Frost wrote:
I think you could solve the "core" issue simply by using a different term. "Core" has become loaded ever since WotC started putting that word on its book with 3e. I never heard anyone say any book was "core" until 3e. Maybe something such as "primary" would work.
Fiffergrund wrote:
I still like "Foundation" as it works with the Castle theme.
Julian Grimm wrote:
Personally, I think if you slap supplement or sourcebook on the cover it works better. The term supplement does not have the same 'need this' ring that core does.
I wanted to address these three points at once.
First, Core may be loaded, but it's the only term that means something to most RPG purchasers. If they have to take time to figure out which books are necessary/should be purchased, you're going to lose customers. Using words like foundation may provide an interesting theme, but they're poor for communication purposes. I'm also not a fan of primary, as secondary sounds inferior.
Second, if you stress the optional aspect too much, people aren't going to buy it. Castles & Crusades doesn't have an audience like D&D with people constantly looking for new material. If people aren't buying Of Gods and Monsters in the same quantities as Monsters & Treasures, it won't be stocked as well, and it won't sell as well. It's either has to be a top-tier book that everyone should own, or it will be a second-tier book, that a few people might buy.
If Troll Lord Games wants to develop these four books as The Fourth Crusade, I don't see why they shouldn't be branded as Core. If they're not, I think this whole marketing blitz will be a waste.
