Alright, I'm confused as shit. I know D&D divides itself into different books, but which one shows basic stuff like cosmology and the 8 schools of magic and stuff like that? I guess the player handbook is the one that lists all the classes and their spells and abilities, but some of them seem to be like "Arcane, Divine and Martial Heroes". Does that mean they left some out or is that just the most up to date class listing?
What version are you looking for?
Player's handbook or the DM's handbook should have everything you want.
>>47149677
Well I have what says it's the 4th edition Player's Handbook (doesn't say this in the PDF so far as I can see, the file is just named that) and it doesn't say one word about the schools of magic. In fact it lists spells in weird categories like (Arcane, Nature).
>>47149663
>Players Handbook
Character creation and most if not all rules.
>Dungeon Masters Guide
Creating the campaign and any needed rules not in the PH
>Monster Manual
Stats for Monsters
Supplements have other stuff to add on top of this, such as more classes. But these three books are all you need.
>>47149663
>but some of them seem to be like "Arcane, Divine and Martial Heroes". Does that mean they left some out or is that just the most up to date class listing?
It's just a way to make more money. Think of the other books besides the Player's Handbook, the Dungeon Master's Guide, and the Monster Manual as optional DLC. You don't need them, but it can add more to the basic rules.
>>47149707
Which one lists the theory of magic and the different planes and stuff? I had what I think was a 5th? edition Player's Handbook many years ago which listed all that, but the one I have now doesn't.
>>47149703
>Well I have what says it's the 4th edition Player's Handbook (doesn't say this in the PDF so far as I can see, the file is just named that) and it doesn't say one word about the schools of magic. In fact it lists spells in weird categories like (Arcane, Nature).
Yeah, those are tags that give a notion of effect, generally speaking used for damage reductions or bonuses or other highly specific thing.
For 4e, you want Manual of the Planes for cosmology, then I dunno for the schools of magic, I didn't get too deep into 4e. Arcane Power (another book) is focused more on class options.
4e is rather simplified; the schools of magic as they're presented in, say, Baldur's Gate, are rather less important unless it becomes a plot point.
>>47149736
Background stuff is usually split between PH and GMG depending on who will be using the info.
>>47149736
Unless you have met a time traveler, it is impossible for you to have had a 5th edition handbook many years ago as it came out in 2014.
You likely had a 2e or 3e Manual of the Planes.
>>47149765
>You likely had a 2e or 3e Manual of the Planes
No. I had a Player's Handbook I'm pretty sure. And it had everything in it. And since I have a PDF of 4 right now and none of that is in there, it obviously wasn't 4th edition. Actually, now that I'm looking into it, I think it was 3rd edition and it had EVERYTHING in it. I definitely didn't have anything obscure like a planar manual.
OP, you seem rather confused. Have you tried looking it up first? Here's a Wikipedia article listing all the official rulebooks of D&D's various editions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons_rulebooks
Classes are found in multiple books, as the game keeps expanding. They did not "leave some out", they wrote some and then later wrote some more.
Cosmology is found in multiple books, but if it has "Planes" in its title it is the most detailed about it. The Dungeon Master's Guide has the basics in it as well.
There are multiple campaign settings, each with its own cosmology. The theory of magic is in the Player's Handbook with the Wizard description.
Any other questions? You seem a bit dense, but that's forgivable. Ask and you shall receive.
>>47149797
>obscure
Manual of the Planes isn't particularly obscure and has been a staple in each edition since 1, in various incarnations.
Now, Chronomancer? That's an obscure splat.
Anyway, considering the huge amount of material published in 3e, I'd be hard pressed to say the Player's Handbook has everything. Everything you need to get up and running but if you wanna start planeshifting and/or fleshing out individual academies and theories of the magical schools, there's a lot more material out there.
>>47149797
>I'm pretty sure
Dude, if you have the book, the title is written on it. And if you don't have the book, just download it. You should not be guessing about this.
>>47149827
>>47149828
>>47149841
I'm basically trying to figure out which book I had years ago. I don't have it anymore. But the more I research, the more I think I had the 3rd Edition Player's Handbook.
>>47149853
Well then just have it again: http://www.aegisoft.be/costa/data/roleplay/D&D%203.5%20-%20Players%20Handbook%20[OEF].pdf
>>47149872
This is absolutely the book I had. Thank you. It seems like later editions really pared info down.
>>47150150
You can't really compare them. Every edition is a completely different game.
>>47150587
Is it? I mean they change so much it does seem that way. But it's not like the difference between Mage the Ascension and Mage the Awakening which are COMPLETELY different games.
>>47151050
Everything before AD&D 2e is basically compatible, but 3e, 4e and 5e are each wildly different from each other. Sure, they all use d20 for rolls and they all have lots of the same names, but the underlying math is completely different.
ITT: Literal illiterates get coddled by spoonfeeding assholes who are conspiring to make the hobby worse by not telling these idiots to fuck off.
IF YOUR QUESTION TAKES LESS TIME TO GOOGLE THAN TO POST ON FUCKING 4CHAN, THEN DON'T FUCKING POST IT.
>>47151110
Shut up, cunt.
>>47151083
>but 3e, 4e and 5e are each wildly different from each other.
They're not. They're the exact same fucking game, with the only difference being the graphic design used to present the rules to you.
If you think there's any difference between those three editions, you've never read any of them.
>>47151134
They are, though, you're just retarded.
>>47151134
We may have just discovered a mutant strain of the Edition War Idiocy memes.
>>47151110
your ideas create a catch 22
if a dumb person (when talking about rpg) can not join of of the few places that would make them learn, because she is dumb, and no one would be able to go to /tg/
I call this the containement board paradox
>>47151163
The fix to that is called "Lurk moar, faggot."
>>47151163
Spoonfeeding idiots too stupid to type a simple question into google doesn't make a healthy community.
It just makes a community where everyone is too retarded to find out anything themselves. God forbid they have to read or learn something on their own.
>>47151134
Okay. Make a 3.5e character and try to play in a 4e game, see how far you get. Rinse and repeat for every combination of editions.
And handwaving everything as you go doesn't count.
>>47149828
>Chronomancer
Hey, I have that!
