Quote from: Cat the Bounty Smuggler on October 23, 2022, 04:00:42 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on October 23, 2022, 03:15:12 PM
All.  Of. Them.

This. I have trouble thinking of any systems where the latest version is the best. Basic Fantasy, maybe? But that's a homebrewed B/X retroclone so not sure it counts.

I notice Call of Cthulhu's been mentioned but I'd be a little more specific: Call of Cthulhu 2nd edition is what I'd run if I ran CoC again. (Why not 1e? Because I don't have it, don't know anyone who does have it, and don't know where to get it for less than several hundred dollars.)

As far as D&D, I find each edition scratches a slightly different itch. Granted I now rarely have the sorts of itches that 3e - 5e scratch, but the TSR-era editions are all just different enough that I can't say that one is The One and the others inferior imitations.

I've heard this before why 2e? Instead of anything from 3-6  I thought they were more or less all the same. I've only played 6

I think Runequest 1&2 were better than the versions that followed.

I have some newer versions of Pendragon (4th ed book which is fine, and one of the latest editions PDF), but someone gave me an old worn box for free with 1st ed Pendragon, and I was blown away when I opened it. I bet there is some improvements, tweaking, and more options in the later editions, but the first edition is a thing that was made with a lot of passion and care; it's a thing of beauty.

Heh, even borked systems seemed better before: 7th Sea 1e was. a. mess. but it was at least entertaining and had evocative art (is the secret being physical media?) that inspired you to try to make that mess work. 7th Sea 2e flashbanged into the scene to be studiously ignored once sobriety sank in. 

Wow, yeah, it's hard to find a game that improved over time. Huh, all the more argument to keep a system evergreen. 

Quote from: Ocule on October 23, 2022, 04:51:39 PM

Quote from: Cat the Bounty Smuggler on October 23, 2022, 04:00:42 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on October 23, 2022, 03:15:12 PM
All.  Of. Them.

This. I have trouble thinking of any systems where the latest version is the best. Basic Fantasy, maybe? But that's a homebrewed B/X retroclone so not sure it counts.

I notice Call of Cthulhu's been mentioned but I'd be a little more specific: Call of Cthulhu 2nd edition is what I'd run if I ran CoC again. (Why not 1e? Because I don't have it, don't know anyone who does have it, and don't know where to get it for less than several hundred dollars.)

As far as D&D, I find each edition scratches a slightly different itch. Granted I now rarely have the sorts of itches that 3e - 5e scratch, but the TSR-era editions are all just different enough that I can't say that one is The One and the others inferior imitations.

I've heard this before why 2e? Instead of anything from 3-6  I thought they were more or less all the same. I've only played 6

I can only speak to two of those editions - 2nd, which I got in RPGNow back before it merged with DriveThru, and 5th, the one for which they forgot to put the contested roll table in the book. While the systems are essentially very similar at their core, 5th was pretty clearly the product of a lot of small accretions in the rules that while not bad often felt superfluous, there more to sell a new book than to fulfill an actual need at the table. (Similar to how I feel about D&D 3.5)

However, if I had to choose the biggest difference, it would be aesthetic: the style of 2nd just sets the tone much better than 5th did. IIRC 2nd also has a better introduction to the 1920's Lovecraft country (been a while since I've pulled out my 5th edition book; I don't even remember where it is). At the risk of sounding like a hipster, by 5th it was another soulless corporate product.

I don't have much experience with "Call of Cthulhu" myself, but I have heard about people using dynamite to blow up monsters and stuff in older editions? If that isn't as easy to do or possible to do in newer editions then that sounds like a downgrade to me. There might be variations of CoC, like maybe deltra green or something where it is still possible? But I think it should be in the main game.

Quote from: Banjo Destructo on October 24, 2022, 11:32:14 AM
I don't have much experience with "Call of Cthulhu" myself, but I have heard about people using dynamite to blow up monsters and stuff in older editions? If that isn't as easy to do or possible to do in newer editions then that sounds like a downgrade to me. There might be variations of CoC, like maybe deltra green or something where it is still possible? But I think it should be in the main game.

I think you're thinking of Old Man Henderson, who was a Trail of Cthulhu character.

D&D: my preferred version is 1st Ed, along with the Moldvay edition of Basic. It's probably more nostalgia than anything because those were the ones I cut my teeth on.
2nd Ed is ok. I find the rules more clear to be sure, but in doing so I think it lost some of it's charm. Namely, the art is uninspiring. Secondly, from the mid-90s on, the game easier to min-max and lent itself to power gaming.

3rd is meh. after that, stopped caring.

CoC: any edition before 7th. I don't mind the having percentages for everything (just divide by 5 to revert back to other editions), but the woke-ness that now permeates the game is intolerable. I could go on a huge rant, but I'll hold myself back.

Star Wars: yep the WEG d6 version is awesome. There is what's called the REUP rules (Revised, Expanded, UPdated) which are rules my gaming group uses.

Classic Traveller.

There is a great deal I like about all the subsequent editions, even T5. I would not go as far as one review of a later edition (fourth) I once read that said it was "like hillbilly incest cloning". But Classic Traveller did it not just first, but better, because it knew when enough was enough. It didn't try and do your imagining for you; it left it up to you to flesh out the bare stats for your character or planet or whatever. Preferences will vary but the likes of Mongoose's random career events table kind of palls for me after a (short) while.

B-b-but... you can die in chargen! No. Chargen is finished once you've rolled up your six stats. There is then a "career run-through" minigame that can be played solo or as a group. Once you embark on a career (not compulsory in the rules as written), you are already playing Traveller. There are big rewards on offer (like a ship!), but you might die.

Computers take up whole rooms like in some 70s scifi movie! Again, not really. If you think of all the jobs a Traveller ship's computer does, a lot of that tonnage is going to be sensors etc. Plus if taking a ship out to the frontiers of known space, you want chunky, rugged gear, plus lots of backups and redundancies.

There is no task system! Yes there is. It is not uniform by modern standards but I like it all the more for just that reason. I like that the referee is expected to make rulings, not rely on extensive RAW. The unified task systems in subsequent editions are all pretty unsatisfactory in their own ways anyway.

Successive Traveller editions chased themselves down the ever-more-detailed-real-world-simulation spiral. I recently re-read GURPS Far Trader. It's a great book and I really enjoy reading it. It is thoroughly based on real-world economics concepts and explains how PC-scale tramp freight can happen when megacorps are shipping millions of tons of freight along star lanes that are organised like the real-world contemporary shipping industry. There is a proper stats algorithm for generating freight rates a tramp freighter might have to work with. It is a really impressive piece of work. But eventually I've come to realise I don't need or want any of this in my game.

Quote from: Cat the Bounty Smuggler on October 24, 2022, 11:46:35 AM

Quote from: Banjo Destructo on October 24, 2022, 11:32:14 AM
I don't have much experience with "Call of Cthulhu" myself, but I have heard about people using dynamite to blow up monsters and stuff in older editions? If that isn't as easy to do or possible to do in newer editions then that sounds like a downgrade to me. There might be variations of CoC, like maybe deltra green or something where it is still possible? But I think it should be in the main game.

I think you're thinking of Old Man Henderson, who was a Trail of Cthulhu character.

As amazing as that story was, I think it still must have been a thing some groups did before this story?  I remember some people talking about their whole group using dynamite. Shotguns, etc.  But maybe it was just how a few groups played rather than a trope of older CoC?

The whole problem of editions is that there are only three paths that can be taken.

First is the Revision. This is usually done to rectify small mistakes, clarify the text and so on. This usually (not always) in a very backwards compatible product, mostly keeps the fan base happy and tends to be well received.

Second is the Money Grab. The previous edition is no longer selling that well even though there's really nothing wrong with the system itself. The company wants to make more money, and a revision doesn't usually lead to massive profits, so they decide to do a true new edition, with different mechanics (different enough that it won't be backwards compatible) and possibly a snazzy new look to attract new customers. If it's well done, it can generate exactly the sort of results that are expected of it, but it will inevitably be contentious, purely on the basis of alienating part of the player base.

Third is the Revolution . Fuck the previous edition and all its players, they were all bastards and bigots anyway, full steam ahead and let's ram this fucking thing down their throats. The result is almost always destructive, with the player base fragmenting (at best) or migrating to a different product. What remains is a completely different thing from the original and/or previous editions, essentially unrecognizable as part of a timeline.

Most RPG companies feel the irresistible urge to keep tinkering with their product, until they end up at that third option. For the players that spent their money and time on the first few editions, this feels like a kick in the nuts, and a positive reputation for the early editions ends up being almost inevitable.

A few companies, like Chaosium, have for the most part resisted the pull of the cash grab or the revolution, but others have fully embraced the model.

Quote from: BronzeDragon on October 24, 2022, 03:21:26 PM
The whole problem of editions is that there are only three paths that can be taken.

First is the Revision. This is usually done to rectify small mistakes, clarify the text and so on. This usually (not always) in a very backwards compatible product, mostly keeps the fan base happy and tends to be well received.

Second is the Money Grab. The previous edition is no longer selling that well even though there's really nothing wrong with the system itself. The company wants to make more money, and a revision doesn't usually lead to massive profits, so they decide to do a true new edition, with different mechanics (different enough that it won't be backwards compatible) and possibly a snazzy new look to attract new customers. If it's well done, it can generate exactly the sort of results that are expected of it, but it will inevitably be contentious, purely on the basis of alienating part of the player base.

Third is the Revolution . Fuck the previous edition and all its players, they were all bastards and bigots anyway, full steam ahead and let's ram this fucking thing down their throats. The result is almost always destructive, with the player base fragmenting (at best) or migrating to a different product. What remains is a completely different thing from the original and/or previous editions, essentially unrecognizable as part of a timeline.

I'm not even clear on the difference between 2 and 3. To take some examples of major revisions:

A) Original D&D -> AD&D (1978): This definitely was not just clarifying the text. It was a whole new system, going from small booklets of a few dozen pages to hundreds of pages in three hardbound 8.5x11. So it seems like Revolution, but it was generally well received.

B) Champions 3rd -> Hero System 4th (1989): This was also a thorough rewrite that changed a lot, but was also well received.

C) AD&D 2nd -> D&D 3rd (2000): This was another major rewrite that was largely well received.

D) GURPS 3rd -> 4th (2004): This was the first new edition after over 15 years, and it was


On the other hand, minor revisions are often considered money grabs. For example, D&D3 to D&D3.5 was a minor revision that was mostly backwards compatible, but was often regarded as a money grab.

The trick with "new editions" that are radically different but somehow work anyway is that the "new edition" is really a new game.  So if that is going to work, then it is best to just admit "new game" up front.  That takes care of many of the people that are annoyed by al the changes to the old game.  Trying to make a new game but sell it as a new edition is like diving off a 10 meter platform but deciding halfway down you'd rather do a cannonball.  The most likely result is pain.

The reason why so many later editions are bad is because the authors want to have their cake and eat it too.  They want the network effect and the brand and the loyalty of the existing game, but they don't want to embrace what caused all of that in the first place.

The only example I can think of off hand that fits is what MRQ II/Legends eventually did with RQ.  As a separate game, it's not bad at all, and thus being forced into the "Legends" label because of losing the license to RQ was probably a good thing in the long run.  Meanwhile, I'd put the best version of RQ as either 1E or 2E. 

So for those 3 categories of change, add a 4th, "wrap around to new game".  Funny how #3 is the worst option, but if you keep going past that, you might succeed.

Fate, 2nd Edition (2003).

It's a surprisingly lean and well-written RPG. More like a cleaned-up and organized Fudge than Fate. It's almost a traditional (i.e. non-narrative) RPG, except it does have "aspects." But that's only 2 pages of rules that you could easily skip.

It's free and OGL so you don't need to worry about giving money to Evil Hat.

Quote from: jhkim on October 24, 2022, 03:52:09 PM


I'm not even clear on the difference between 2 and 3. To take some examples of major revisions:

A) Original D&D -> AD&D (1978): This definitely was not just clarifying the text. It was a whole new system, going from small booklets of a few dozen pages to hundreds of pages in three hardbound 8.5x11. So it seems like Revolution, but it was generally well received.

B) Champions 3rd -> Hero System 4th (1989): This was also a thorough rewrite that changed a lot, but was also well received.

C) AD&D 2nd -> D&D 3rd (2000): This was another major rewrite that was largely well received.

D) GURPS 3rd -> 4th (2004): This was the first new edition after over 15 years, and it was


On the other hand, minor revisions are often considered money grabs. For example, D&D3 to D&D3.5 was a minor revision that was mostly backwards compatible, but was often regarded as a money grab.

A - Those are two different games. D&D remained a fully supported different option for another 13 years. Yes, there was migration, but it was far from complete.

B - I can't speak to this, since I'm not familiar with either.

C - Yes, hence my "if it's well done" clause. But it still generated a fracture of the player base. The OSR was born soon after the new edition appeared. Third edition was just so good at generating new player interest that it never felt the blow from the fracture. It would take a revolution to break the game. 3.5 was backwards compatible only if you didn't use battle mats  and miniatures, which were heavily pushed. The changes to creature sizes, facing and spell effects were extensive. It was far closer to a true new edition than AD&D 2E was.

D - I'm not sure what you were gonna say here (you seem to have gotten truncated) but most GURPS players I know didn't really like 4E and mostly still play 3E.

The minor revisions are things like CoC editions, sometimes they don't even change anything and would probably just be reprints in C&C terms. A player going from 2E CoC to 7E would need five minutes or so to adapt.