Well, with the PHBII I feel is a good question to ask. Do you think that releasing a core book and an endless flow of supplements (the usual road for publishers) is the best route? Or do you feel that smaller runs and a constant release of new games would be the best route?

Discuss!

Quote from: Imperator;294274Well, with the PHBII I feel is a good question to ask. Do you think that releasing a core book and an endless flow of supplements (the usual road for publishers) is the best route? Or do you feel that smaller runs and a constant release of new games would be the best route?

Discuss!

If a company is publishing an endless stream of Core Rulebooks (PHB, PHB2, PHB3, etc...) then it isn't the supplement mill because each rulebook is a Core Rulebook. The supplement mill is entirely optional, it is designed for a low buy in to the game with the Core Rulebook and then the consumer can decide if they want to include supplementary material.

The problem with releasing an endless supply of Core Rulebooks is that eventually the buy in for the game becomes greater than the average consumer will wish to spend. So it may be profitable in the short run, but then once the number of Core Rulebooks reaches a critical number, sales will drop and stay low in the long run.

My preference is for Core Rulebooks, and then everything else is optional.

Personally, I prefer self-contained core books.

I understand why the industry puts out supplements, but personally I would prefer to see more complete RPGs being put out and have the publishing companies offer online support in the form of free zine style supplements. Fans of the game could submit material for the publishers to put on the websites, etc. Sometimes, a cheap PDF or printed booklet could be offered in order to maintain readership/metacampaign events and whatnot...

In the case of 4e, I bought the core rulebooks and I'm sure it's all I need to run successful campaigns with it, but if I were to run a game for any kind of hardcore fan of 4e, I'd pretty much be expected to have the PHB2, MM2 and DMG2 as well as pretty much any additional 'core books' that are being published.

My guess is that supplements are good for the industry on the business side, building readership and maintaining a constant stream for a game line, but as a GM, it can be a pain.

Look at AEG's L5R 1st edition line for instance. You didn't need all of the clan books to run good games, but there was enough material there to keep me buying them but not necessarily enough to warrant the cost.

In my mind, Core Books should be hardcover and all that you need to play, ever. Supplements should be softcover and cost less than half the core book's price and let's say no more than 4 supplements a year. More than that and I know I won't be creating a collection out of that game line.
It would be nice if most publishers did Core Books without a supplement schedule in mind so that they don't hold back on anything...

The industry (i.e. the game companies) think of it as necessary. You basically exploit the concept of serials for RPGs, since fans will want always more of a world of imagination they like, preserve resources, and at the same time, maximise profit by "milking the cow" so-to-speak.

Doing it any other way would dramatically alter the business practices of the industry. One could for instance imagine companies publishing games with limited numbers of supplements, if any, but that would mean you multiply the number of games to try to get the same cash flow, which would mean you could run into a "TSR settings" kind of problem where there's just too much stuff to ensure the rentability of a single product or brand like, say, D&D.

Maybe White Wolf and its new WoD presents some kind of middle ground in this instance with its five-supplements games, one game a year format.

Is it necessary for the gamers themselves? Not at all, though they desire it and often think of it as necessary to their game tables, otherwise they move on to other pastures (i.e. if the game line is not in print, it's a "dead game" somehow - which is in fact a ridiculous concept as it relates to one particular game table).

Let me just say up front that I hate the 3-Core book structure.  I much prefer that the game be presented in one book.  However, I realize that some game system really need more than one book.  Consequently, I have accepted, under duress, have accepted the 3-Core book system.  

I would prefer the 3-Core book system.  As with 3.x D&D, all you really needed was contained in the Core books.  You never really needed to purchase any additional books.  The additional splat books are just that- additional and splat.

Quote from: Drohem;294283Let me just say up front that I hate the 3-Core book structure.  I much prefer that the game be presented in one book.  However, I realize that some game system really need more than one book.  Consequently, I have accepted, under duress, have accepted the 3-Core book system.  

I would prefer the 3-Core book system.  As with 3.x D&D, all you really needed was contained in the Core books.  You never really needed to purchase any additional books.  The additional splat books are just that- additional and splat.

The 3-core rulebook structure is something I've disliked about D&D since I started playing. Early on, I was more attracted to B/X D&D because of its low buy-in to play (I could buy both the Basic and the Expert D&D rulebooks for the cost of 1 AD&D core rulebook, which was an important consideration for a 12 year old earning only an allowance and lawn mowing money). Unfortunately, that is now part of the tradition of D&D, having a PHB, DMG, and a MM.

I really think that a version of D&D in a single book, designed to take players up to level 10 or so and introduce them to the game, could really sell well as a low buy-in game. The first printing of the 3E PHB with the 16 page 2000 Survival Kit in the back comes close to this.

More than anything else, I didn't buy the 4e books because I knew they wouldn't have the shit I need in them, and I didn't want to buy phb2 or any other bullshit.

I've personally come to prefer the self-contained, one-volume, $20 game, but I have a shelf full of RQ and Pendragon stuff that says the supplement model works in some way.

Of course, supplements didn't keep RQ at its position of the early 80s. And it's clear to me that the model includes a reboot when they've milked the supplements enough. I've seen this happen several times with the biggest games (D&D, Vampire). Chaosium/Avalon Hill just dropped the ball instead of rebooting.

So WotC releases PHB II now, and that's probably really a core book in the sense that it's got a lot of things people want. But what happens in a few years when they've run out of things you can publish for a profit? Scraping the bottom of the barrel, so to speak?

It's a consumerist model. And it helps to train the buyers in consumerist habits. That's why people refer to unsupported games as dead (nobody calls Monopoly dead, and it hasn't had a supplement ever).

Is it good for the industry, whatever that is? Maybe. Is it good for the people who play (AKA 'the hobby')? I don't think so. Is it good for me? Definitely not.

Quote from: jeff37923;294284The 3-core rulebook structure is something I've disliked about D&D since I started playing.

Wordy McWord. And it has gotten worst with every edition. I vastly prefer a core book like CoC that is really all you will ever need to completely run the game.

Also, I vastly prefer the new approach of WW to WoD. Every supplement is more of a toolkit than a metaplot oriented book, so there's more barrel to scrap, so to speak.

It's bad for the hobby not only because it increases the apparent cost of "buy-in" for new players but because a constant stream of "core" books and "must have" splat books cuts down the number of people willing to GM. Players can get by with only buying the books that interest them, but the GM has to buy all the books that any player at the table wants to use or disallow the books (upsetting the player).  Some GMs have infinite supplies of money, but most do not. Sure, it is possible to limit a campaign to just the game's basic books, but once the additional books start pouring out it gets harder and harder to find players willing to be so limited.

Of course, a constant stream of expensive core and splat books are great for the publisher's cash flow. Since expanding the market for games is expensive, it is easier to sell more stuff to the same people and get new people to buy the core rules. This is probably why TSR -- in the expanding market of the late 70s to late 80s -- did not have a constant stream of new rulebooks aimed at player and GMs, instead they had a constant stream of relatively inexpensive modules aimed at GMs (and an occasional hardback still mainly aimed at GMs).  The influx of new players kept the cash coming in from the rulebooks and providing inexpensive modules made it easy for GMs to run games, which made it easy for new groups of those new players to form, which in turn helped bring in more new players.

TSR did not start producing lots of splat books for players and GMs until the RPG boom died shortly after 2nd edition came out. Without new players streaming in to make purchases, a constant stream of rulebooks that both players and GMs would buy (full of kits, etc.) was the best way to milk money out of a stagnant or even shrinking number of buyers.

With the continued shrinking of the number of gamers from the highs of the 1980s, producing adventures went from a money making proposition to an non-effective way to do business. Adventures only sell to GMs, splat books sell to both GMs and players. Of course, the lack of inexpensive prepared adventures makes it harder to GM, thus reducing the number of casual GMs which, unfortunately, soon shrinks the overall market even more -- especially when the rules are so bloated and complex that creating a adventure from scratch is a lot of hard work. (It's easy to create an adventure for 0e or B/X (where stat blocks are a couple of lines), but much harder for 3.x and 4e  (although 4e is easier than 3.x).

Overall, I think the production of splat books to sell to the same people instead of trying to bring new people in is successful short-term business thinking, but is killing the RPG industry in the long run. Fortunately, the hobby will survive even if bad thinking kills the current version of the RPG industry.

Really, from a hobby perspective an ongoing magazine flow of random assorted material would be best.

DRAGON of the eighties how we miss ya!

Quote from: David Johansen;294316Really, from a hobby perspective an ongoing magazine flow of random assorted material would be best.

Agreed. I suspect that's why Knockspell and Fight On! are doing so well in the "Old School" world. Magazines are great from the hobbyist's POV and these are the closest I've seen to the late 70s -- early 80s issues of The Dragon. All they really lack is Gary's occasional pontificating.

I can do very well without pontificating.

I'm a big fan of published adventures. I strongly feel that they help people GMing, and the more GMs, the best for the hobby. However, cheap published adventures seem to have lost appeal to the publishers (with exceptions like CoC), who prefer to release expensive fat books about rules or setting. I don't think it's a good idea. The more scenarios and campaigns we get published (as long they reach some quality criteria) the better.

I'm also a fan of published adventures. The best ones give value added by including a new monsters, magic items, equipment, or whatever without forcing you to expend large amounts of cash for a splatbook (like AD&D modules of past, Dungeon Crawl Classics and Paizo's Gamemastery series of modules for 3.x).

Unfortunately, like Imperator said, large game publishers don't find them cost-effective like small to medium game publishers do. Even though they are great for the hobby.

I feel that well done adventures have an additional benefit: they give gamers some common experiences to talk about. For me one of the best things about playing CoC, for example, is discussing the published adventures with other people and seeing how it went for them.