My Ars Magica, 3rd edition, books.

I ran a semi-long campaign 12-14 years ago, has once in a while since bought more sourcebooks when they've turned up in bargain bins and like, and I don't think I will ever run it again. It just takes a very special kinda of group of players to make the troupe-style roleplaying work and click. And quite a lot of work.

But I'll be damned if I am ever gonna sell or unload them.

Just for this EXACT reason, I refuse to sell any RPG books ever again. I have sold off books only later to regret it, and even re-purchased them because I felt I could use them.

This of course has become much easier with my expansive digital library as I can keep all my books in a small space. :-)  (I still have a fairly large print library as well)

Examples: GURPS Voo Doo and GURPs Cabal. Man these books are chock full of useful tid bits to use in any horror game. I have also sold then re-bought a collection of Eberron books (DD3.5). I really like this setting and I plan on running games for it in the future (most likely using another system, not DD3.5).

Earthdawn first and second editions. The former for the art, the latter for the slightly better mechanics, both because it's simply my favorite RPG. I loaned the 2e book to my DM a few months back to run the magic system by her as (inspiration for) a replacement for the pseudo-Vancian stupid of D&D/PF magic, but it never went anywhere. Sigh.

I also still have my old d6 Star Wars and 7th Sea books, but I don't really anticipate using either of them again, sadly. I vastly prefer the skill-based design of both over the restrictive classes of Pathfinder, but as we all know, there's what you'd like to play and there's what everyone else will play.

Quote from: woodsmoke;802590Earthdawn first and second editions. The former for the art, the latter for the slightly better mechanics, both because it's simply my favorite RPG.

Earthdawn is a great setting... I'm not sure about the rules because our GM was always fiddling with them. I'd like to try it again someday.

Quote(...) but as we all know, there's what you'd like to play and there's what everyone else will play.

A constant frustration, BUT one I'm feeling less of since I started playing online more... connecting with other folks who are not Pathfinder fans.

Several books have been lost over the years, a couple stolen, and I gave my MERPS stuff to a buddy who really wanted them.

Otherwise, I have kept every rpg book I have ever acquired.  Plenty of room in the basement for them.  Even old Dragon/Dungeon/Polyhedron mags.  Everything comes in handy as inspiration though never directly used in game.

If I don't use something for 3 years, it gets sentenced to the Shelf. In the next year, anything on the Shelf has a chance to get used - even as a resource - but if it does not get used, then it gets sentenced to eBay unless its clearly a rare reference text.

If I decide I made a mistake, I just buy another copy off eBay.

Quote from: Simlasa;802600Earthdawn is a great setting... I'm not sure about the rules because our GM was always fiddling with them. I'd like to try it again someday.

My brother did the same thing when I used to play with him. He's of the opinion Shadowrun (3e, I think?) is about as close as any game has ever come to mechanical perfection, and he was always trying to figure out a conversion. When that didn't work he turned to the Savage Worlds conversion, but that didn't live up to his theoretical ideal either and he ultimately just stopped running the game. Haven't played Earthdawn since, much to my chagrin.

I'll readily admit ED's mechanics are far from perfect, but IMO they're perfectly serviceable if you don't expect the game to be anything more than it is (D&D with the serial numbers filed off and mechanics that actually make sense). I particularly like the magic and dice step systems; both are perhaps less elegant than they could be, but they make sense, which is a breath of fresh air after years and years of D&D, and the latter actually gives on a reason to use all of one's dice instead of just rolling a dX plus modifier for everything.

Quote from: SimlasaA constant frustration, BUT one I'm feeling less of since I started playing online more... connecting with other folks who are not Pathfinder fans.

I should probably look into that more, but... I don't know, online gaming has just never really appealed to me outside of MMOs. Nothing beats the experience of everyone sitting around a table in the same room, even if it means always playing fucking Pathfinder.

Quote from: woodsmoke;802810I should probably look into that more, but... I don't know, online gaming has just never really appealed to me outside of MMOs. Nothing beats the experience of everyone sitting around a table in the same room, even if it means always playing fucking Pathfinder.

I'd never say it's AS GOOD as live and in person... but it's been pretty damn good, particularly if there's cameras for face contact. My first online game was with James Raggi and I was really taken with how well it worked and how near it came to actually being there.
There are downsides... like technical glitches and people feeling less pressure to show up... but not having to travel, having access to your own bathroom and fridge and getting to play obscure games with willing/eager participants nearly makes up for all the shortcomings.

Quote from: woodsmoke;802810My brother did the same thing when I used to play with him. He's of the opinion Shadowrun (3e, I think?) is about as close as any game has ever come to mechanical perfection, and he was always trying to figure out a conversion. When that didn't work he turned to the Savage Worlds conversion, but that didn't live up to his theoretical ideal either and he ultimately just stopped running the game. Haven't played Earthdawn since, much to my chagrin.

I'll readily admit ED's mechanics are far from perfect, but IMO they're perfectly serviceable if you don't expect the game to be anything more than it is (D&D with the serial numbers filed off and mechanics that actually make sense). I particularly like the magic and dice step systems; both are perhaps less elegant than they could be, but they make sense, which is a breath of fresh air after years and years of D&D, and the latter actually gives on a reason to use all of one's dice instead of just rolling a dX plus modifier for everything.

I have ED1, 2, Classic, and 3rd sitting on my shelf. Some of these books will get pulled out for setting stuff once Earthdawn 4th edition hits (Player's Guide this month). Probably won't ever touch 2nd again, tho. As some-one who has played and GM'd all the editions, I really, really recommend checking out 4th edition.

The new devs have figured out a mechanic to replace the Success Level Chart (basically +1 success for every 5 over the Difficulty number). This streamlines play incredibly and they're using this mechanic to improve the Spell rules (and it also is the basis of the "Armor Defeat" rules, where each additional success on the to-hit gives +2 Damage... so a 4 success hit will blow through Chainmail - if I remember my 3rd edition numbers). Lots of improvements built on the "Optional Talent Pool" advancement mechanic that was introduces in Classic, which resolves the cookie-cutter Adept problem I ran into as a GM.

Quote from: Telarus;802950As some-one who has played and GM'd all the editions, I really, really recommend checking out 4th edition.

The new devs have figured out a mechanic to replace the Success Level Chart (basically +1 success for every 5 over the Difficulty number). This streamlines play incredibly and they're using this mechanic to improve the Spell rules (and it also is the basis of the "Armor Defeat" rules, where each additional success on the to-hit gives +2 Damage... so a 4 success hit will blow through Chainmail - if I remember my 3rd edition numbers). Lots of improvements built on the "Optional Talent Pool" advancement mechanic that was introduces in Classic, which resolves the cookie-cutter Adept problem I ran into as a GM.

That does all sound pretty good. While playing Earthdawn I appreciated what the rules were trying to do but they often felt bulky and redundant... having to roll several times for each attack... and yeah, there was that samey feel to always favoring certain Adept abilities.

I fully intend to pick up ED4 when it's released; I've been watching the FASA site for months now just waiting for the damn thing to finally show up in the store.

I don't remember enough about the mechanics to know whether I'd consider what you said about the change to success steps an improvement. While I know some consider it unweildy, I've always loved the fact ED separates defense (did I hit him?) from damage mitigation (yeah, but the blow glanced off his armor). Not sure whether that's what either of you were referring to.

I do remember cookie-cutter disciplines being kind of a problem. Back when I was still playing the GM at the time tried to encourage us to do more with skills to get around that somewhat. I was fairly power-game-y back then and didn't really go for it because of the mechanical inferiority of skills, but if I were to play the game now I'd probably load my characters down with skill ranks simply because the system lets me (as opposed to Pathfinder, in which I'm constantly running afoul of the class-based skill cap in my bid to do add a little extra flavor to the character). Hopefully the optional talent pool will provide a nice middle ground.

Quote from: woodsmoke;802963While I know some consider it unweildy, I've always loved the fact ED separates defense (did I hit him?) from damage mitigation (yeah, but the blow glanced off his armor).

I always liked how Runequest did it... but for some reason the Earthdawn seemed to have extra layers that repeated the process... or something. It's been a while now since I've played. I remember it always slowed down combat as each Player tried to remember all the various Abilities he could bring to bear... then rolled each one... added bonuses... rolled the actual attack... then remembered he forgot to subtract wounds. It was just a lot of moving parts, IMO.

Fair point. I really liked the level of crunch in ED because, again, all of it made sense to me (insert broken record joke here). I get that it's very much a YMMV issue, though.

Quote from: woodsmoke;803049Fair point. I really liked the level of crunch in ED because, again, all of it made sense to me (insert broken record joke here). I get that it's very much a YMMV issue, though.

Yeah, the crunch made sense, and tied back to the setting... which kind of made it more frustrating because it all had a reason for being there. It was flavorful crunch.
I'm noticing the same thing now as I tinker with the magic rules for my homebrew setting... coming up with all sorts of flavorful ideas that are tied to how the magic works in that place... but realizing it's just too much to move smoothly in game.

I going to highlight this as 'Probably doomed' as I haven't made my mind up on them yet.

Celtic Legend - I used this to get some ideas for a campaign I ran where the PCs were heroes from the Dark Ages that got re-incarnated into bodies in Victorian times. I will probably never use this again as I have my eyes on getting the Design Mechanism book Mythic Britain that I think will more than adequately replace this.

Paranoia - Played this back in the day but its not a setting that I think you can make last long term. I therefore doubt I'll use this again, but many of the adventures are funny and might give me horrible ideas in the future.