Best book on D&D rules (gamewise)?

[Jaqen]

Hi all,

Long story but can anyone recommend a guidebook book that explain the Dungeons & Dragons rules (gamewise) for someone who has never played an RPG? Must be in book form rather then Internet guides etc.


Any help appreciated,

 

[aleph]

what about the dungeon and dragons player's handbook?

 

[Andhaira]

First you need to know which edition you want to learn aboiut.

The current D&D edition is 4.0.

Games like Baldurs Gate 1 and 2 were based on D&D 2.0.

Games like Neverwinter Nights and ToEE were based on D&D 3.0

Once you know which edition you want to know about simply purchase the Players Handbook for that edition. If you want to run games you will also need to purchase the Monster Manual for that edition. The third book in the 'core set' is the Dungeon Masters guide but its not essential.

 

[Jaqen]

Thanks for replies

I actually want to get the guides as a gift for a mate. They want to start playing Baldurs Gate. I'll look into getting the players handbook (D&D 2.0) now.

If you want to run games you will also need to purchase the Monster Manual for that edition.

Do you mean the game manual? or is this a sub-book targeting the likes of baldurs gate?

The third book in the 'core set' is the Dungeon Masters guide but its not essential.

You've lost me now . Would this be used more for a Dungeon Master as in 'Role Play', rather then the actual PC game?

Thanks very much,

 

[Hümmelgümpf]

Why do you need books for PC games? Manuals that come with them should suffice.

 

[asper]

It's completely unnecessary to read anything about the D&D rules in order to play Baldur's Gate. All the important things are explained in-game, and you don't need any deep understanding of the rules.

Buying the D&D books only to play a computer game is just overkill.

 

[Ammar]

If you decide to get a playerguide for 3.5 consider getting the Mongoose version. It's more easily carried around and cheaper. The art of the WotC version is missing but it's rather shitty anyway.

As it's BG we are talking about, Dan Simpsons Guide to AD&D at Gamefaqs is worth looking at.

 

[FeelTheRads]

You've lost me now Smile. Would this be used more for a Dungeon Master as in 'Role Play', rather then the actual PC game?

Neither of the three mentioned above are required for playing fucking Baldur's Gate, nor will they will be very helpful since the rules aren't copied exactly from them.

Also, yeah, if you want to make a gift, just buy a version of Baldur's Gate which has a printed manual and that's it.

 

[Andhaira]

Jaqen: The monster manual lists all the monsters in the game which you need to fight with players. But from the looks of things you are just getting the Players Handbook so your mates can use it when playing baldurs gate right? Then you wont need the monster manual.

And yes, the Dungeon Master uses the Dungeon mnasters Guide when 'roleplaying' instead of playing a pc game.

While I agree with Lestat the manual should siffice, there are a few things in he PHB you wont find in the manual.

 

[Hümmelgümpf]

While I agree with Lestat the manual should siffice, there are a few things in he PHB you wont find in the manual.

You won't find them in BG either.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Real men play 1st edition. Elves, Dwarves and Halflings as classes instead of races, baby. None of this gay shit with multi-classes, epic classes, feats and whatnot. That's just LARPer shit!

 

[Applegate's Breasts]

As it's BG we are talking about, Dan Simpsons Guide to AD&D at Gamefaqs is worth looking at.

This.

Neither of the three mentioned above are required for playing fucking Baldur's Gate, nor will they will be very helpful since the rules aren't copied exactly from them.

Also, yeah, if you want to make a gift, just buy a version of Baldur's Gate which has a printed manual and that's it.

And this.


ToEE, on the other hand...


Also, a possibility if you want it in book form.

 

[Jaqen]

Big thanks to all (especially AndhairaX), will look into suggestions now.

 

[SkeleTony]

For pre-3rd edition(AD&D) rules you are literally better off NOT understanding them anyway. 1st and 2nd editions (as well as the older D&D 'basic' stuff)were just horrible designs period. They were so inconsistent and unnecessarily complicated, poorly balanced and just damned illogical and ugly that it is only nostalgia and the 'security in misery' phenomenon that provokes any positive responses to them.

3rd edition is not half as bad(but still bad) but everything you need to know is already in the games' manuals(printed or on disk depending on which release of BG you got).

 

[Volrath]

Things like THACO and negative AC were moron repellents. D&D 3E started the decline.

 

[ScottishMartialArts]

Thanks for replies

I actually want to get the guides as a gift for a mate. They want to start playing Baldurs Gate. I'll look into getting the players handbook (D&D 2.0) now.

This is what you're looking for http://www.amazon.com/Players-Handbook-2nd-Fantasy-Roleplaying/dp/0786903295/ref=ed_oe_h . Any used books store should have it cheap. If they're playing Baldur's Gate you might also want to track down a copy of the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting http://www.amazon.com/FORGOTTEN-CAM...r_1_12?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241988163&sr=8-12 since it details the setting and lore that provide the backdrop for the series.

 

[SkeleTony]

Things like THACO and negative AC were moron repellents. D&D 3E started the decline.

Moron magnets is more like it. Designing a rules system to be counter-intuitive is not in itself bad(if there is some brilliant reasoning behind such). But making a game that is counter-intuitive, counter-logical, backwards, messy, cumbersome and just all around unnecessarily Rube Goldbergian YEARS after much better designs were published is bad. And maintaining such for a few DECADES just because the 'secure in their misery' kiddies are threatening to not buy a game we all know for certain they WILL buy(re: 3rd edition and 4th ed.) and get used to and eventually admit they were being idiots in their youth...well that is just madness.

I have heard a lot of gripes from the over 40 nostalgia guys in regards to 3rd ed. being the "decline" but one thing I have NEVER heard from a single one of them is an argument rooted in any understanding of game design. A lot of "They shouldn't have changed anything EVER!" but no "Here is why *THIS* worked better in 2nd ed...." arguments.

Telling.

 

[ScottishMartialArts]

I have heard a lot of gripes from the over 40 nostalgia guys in regards to 3rd ed. being the "decline" but one thing I have NEVER heard from a single one of them is an argument rooted in any understanding of game design.

My big problem with 3rd ed is that the system is geared towards multi-class/prestige class min-maxing. There's something just wrong with a game system that encourages you to take levels in four different classes that are unrelated to each other except for the saving throw bonuses they give. It encourages the players to play the system rather than the adventure.

 

[Lord Rocket]

Real men play 1st edition. Elves, Dwarves and Halflings as classes instead of races, baby.

That's not 1st edition, dipshit. That's Original and the Basic sets. Clearly real men don't know what they're talking about, in which case they should be playing Paranoia.

Things like THACO and negative AC were moron repellents. D&D 3E started the decline.

I don't even know what to say. Fuck.

 

[Jaqen]

Thanks ScottishMartialArts and others for replies, much appreciated.

 

[Hümmelgümpf]

Things like THACO and negative AC were moron repellents. D&D 3E started the decline.

Word. I really miss the old days when only classy people like Lyric Suite played D&D.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Real men play 1st edition. Elves, Dwarves and Halflings as classes instead of races, baby.

That's not 1st edition, dipshit. That's Original and the Basic sets. Clearly real men don't know what they're talking about, in which case they should be playing Paranoia.

It might as well be the 1st edition, since it's like, well, the first incarnation of D&D. No need to get so butthurt over such a small mistake.

 

[SkeleTony]

I have heard a lot of gripes from the over 40 nostalgia guys in regards to 3rd ed. being the "decline" but one thing I have NEVER heard from a single one of them is an argument rooted in any understanding of game design.

My big problem with 3rd ed is that the system is geared towards multi-class/prestige class min-maxing. There's something just wrong with a game system that encourages you to take levels in four different classes that are unrelated to each other except for the saving throw bonuses they give. It encourages the players to play the system rather than the adventure.

A) Nothing wrong with "playing the system"(especially as it is NOT exclusive to "playing the adventure"). That is why gamers are sitting around the table in the first place rather than rehearsing for a school play in drama class.

B)3rd edition had limits on the number of classes you could take(3 IIRC) and there were balancing consequences to spreading your character rather than concentrating in one or two classes.

Plus it is easy as Hell to house rule this(being more restrictive over class switching and benefits(i.e. always have the save throws of your first class or the weakest of ALL classes etc.).

But the whole saving throw system is so messes up in the first place that it really cannot be made 'good' anyway..

 

[SkeleTony]

Real men play 1st edition. Elves, Dwarves and Halflings as classes instead of races, baby.

That's not 1st edition, dipshit. That's Original and the Basic sets. Clearly real men don't know what they're talking about, in which case they should be playing Paranoia.

It might as well be the 1st edition, since it's like, well, the first incarnation of D&D. No need to get so butthurt over such a small mistake.

You still do not know what you are talking about. These were different game systems altogether. AD&D came AFTER the original/basic D&D. OD&D was the "first incarnation"(unless you are counting Chain mail). AD&D was supposed to be a more "Advanced" version of D&D(it IS perhaps more complicated and does have some improvements over D&D but is still the same bad system).

 

[Redeye]

D&D/AD&D were poorly designed, no doubt.

1E: Quirky atmosphere? How much of that is nostalgia/what you brought to the table with you?
2E: Shiny? Well, it was FR time, and FR is gold-rich and magically sparkly.

3E: Plastic? Finally a more modern set of mechanics/balance. Too bad that the mechanics/balance sort of become the game. My 3E experience comes solely from NWN/NWN2 and a bit of IWD2. So of course I played sploity-sploity. Maybe tabletop 3E could have been ok.

4E: shiny push-button.

More like a superhero game.

Still, it has the advantage of being able to draw on decades of design experience.


not that there is anything wrong with a superhero game