Quote from: weirdguy564 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:33 PMI'm so used to an RPG core rule book being a complete game that it's just weird to have D&D set a precedence for being split into three books.

Also, from what I saw it does indeed seem that a Player's Handbook is enough to play a game. 

I honestly dislike all in one books. Too tempting to players to try and read up on monsters for advantage.

And single book RPGs tend to lose something to make space. Or are big and unweildy.

Quote from: Omega on July 18, 2024, 06:17:34 PM

Quote from: weirdguy564 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:33 PMI'm so used to an RPG core rule book being a complete game that it's just weird to have D&D set a precedence for being split into three books.

Also, from what I saw it does indeed seem that a Player's Handbook is enough to play a game. 

I honestly dislike all in one books. Too tempting to players to try and read up on monsters for advantage.

And single book RPGs tend to lose something to make space. Or are big and unweildy.

I know for my own project that was a factor.

For cost and digital layout reasons I opted for a 6"x9" and slightly larger font format, but this also meant that what would have been about a 250 page book in the typical 8.5x11" slightly undersized font with quarter page images would be around 720 pages once art was factored in.

So I split it into a Player's Guide and GM's Guide; each about 360 pages (right about thickness of the 4E Essentials books).

The PG has all the PC building and general gameplay rules along with a "this is what the average PC knows about the world" gazetteer and a "micro-GMs Guide" (basically four pages on guidelines for rulings and how to build quick and dirty encounters and opponents in the absence of the full rules in the actual GMs Guide... just enough that if someone ever comes across the PG but can't find the GMG they could still do something with what is provided).

The GMG is all the stuff a GM needs; advice for new ones, system specific mechanics (how to build monsters, NPCs, curses, diseases, artifacts, etc.), and the back 2/3 is basically my Monster Manual.

Theoretically all those monsters are just examples built using the monster-building rules and if I canned all the new GM advice and just condensed down to the actual rules and tools I could have just tacked another 20-30 pages onto the PG... but I think there's real value in providing new GM advice that isn't "read D&D's DMG first" and in not having to do a bunch of monster-building yourself.

Far too many single-book RPGs shortchange the GM section on the theory that everyone is coming from D&D first anyway so why duplicate the effort. I think this does a grave disservice to a lot of RPGs as it does make them far less accessible and less likely to ever be looked at by ceding that "first game affection" to WotC.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on July 16, 2024, 06:00:55 PMI've never played D&D. 

They always sell the books as a group of three.  The players handbook. The GM guide.  And the monster manual.

As somebody who is an outsider I've bought and skimmed 3.5 players handbook, plus some PDFs of other eras. 

Is the GM guide a "must have" book?  It seems to me that a player's handbook is really all you need to start with, provided the GM can keep it interesting with monsters and NPCs of their own creation. 

The 1E DM Guide is a must for just about every FRPG. It has a ridiculous amount of useful material for any campaign.