How things have changed!

[Hugh Neilson]

Um...I've had this book how long' date=' and have read it how many times, and didn't even know that section was [u']in[/u] here?! Thanks Armitage! [repped]

 

Pulled from another thread, obviously, and the actual topic is irrelevant, but RPG's have certainly grown over the years.

 

I suspect many of us who've been in the hobby a while could probably identify entire games in our collections that have less pages than, say, 5er's combined table of contents and index.

 

Games today try to cover more and more of "everything that could happen" where the games of yesteryear left a lot more for players and GM's to work out, wing it or just say "you can't do that in this game.

 

So, is that a good thing, or a bad thing? Do you prefer to have all the rules laid out for you (even if you choose to amend some of them), or to have a bare-bones system and flesh it out for yourself?

[MitchellS]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I prefer a bare-bones system with optional rules in additional books. I'd much rather see a 196 page 5E with all the Ultimate books adding optional rules then the 600 page 5E [with the Ultimate books adding optional rules ].

[Vondy]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I prefer core mechanics I can expand upon. When it comes to mechanics, its easier to add than subtract.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I want it all in the big rule book, and any optional rules being derived or build from what is in the book, so that everything is in one place. Try to avoid opional rules, and include them in the core rules in the next edition.

 

I find it easier to subtract rules I don't use than add ones I might find useful.

[RDU Neil]

Re: How things have changed!

 

Gotta go with the "less is more" crowd. I think White Wolf is to blame... because they really introduced a level of marketing into RPGs that was unheard of before that. They wrote their books to be read like some people chew through cheesy fantasy series. Thick books... many of them... most with zero real relevance to actually PLAYING A GAME... but created a market for game systems to require massive amounts of text to be taken seriously. Hero has bloated for more reaons than that... primarily an attempt to answer every question, rather than cutting off and saying "The rest is up to you" Even if just to appeal to a certain market (as much created by D&D and all their Complete... books) there is a desire from many RPG players to have it all spelled out of them... complete the system for every little nugget... rather than realizing you don't actually NEED anything but sidekick to actually play Hero.

 

Hero can't survive if it is only core rules... so it has to expand. That is the demand... whether good for actual game construction or not. (A lot of the Indie games are back to the old school method. Very slim... very specific. Don't try to cover every eventuality. Here is what the game is intended to do... here are the basic mechancis that support that play. Done.)

[Dust Raven]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I'm the iconoclast there I suppose. I'm for more more more! There is such as thing as too many rules, and under no (or at least few) circumstances should the rules contradict or be redundant. Assuming this, more rules is better than less rules. A GM can always choose which rules are used and which are not.

 

Someone in another thread compared role-playing games to Legos. I think that's very true. The more types of blocks you have, the more you can build and the better it will look once you've built it. You don't have to use all the blocks, just the ones you need. But without those blocks, you are limited by what you can and can't do, and if you want to do something you can't, you have to pretend one block is something it isn't or else or try to make our own block.

[ghost-angel]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I want it all in the big rule book, and any optional rules being derived or build from what is in the book, so that everything is in one place. Try to avoid opional rules, and include them in the core rules in the next edition.

 

I find it easier to subtract rules I don't use than add ones I might find useful.

I'm here to. I think it's much easier to remove than add. Adding involves all sorts of arguements of How to add, removing is just "we aren't using this part" and go from there.

 

That and the nice big thick full or rules books is ALL you need to play the game. Sure I own bunches of HERO books, but when I go to play I bring the Main book or Sidekick (con games get sidekick). That's it.

 

If we had a barebones with bunches of add-ons I'd be luggin all sorts of crap around like when I briefly played D20 - four books and that was just info on the Class I was playing, not all the rules in use. Headache (and shoulder ache) city.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: How things have changed!

 

That and the nice big thick full or rules books is ALL you need to play the game. Sure I own bunches of HERO books, but when I go to play I bring the Main book or Sidekick (con games get sidekick). That's it.

 

One of the guys in our group said that specifically - "That's one of the reasons I play HERO, so I only have to take one book with me when I game"

 

Now I don't mind lots of ancillory information- I really enjoy the Ultiamte books, but for the advice and powerstunts writeups, not for any new rules; more the "look at all the nifty things you can do with the HERO system" stuff.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I confess to liking a rather high level of, shall we say, rules-precision and rules-completeness, primarily because I've had too many bad experiences with GMs who can't be entirely fair or consistent from session to session or even player to player. Having (and using) the rules in black and white prevents that.

 

It stinks that some GMs can't make a fair on-the-fly judgement to save their lives, but it happens.

[RDU Neil]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I'm the iconoclast there I suppose. I'm for more more more! There is such as thing as too many rules, and under no (or at least few) circumstances should the rules contradict or be redundant. Assuming this, more rules is better than less rules. A GM can always choose which rules are used and which are not.

 

Someone in another thread compared role-playing games to Legos. I think that's very true. The more types of blocks you have, the more you can build and the better it will look once you've built it. You don't have to use all the blocks, just the ones you need. But without those blocks, you are limited by what you can and can't do, and if you want to do something you can't, you have to pretend one block is something it isn't or else or try to make our own block.

 

 

See... the Legos or Toolkit aspect bugs me with RPGs, because it is not like the need to have some actual, physical object with which to build. What RPGs need is lots of concepts and ideas, theories on which to make judgments like CC talks about above... all of which you can then use to build your own rules... and to me, too much detail makes me shut down... where I want big ideas and basic conceptual frameworks with which to play. The detailed ruling should be my own... but I actually find it harder to come to a consensus with a group on what to 'throw out' than it is to make a call on "what should be."

 

Different strokes and all that...

[casualplayer]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I don't like RPGs that assume too much, and by assume I mean force feed me particular abilities because I want my character to be able to track. I don't like RPGs that have win conditions. I don't like RPGs that require a shelf of books to play. I don't like RPGs that equate character growth with inflicting death. I don't like RPGs that are the paper equivalent of a high maintenance girlfriend. I don't like RPGs that hand you a block of marble and say "chip away everything that doesn't look like an elephant."

 

However I love world books that do all of the above.

 

I think we lost something ineffable when RPGs stopped coming in a box with a crayon.

[kave99]

Re: How things have changed!

 

i have to say that the games i {WE} played in the early 80's were short on rules but were lots of fun, boot hill stands out as a simple but fun game and it had next to no rules [just a simple combat resolution system and some stats]. we just winged it most of the time and i think it was a good thing. i sometimes think that made us better gamers and less rules lawyers. H5R gives us all kinds of rules but i would never use them if it bogged down the game or made it less fun.

[OddHat]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I was just looking through a few of the original Champions books yesterday. Such great little volumes. One of my favorite games remains Nightlife, which did everything its world needed with one thicker book plus a few optional rules in each slim module.

 

From the game design POV, I don't think the endless expansion of a system is a good thing. Optional rules start to clutter the table and risk annoying players and GMs used to older house rules on a given subject.

 

As a buyer, I'd rather buy Enemies books and modules than USPD and Ultimate X type work, and that's speaking as someone who likes the Ultimate books. At the very least I'd like to see more space given over to plot-seed rich characters built with the new example powers, turning each USPD into a more immediate game resource.

 

However, from a marketting POV, the WotC / White Wolf model works. I expect I'm stuck with it if I want to stay in this part of the hobby.

[Dust Raven]

Re: How things have changed!

 

See... the Legos or Toolkit aspect bugs me with RPGs, because it is not like the need to have some actual, physical object with which to build. What RPGs need is lots of concepts and ideas, theories on which to make judgments like CC talks about above... all of which you can then use to build your own rules... and to me, too much detail makes me shut down... where I want big ideas and basic conceptual frameworks with which to play. The detailed ruling should be my own... but I actually find it harder to come to a consensus with a group on what to 'throw out' than it is to make a call on "what should be."

 

Different strokes and all that...

 

I definately understand, I can swing both ways on this issue though. My two favorite RPGs of all time are the Hero System and Amber Diceless. Hero is a toolkit of rules, rules and more rules, all designed to work together to create a balanced game enjoyable to all. Amber is a guideline with effectively no rules that makes suggestions on how to arbitrate the action of the game fairly and in a way that everybody has fun.

 

For my at least, there is no happy medium. Give me enough rules so I don't have to make any up, or don't give me any at all and I'll know the judgements I make don't upset the balance of an existing system.

[Rapier]

Re: How things have changed!

 

While I can see both sides of the issue, does it really matter?

 

Back in the late 70s all there was, was Chainmail. You used what was there and Chainmail was about as simple as things got.

 

However, at some point when you get more people and and a larger player base, enough situations came up regularly that a rule was invented. After so many years enough rules come into being to handle most situations that come up with any kind of regularity.

 

Those should be documented. Why should you bother reinventing the wheel?

I was actually very happy with 5e (and R). For me, there are enough expansions on the rules to handle the little quibbles we had and to firm up some of the gray areas we had.

 

One of the problems with the BBB was that there were expanded/different rules in Western Hero and Cyber Hero that you couldn't get unless you bought all those books. 5e (and R) were nice that they rolled all those rules into the main book so that we all had that. The expansion books (eg Ultimate Series) don't really add any new rules, they just expand on how to adapt the rules to a specific purpose (the notable exception is UMA's custom Martial Arts design tools).

[prestidigitator]

Re: How things have changed!

 

Games today try to cover more and more of "everything that could happen" where the games of yesteryear left a lot more for players and GM's to work out, wing it or just say "you can't do that in this game.

 

So, is that a good thing, or a bad thing?

Yes.

[Black Rose]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I was actually very happy with 5e (and R). For me, there are enough expansions on the rules to handle the little quibbles we had and to firm up some of the gray areas we had.

 

One of the problems with the BBB was that there were expanded/different rules in Western Hero and Cyber Hero that you couldn't get unless you bought all those books. 5e (and R) were nice that they rolled all those rules into the main book so that we all had that. The expansion books (eg Ultimate Series) don't really add any new rules, they just expand on how to adapt the rules to a specific purpose (the notable exception is UMA's custom Martial Arts design tools).

Agreed. I will admit that I would like 6th Ed to be tightened-up from what 5ER is now. I do like that there are significantly fewer gray areas, but I could want the details clearing them up to be... refined, I guess.

 

The last thing I want is for rules to be findable only in an Ultimates (or genre, or setting, or ....) Book. I utterly hate that. It sucked when DnD did it, it really sucked when White Wolf did it, I'd be truly PO'd if HERO started doing it. Clarifications and expansions are one thing; all new material is quite another.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: How things have changed!

 

The last thing I want is for rules to be findable only in an Ultimates (or genre, or setting, or ....) Book. I utterly hate that. It sucked when DnD did it, it really sucked when White Wolf did it, I'd be truly PO'd if HERO started doing it. Clarifications and expansions are one thing; all new material is quite another.

 

Part of the reason I hated Piercing being in Dark Champions.

The rulebook is the rulebook dang it, and it has all the rules. Don't put more in later books.

[prestidigitator]

Re: How things have changed!

 

The last thing I want is for rules to be findable only in an Ultimates (or genre' date=' or setting, or ....) Book. I utterly hate that. It sucked when DnD did it, it [i']really[/i] sucked when White Wolf did it, I'd be truly PO'd if HERO started doing it. Clarifications and expansions are one thing; all new material is quite another.

Definitely! Couldn't agree more!

[Curufea]

Re: How things have changed!

 

Depends on the game and the players.

 

I'm generally a rules light GM - and will often skip Hero rules. It makes many of my players comfortable to know the rules exist, and they like using them (or other system's rules if we are using another system) - but when I do Hero or other systems, I generally ignore many rules.

 

I base my NPC stats on how well a PC rolls and what outcome I want to achieve. If it's a really good roll - it hits.

[archermoo]

Re: How things have changed!

 

As a buyer, I'd rather buy Enemies books and modules than USPD and Ultimate X type work, and that's speaking as someone who likes the Ultimate books. At the very least I'd like to see more space given over to plot-seed rich characters built with the new example powers, turning each USPD into a more immediate game resource.

And I'm quite the opposite. I have very little use for Enemies books or modules except as examples of how other people do that kind of thing. For that matter USPD falls into that category too, though I find it a bit more useful than books of bad guys or adventures. The Ultimates books I like a great deal. If I hadn't made the decision to buy everything Hero prints, the first things that I would take off the list would be canned adventures, followed closely by books of bad guys. But each to their own.

 

To address the actual topic of the thread: More is better, assuming that the "more" is done well. And I think that Hero has done an exceptional job on good quality "more".

 

Edit: That being said, I almost always modify/prune rules and add new stuff to anything I run, in any system.

[Silbeg]

Re: How things have changed!

 

As a buyer' date=' I'd rather buy Enemies books and modules than USPD and Ultimate X type work, and that's speaking as someone who likes the Ultimate books. At the very least I'd like to see more space given over to plot-seed rich characters built with the new example powers, turning each USPD into a more immediate game resource.[/quote']

 

Exactly!

 

How many of us have paged through the Enemies books looking for inspiration for powers? I would rather see something like that, defining the powers possible in the body of a few paranormals (or whatever).

 

That is one thing that is nice about the Ultimate books... at least they define a couple of canonical character that match the subject of the book!

 

What I would like to see would be a book with characters at different times in their career. A couple of the 4E books did that... I believe the 4E CU had "experienced" versions of the Champions, as well as a new version of The Ultimates. That was actually pretty cool.

 

If the different stages of the characters' developments are well thought out, we should be able to see characters at the beginning of their careers (no xp, fewer skills, more unstable powers)... once they have "reached their own", and perhaps a version when they are "World Class", or post-"Radiation accident" (like Requem from the 4E CU).

 

That'd be kewl.

[gojira]

Re: How things have changed!

 

I was just looking through a few of the original Champions books yesterday. Such great little volumes. One of my favorite games remains Nightlife, which did everything its world needed with one thicker book plus a few optional rules in each slim module.

 

From the game design POV, I don't think the endless expansion of a system is a good thing. Optional rules start to clutter the table and risk annoying players and GMs used to older house rules on a given subject.

 

Yes, this is a big part of what has turned me off to GURPS. TOO many rules, not enough fun stuff. And too many nit-picky little rules that don't really flow well with the rest of the system.

 

As a buyer, I'd rather buy Enemies books and modules than USPD and Ultimate X type work, and that's speaking as someone who likes the Ultimate books. At the very least I'd like to see more space given over to plot-seed rich characters built with the new example powers, turning each USPD into a more immediate game resource.

 

I just wanted to add my own "me three" here. My default way of building a character is to flip through one of my books until I find something interesting, then start tweaking with the character until I have something unique. I personally do find it very interesting to see how different powers and SFXs can be represented. I don't own USPD, but the versions available for free on this web site left me a little underwhelmed.

 

 

However, from a marketting POV, the WotC / White Wolf model works. I expect I'm stuck with it if I want to stay in this part of the hobby.

 

I don't play WoD/WW either.

[prestidigitator]

Re: How things have changed!

 

Yes' date=' this is a big part of what has turned me off to GURPS. TOO many rules, not enough fun stuff. And too many nit-picky little rules that don't really flow well with the rest of the system.[/quote']

Interesting way of putting it. The Hero system has a nice fun-stuff-to-rule ratio.

[Roter Baron]

Re: How things have changed!

 

One thing I generally don't like with games is hwen new options or even whole new classes, rules, essentials are added on in later suplements. Some of you have already mentioned D20 which has also the "problem" that with OGL you can now play different kinds of classes that all shrea the same concept, the same name - but are different character classes. There is more than one "Sniper" class in the various books I own for D 20 Modern.

Well, all you have to do is decide so the problem is not a big one, but I am more for clarity here.

I think Palladium was the first company that really got into this "let's add some new classes" thing which was/is really, REALLY annoying for players because the new classes usually ROCK like in TOTALLY ROCK!!! and you got to stick with some lame 5th level what-not who still has to get 5 more levels to be on par with the newly created über-class character.

 

Generally I prefer for some time easy rules games, and not too many options in combat. That is what I like about the basic combat concept of GURPS. Hero has a tendency to turn into "roleplayer's chess" as soon as combat starts - at least in my group with one player. It does not kill but hinders the gm sometimes to build up the exciting atmosphere of combat when everybody can break down every tiny little aspect of fightig into rule terms and judge the future outcome accordingly.

One of Hero's strength sometimes turns out as a weak point.

I am not advocation a "rock & scissors"-system, but a system that addresses the genre best - sometimes less is more and add-ons are not always neccessary.