SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Games that are much better played without their supplements

Started by Benoist, March 28, 2011, 02:37:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Benoist

Quote from: Sigmund;448503For me it's the Cyberpunk 2020 main rulebook, plus a printout of the Night City map, and whatever adventure material I need and that's it. No splats, expansions, subsequent setting material allowed. Oddly enough, the few times I've run D&D it's the same approach. The only games I've run where I used almost all the published material for were Traveller and Alternity.
Let's face it: there are role playing games out there which did not benefit very much, if at all, from the supplemental lines that followed them.

One such game coming to my mind is AD&D, First Edition, to some extent. I love some of the modules, but the vast majority of its supplemental rules material just alters the game in a way I do not care about. Pre-Unearthed Arcana AD&D is to me vastly superior to AD&D + UA + Survival Guides. I would keep the Monster Manual 2 and Fiend Folio, however, since I'm using these books for my games very much. So it's not an entirely dark picture in this regard.

What games are coming to your mind, and why?

ggroy

Quote from: Benoist;448509One such game coming to my mind is AD&D, First Edition, to some extent. I love some of the modules, but the vast majority of its supplemental rules material just alters the game in a way I do not care about. Pre-Unearthed Arcana AD&D is to me vastly superior to AD&D + UA + Survival Guides. I would keep the Monster Manual 2 and Fiend Folio, however, since I'm using these books for my games very much. So it's not an entirely dark picture in this regard.

I agree.

For the longest time back in the day, we were frequently playing 1E games using only the three core books (MM1, PHB, DMG).  At the time I didn't bother buying many of the later hardcover books.  (I bought modules instead).  We thought many of the later 1E hardcover books seemed kinda superfluous at the time.

Melan

AD&D 2nd edition. In hindsight, you can pick out the rare gems from the torrent of crap and run a great game with them. Back then, you would just be wading around in crap a whole lot. Which is what we did.
Now with a Zine!
ⓘ This post is disputed by official sources


misterguignol

D&D 3.5

Player: "Hey there is this awesome feat in the Complete Book of..."

DM: "NO!"

Player: "How about this awesome prestige class in..."

DM: "NO!"

The above is how all such conversations will play out at my table if I ever run 3.5 again, which is admittedly not likely.

danbuter

D&D 2e was great with just the PHB and no splats. I played and ran it that way for the entire run of the product.
Sword and Board - My blog about BFRPG, S&W, Hi/Lo Heroes, and other games.
Sword & Board: BFRPG Supplement Free pdf. Cheap print version.
Bushi D6  Samurai and D6!
Bushi setting map

Jason D

Star Wars Saga Edition.

You've got everything you need in the core book. You start adding books, and it's more talents, more feats, more prestige classes, alternate systems for handling basic stuff, etc. until you're needing to carry a dozen books to each session just to keep everything handy.

PaladinCA

Quote from: jdurall;448560Star Wars Saga Edition.

You've got everything you need in the core book. You start adding books, and it's more talents, more feats, more prestige classes, alternate systems for handling basic stuff, etc. until you're needing to carry a dozen books to each session just to keep everything handy.

I really like most of the supplements, but I agree with you. The game runs just fine and a whole lot more easily with just the core rulebook.

I'd have given almost anything for a character builder for Saga Edition similar to what D&D 4e had when it was offline. But it was not meant to be....

Nicephorus

Quote from: misterguignol;448552D&D 3.5...

Yea, allowing all the splats is how broken characters come about.  I like 3.5 alright but not enough to pore over every splat looking for potentially broken combos.

This is true to some extent with Saga Star Wars as well.  Some of the ships in the splats are also way underpriced.

PaladinCA

Some splats are better than others.... That said, I'd certainly never run 3.5 will all of the splats being given free reign. That path would have led to madness for me.

Pseudoephedrine

Actually, splats are pretty much necessary for noncasters to keep up with casters in 3.x. There are a few OP options in a handful of them, but they're almost all for casters and they're well written up on the internet (Divine Metamagic, Arcane Thesis and Diplomancy are the only three I can recall that don't look immediately questionable to someone who knows the rules). "Core only" is a terrible idea in 3.x and is sign #1 that the DM doesn't know the rules very well.

Sign #2 is when a DM doesn't swap out monster feats.

On topic>
I don't use supplements for Paranoia and have never noticed the absence. I also don't use Traveller supplements. I find both games are better served by just making shit up.
Running
The Pernicious Light, or The Wreckers of Sword Island;
A Goblin\'s Progress, or Of Cannons and Canons;
An Oration on the Dignity of Tash, or On the Elves and Their Lies
All for S&W Complete
Playing: Dark Heresy, WFRP 2e

"Elves don\'t want you cutting down trees but they sell wood items, they don\'t care about the forests, they\'\'re the fuckin\' wood mafia." -Anonymous

Nicephorus

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;448573Actually, splats are pretty much necessary for noncasters to keep up with casters in 3.x.

That's a bigger issue at higher levels and I find 3e tedious by then anyway.  

The 3.5 splats had quite a bit of power creep.  This allows those players who buy all the books able to make much stronger characters than those who don't.

Benoist

If you want to keep arguing about CharOp "balance" in 3rd ed, power creep etc, create your own thread to do it, please. This thread here is about games that you prefer to play without supplements, and why.

Thanks. :)

Simlasa

I kind of felt that a lot of the White Wolf stuff was best as a raw idea in one book... no splats. I've got a shedload of the things but all inherited, I never bought anything but the corebooks.

thedungeondelver

Battletech, if we can consider core as the blue-covered Rules of Warfare



 and a 3025 Tech Readout



If you want to go even lower-tech and say just the original BT boxed set, that's OK too.

Warhammer Fantasy Role-Play 1e or 2e.
THE DELVERS DUNGEON


Mcbobbo sums it up nicely.

Quote
Astrophysicists are reassessing Einsteinian relativity because the 28 billion l