Im begining to really dislike the flood of new editions coming out. most IMO dont really fix anything

Warhammer is missing all of its charm and background info.
Palladium Fantasy became RIFTS Jr.
Cyberpunk became Barbiepunk
World of Darkness became watered down

really the only improved "next" edition was D&D

I liked nWoD, and SR4 is a vast improvement. Some don't like the new dice pool mechanics, but at least it's finally a unified system instead of a mishmash of different rule sets for every occassion.

L5R 3rd edition is good, but they actually went back closer to the 1e rules, so it was kinda like a reversal in many ways and not actually a new edition.

Sorry but as new editions they're all very different products with different changes from their original systems so I find it hard to group them all together like that rather than look at them individually.

I don't think you can make sweeping generalisations about the 'inferiority' of subsequent editions.  

In the case of Rolemaster, for example, the core rules of 1st and 2nd edition were pretty straightforward.  Sure there were a lot of charts, but the rules themselves were pretty consistent and coherent (even moreso than d20, which RM influenced).  However, the 3rd edition of RM (a.k.a. RMSS or RMFRP) is a monstrosity -- way too many rules and number crunching for any sane individual.  A definite step down.  (Of course ICE is now releasing 'Rolemaster Classic', the 2e rules repackaged, so perhaps they're evolving back to common sense. )

Quote from: NYTFLYRWarhammer is missing all of its charm and background info...

Well, the magic system in 2e is way better than the one in 1e.

And really, the game as a whole is better (IMO).  There are no obvious problems like the 'naked dwarf' issue that afflicted 1e.

Yes, Black Industries wants you to buy more books, so they're spreading out the background info.  That doesn't mean that the game is inferior -- it just means that you're going to get milked for it.

Quote from: NYTFLYRreally the only improved "next" edition was D&D

Yeah, the Rules Cyclopedia was an improvement over the Mentzer BECMI series.  No more flipping through multiple booklets!  

The post-RC stuff, though ... :sleeping:

I think it's pretty rare, unless a game is based upon some other pretty solid games, that they do everything right the first time. A second edition is very typically needed in most cases.

That said, I am in full agreement that there are many new editions that screw things up instead of improving them.

It's also a matter of personal preference too. For instance, there are large groups of people that think 3E was the worst thing that ever happened to D&D, or even that it doesn't deserve to bear the name.

And there's always Hackmaster, whose first printing was 5th edition.

WFRP desperately needed a new edition.  It had several problems that made it unplayable in long-term games in 1st Edition. I loved 1st ed; a ton of people did; but most of these people also agreed that the game desperately needed some fixing, and that BI did that fixing very well in the new edition.  The way they handle magic now is brilliant; whereas in 1st edition there was absolutely no point ever in playing a wizard.

WFRP is, to me, an example of how to do a "new edition" right. You fix the things that need fixing, without transforming the game into something unrecognizeable to the fans.  The game, as you play it, is one where it feels like Warhammer!

As for setting, have you checked out the sourcebooks? There's been some really great setting work done; in particular the whole "Paths of the Damned" series is great for setting info, Sigmar's Heirs is very good, etc.

I don't care for how Brettonia has been changed, but I understand that's apparently a Games Workshop issue, not a BI issue in particular, and they did the best job they could with what they had.

RPGPundit

the only time this bothers me is when somehow the author decides that "no, what would be more elegant to me now is to use Fudge dice. what was i thinking with all those crazy six-sided dice in the previous edition."  or  "damn, i did a piss-poor job of explaining contests in the first printing...let me rewrite that chapter and reprint the book."

now, luckily in the two examples above, the authors provided online resources for the people who ordered the games early on.  however, as a completeist-nerd, it makes me not want to ever buy another game a version 1.0.  i'll just start waiting for the .5 revision or "SP1" before dropping cash on another game.

Quote from: NYTFLYRreally the only improved "next" edition was D&D

Yep.  AD&D2 was much better than AD&D1.  It was the way people actually played instead of all the gibberish in the first edition.

Obviously you've never encountered Mekton II, which was also much improved from it's predecessor.  

If you consider the Marvel Super Heroes Advanced Set as the second edition of that game, then it joins the list of improved next editions.

All of these are good examples of how to do a next edition.  They all improved and streamlined the rules while simultaneously adding needed detail and avoiding needless complexity.

For an example of a bad way to do a next edition, look at nearly any Palladium game.  The only Palladium game which managed to improve in a second edition is After the Bomb, which is effectively TMNT2.  All the others are textbook examples of how to do everything wrong.

RuneQuest 2nd edition is considered better than both third and first editions.
I consider AD&D 3 better than previous editions, but this is a topics minor wars have been fought about.
Shadowrun 4 is vastly improved over previous editons, IMHO.
I don't really care for the nWoD system improvements, but at least the world isn't as bad anymore, at least the Werewolf and Vampire sections.
GURPS has evolved nicely.

Quote from: GabrielYep. AD&D2 was much better than AD&D1. It was the way people actually played instead of all the gibberish in the first edition.

Wait... I didn't see the little winky smiley.  Are you kidding?  If AD&D2 was better than AD&D1, why would AD&D3.x have went back to what they were doing in earlier editions?

Because it's the best of all possible worlds?

Just a theory, not a claim.

Star Wars: The Role-Playing Game was a thing of pure, crystalline genius.  Star Wars 2nd Ed. was a slight improvement on the wonder that was, but messed up some other stuff and acted stupid.  

Then came Star Wars 2nd Edition Revised & Expanded, and the very universe bent under the awesome wonder of something so astonishingly and, umn, universe-bendingly badass that it...uh...bent...the universe.

So six a'one, half a dozen of the other.

dude... thesaurus

Paranoia 5th edition was the worst rerelease of an RPG ever. The humour amounted to unfunny puns and fart jokes, and the art looked like someone had whipped it out in an hour, tops.