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

ggroy

Quote from: The Butcher;449768Too true. It's simple statistics, really, no matter how high the writing and publishing standards for a given game line, the more stuff you put out, the higher the probability that bad material sees print.

There's no shortage of great games and settings which have collapsed under the weight of their own supplement treadmill.

At what number of supplements, would be the "breaking point"?

(ie.  How many splatbooks does it take for a game/setting to collapse under its own weight?).

The Butcher

Quote from: ggroy;449771At what number of supplements, would be the "breaking point"?

(ie.  How many splatbooks does it take for a game/setting to collapse under its own weight?).

I'm not sure you can actually derive a number, or even a range. Especially since "good supplement" or "bad supplement" is a value judgement. Some games are saddled with bad writing right form the start. Some have great writing but never playtest. Others have great teams, but change writers or editors and start to suck, until the new people get a hang of the game (and/or its fans) and strat putting out good material again. It's complicated.

ggroy

Imho, the closest example I can think of offhand of a game/setting just reaching a "breaking point" without collapsing under its own weight (subjectively) could be Scarred Lands.

Imho, a game/setting which is just beyond the point of no return and already in the process of collapsing under its own weight (subjectively) could be the Pathfinder rpg + Golarion setting this year (2011).

Pseudoephedrine

Quote from: ggroy;449771At what number of supplements, would be the "breaking point"?

(ie.  How many splatbooks does it take for a game/setting to collapse under its own weight?).

I don't have a number, but I do have a principle: If I have to consult more books during play than I can comfortably have open on the table, then I'm playing with too many supplements. This in practice means 2-3 books including the corebook. Supplements consulted "off the table" (during character or adventure creation or during downtime between adventures) don't count.
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

Claudius

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;449693I think that any game that sees continual publication is more than likely to reach the point where additional supplements are more trouble than it's worth.
Yes. I think the reason is that there is a finite amount of "interesting things" you can say or write about anything. You can't churn out supplement after supplement and have all of them be good, interesting and engaging.
Grając zaś w grę komputerową, być może zdarzyło się wam zapragnąć zejść z wyznaczonej przez autorów ścieżki i, miast zabić smoka i ożenić się z księżniczką, zabić księżniczkę i ożenić się ze smokiem.

Nihil sine magno labore vita dedit mortalibus.

And by your sword shall you live and serve thy brother, and it shall come to pass when you have dominion, you will break Jacob's yoke from your neck.

Dios, que buen vasallo, si tuviese buen señor!

Caesar Slaad

Quote from: The Butcher;449768I've been avoiding the career supplements like the plague, having been warned off of splatbooks by the Old World of Darkness and D&D 3.5e. From my cursory readings, I'm not sure the new career paths actually add anything significant to the core character generation charts.

I am curious, though, as to what supplements you prefer for Mongoose Traveller. You mention 760 Patrons and Central Supply Catalogue (which seem to heap a lot of praise everytime MongTrav supplements are mentioned). What else?

Well, if you don't see value in new careers, that may be just about it. 1001 Characters is nice if you like a ready-made packet of NPCs, and Traders and Gunboats is pretty much what's on the tin--I got the PDF version and use it to print and laminate ship plans for players to use.

Beyond that, the content of the green-stripe books is, as I alluded to, highly dependent upon the sort of game you run. Psion would be useful, for example, if you want a game where psychic powers are a feature, perhaps not so much otherwise. Scout would be good for a survey/exploration game, etc.
The Secret Volcano Base: my intermittently updated RPG blog.

Running: Pathfinder Scarred Lands, Mutants & Masterminds, Masks, Starfinder, Bulldogs!
Playing: Sigh. Nothing.
Planning: Some Cyberpunk thing, system TBD.