling an artist or author that they MUST abide by certain "rules". While there may be a structured framework, often times even these are "broken" -- ee cummings, Dr. Seuss, etc. Warhammer is far less about telling a story and much more about destroying the enemy.
Anyway, I don't see a problem with modifying the rules a bit to tell a better story.
Even in Warhammer RPG the rules are set in stone.
I agree with many other posters above- anything that WotC publishes, as well as sources such as Dungeon and Dragon, are official. However, "official" doesn't mean anything, and even the most basic elements of attack rolls and saving throws aren't beyond permutations through house rules (though I would consider most such ideas to be bad).
I, as many above have stated consider all WotC material to be "official” D&D. Though the PHB, DMG & MM are the primary books that are needed to run any base campaign. That said, some may consider that as these 3 books are all that’s needed they are the only true books that should be used during game play. Well that’s the choice of the DM and to a lesser extent the players. So it’s sounds to me that most of the above DM’s and players in my opinion have correctly defined the word “official” and therein lays your answer.
Going beyond that there are books with variant rules (Unearthed Arcana) and the like, along with expanded rules (Psionic handbook) not to mention various other accessories (Complete series, Campaign worlds etc.) though all still official. In our campaigns we use all the books that we have access to for we find that the game like life in general gets better the more you put into it. As players they enjoy being able to play different characters and races, use different feats and skills along with various other aspects that bringing new books in allow. I as a DM love being able to do the same, not to mention using all the new monsters in the various Monster Manuals to test the parties resolve. As a group, like any game you play over and over again you can get bored with all the same rules, monsters, terrain, PC’s, etc. so expanding your knowledge can fix that.
There are some problems with this type of ideology, such as it can take more time for one, but all in all it works well for are group and for that reason encourage your group to try it.
Hope that helps.