|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 8, 2009 8:26:54 GMT -6
This is a thought that dwayanu had in another thread and I thought it was interesting enough to explore as a thread of its own. This was actually something I thought about a lot when I was putting together S&W:WB and my "master plan" involved trying to put together something about the size of Holmes. Just as constrained resources were once the mother of invention in programming, an enforced brevity may be an asset here. MA weighs in at 32 pp., and has never struck me as notably lacking (which is not incompatible with always welcoming more). Now that’s a point that most game designers seem to miss. Here are some early RPGs, along with page counts. As I note, the pamphlet-sized booklets artificially inflates page counts, so I scaled them to regular 8.5x11” sized pages for comparison purposes. 1E Boot Hill 18 (36 half-sheets) Chainmail 22 (44 half-sheets) Warriors of Mars 28 (56 half-sheets) The first three are technically miniatures rules and not RPGs, but we played Boot Hill like an RPG and had a great time with it. MA is, as you said, only 32 pages  Holmes Basic is 48 OD&D (3-LBB only) is 56 (112 half-sheets) Gamma World is 56 Top Secret is 62 Traveller (3 black books) is 66 (132 half-sheets) OD&D (3 LBB + 4 Sup) is 183 (366 half-sheets) 1E AD&D (PH, DMG, MM) weighs in at 470 pages. 4E "D&D" (PH, DMG, MM) is a colossal 828 pages.  Somewhere along the line (perhaps with Gary's AD&D hardbacks) the notion of "bigger is better" took off and today's RPGs are often bloated rulebooks with few rules and a lot of fiction or backgrounds to pad the space. The same thing can be said about adventure modules, with the AD&D G-series mods being something like 16 pages each while the 4E intro module "Keep on the Shadowfell" is 80 pages long! So, the question becomes … how many pages are needed to make a complete RPG? How much does the genre impact this? (Wild West games usually don’t have spells, for example.) EDIT: Fixed the length for Holmes from 64 to 48 (what was I thinking?) and moved it in the post since they were arranged by size. |
|
|
|
Post by greyharp on Mar 8, 2009 16:00:53 GMT -6
Actually Holmes is only 48 pages long. I've downloaded lots of really nice looking games of 200 to 300+ pages, but I'll never read them let alone print them out, they're far too long. I think the larger the page count, the more the gamer is shackled by the rules, stiffling imagination and consulting the rulebook for every doubt and uncertainty. These days, for me, any more than 100 pages and a rpg is starting to go into the realms of wanky bloat. |
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Mar 8, 2009 23:20:13 GMT -6
I have to agree; I've had a lot of fun with games with page counts numbering 64 or less.
I hesitated, I really did, before acquiring Empire of the Petal Throne (124 pages or so). (But the idea is just so darn cool, I had to get it...)
Plus, these days, I just get bored reading something as long and bloated as the recent stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Random on Mar 9, 2009 7:24:48 GMT -6
I agree. Men & Magic would be a perfect player's book if only anyone could understand it!
Actually, I'm quite fond of the AD&D PHB, but the DMG is too bulky for me to really memorize or conveniently reference at the table.
|
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Mar 9, 2009 15:53:52 GMT -6
Size of type, number and size of illustrations, and white space in layout are factors. In the case of 4E, I think the choices contributed to aesthetics and utility -- but even accounting for them, I consider the books bloated.
Much of the bloat is in "designers' notes" and advice, and much is in sheer accumulation of mechanics.
As to the genre factor, one might note the large number of pages devoted to spells in most fantasy games. One might also note, however, that long spell lists reflect a choice in how to treat magic. T&T 5E, for instance, goes into little detail concerning monsters and none at all concerning magic items.
A superhero game covers at least as much fantastic subject matter as one involving sorcerers. Villains & Vigilantes (revised edition) is 48 pages. Champions went from 56 to 80 pp. in its first two editions, but that was mainly a matter of improved layout. Hero System Fifth Edition is between 370 and 380 pp.; I don't know about Fifth Revised. I do know that it feels "heavier" rules-wise to me than AD&D, and I much prefer 1st-3rd. ed. Champions with very rare reference to supplements.
How many pages of Dragon magazine did I read? Surely hundreds -- but only a tiny fraction ever directly affected my games.
I think that 64 pages is a good target for a "core" text, 32 pp. for a module, accounting for easy-to-read layout.
|
|
|
|
Post by RandallS on Mar 9, 2009 16:57:26 GMT -6
B/X was two 64 page books -- packed full of useful info for the most part. RC was a 304 page book -- but it was a compilation of a number of smaller books (which were actually easier to use in play). Personally, I think anything over 128 full size pages for complete core rules is probably too much. I'd really like to see that divided a player's book and a GM's book, with the player's book no larger that 32 pages (48 at the outside). If a book is going to have lots of illos (especially full page ones), I can cut it some slack on the page count. However, unless the illos are actual game aids, I really am not willing to pay more to have them in the book. I am, however, willing to pay a bit more for a readable type size and enough white space to make the book easy to read. (First edition C&S is a bad example to follow. ) |
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Mar 9, 2009 17:02:02 GMT -6
Wasted SpaceA) Game Fiction. Bring me the head of whoever started this fad! If it's something based on Leigh Brackett's planetary romances, then a select few paragraphs as section headings may be meet. But spare us page upon page of "fanfic." B) The History of the World. EPT gave us about six pages, and Tékumel is exceptional. Other setting details should be chosen judiciously, preferably worked into presentation of game basics as unobtrusively as possible. I cut some slack for Chaosium's games (e.g., Stormbringer), but in general I think it better to save most such stuff for supplements. C) An Introduction to Literature. A short bibliography is fine, but do we really need long essays on Genre, Sub-Genres, Plot, Character, Theme, and so on? Can't we just assume some things of someone who was interested enough to pick up a game about (say) Post-Holocaust Fuzzy Cowboy Wuxia in the first place? D) Game Philosophy. Get a pass if your name is Gary Gygax -- but it's still nice not actually to need to buy the whole megillah of AD&D to play D&D. A succinct explanation of "How to Use This Book" (for those who've spent the past 35 years in a Tibetan monastery or something) is appropriate, as are a few quick tips along the way. There's plenty of theory and so on to be found online! 
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 9, 2009 17:25:48 GMT -6
Well stated overall! Wasted SpaceA) Game Fiction. …spare us page upon page of "fanfic." I agree. I’d rather see a list of inspirational reading than have a rulebook that contains all of the inspiration reading. The original authors did it better anyway; I won't be able to write Conan better than REH or write Barsoom better than Burroughs or... B) The History of the World. …in general I think it better to save most such stuff for supplements. Agreed. A couple of pages is okay, but most of this stuff is wasted space for a core rulebook. C) An Introduction to Literature. …do we really need long essays on Genre, Sub-Genres, Plot, Character, Theme, and so on? No, no, no, no, no. And so on. Agreed. Even in my own S&W:WB there are some paragraphs on how to use the funny dice, but I wonder if that stuff is needed at all. How many people find a game and decide to play, but have never heard of gaming or have no friends who have heard of gaming or have no internet access. I suppose we put that stuff in because you’re “supposed do” in the modern RPG model, but I didn’t have much trouble with Men & Magic and it didn’t explain much at all. People would read the rules and take a stab at it – if they had fun great, and if they didn’t like a rule they’d change it. |
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Mar 9, 2009 17:49:43 GMT -6
This discussion is wonderful and very useful to me right now. I don´t have too much to say, but keep it going please.
|
|
|
|
Post by snorri on Mar 9, 2009 18:25:33 GMT -6
Epées & Sorcellerie is 64 pages, including several pages of tables to have all of them in the back of the book. That's exactly what I wanted : the same lenght as the Red Box rules. It means some things lacks : - no background at all - i'm currently writing one. - very few 'how to play' advices, just a few ideas on how to tinker monsters, and a page of introduction. - no magical objects lists - I rather used lbb magic items to enlarge spell lists - no sample of character creation, and more generally, no sample at all - no introduction scenario So it's not a beginners friendly game - which was not its intention, even if some players suggested on a french forum they wil use it as an initiation game! For a larger project, or a better version of this one, I could go up to 128 - Labyrinth Lord size - but nothing's more. i'm very pleased with E&S being a softcover book |
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Mar 9, 2009 18:30:44 GMT -6
Amen, dwayanu. I especially HATE game-related fiction. Grrr...  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2009 19:07:08 GMT -6
there are some paragraphs on how to use the funny dice, but I wonder if that stuff is needed at all. Heh! Here is the intro to my house-rules: Standards & Assumptions
It is assumed the prospective player or referee reading this material is already familiar with role-playing games (RPGs) in general and Dungeons & Dragons (D&D) in particular. If not, a variety of web based resources are available to D&D neophytes. Beginners are strongly encouraged to pay particular attention to dice notation and how to use the dice to generate random numbers; the various meanings of the word level as used in the game; and other standard abbreviations. |
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Mar 9, 2009 19:15:20 GMT -6
I find game fiction used exceptionally well in the RQ supplements Cults of Prax and Cults of Terror. That they are supplements is a factor, as is the spreading of the narrative across sidebars scattered -- with an eye to relevance -- through the book (rather than, say, filling whole pages at the start of each chapter).
Above all, though, the quality and actual utility are exceptions to the general rule concerning such stuff. For example, the journal excerpts actually take the place of "textbook" regional descriptions. I'm not sure when the really tiresome vogue started, but I suspect Cyberpunk or Vampire.
I think the main reason MA seems to me quite adequate in its brevity is that each page is packed with material that inspires the imagination.
|
|
palmer
Level 3 Conjurer
Foolish Rules Lawyer! Your disingenuous dissembling means nothing to Doom!
Posts: 81
|
Post by palmer on Mar 10, 2009 21:38:40 GMT -6
I think Holmes at 48 pages is just perfect in size for a set of core rules. It's got everything you need to run a game, and leaves plenty of space for you to bolt on whatever else you see fit. I like books that touch on things that are likely to come up in the game, but don't try and force you into a straight jacket concerning how they must be treated.
I'm a seat of the pants sorta game master anyway, and half the fun is working out the most nicely fitting solution to an in-game problem.
A concise, but not iron-clad prose style is my favorite in presenting rule information.
I remember somebody refering to Gygaxian rulesmithing as having a sense of "vague precision", and I think thats perfect for an abstract system like D&D
|
|
|
|
Post by chgowiz on Mar 11, 2009 9:07:00 GMT -6
As long as the rules have a good index and logical layout, I don't mind larger sized tomes. If they have a lot of good meat and food for thought, all the better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Mar 11, 2009 9:15:37 GMT -6
It's a bit unfair to state Holmes as an example since it only covers 3 levels of the game...
|
|
|
|
Post by James Maliszewski on Mar 11, 2009 9:30:09 GMT -6
It's a bit unfair to state Holmes as an example since it only covers 3 levels of the game... What I find interesting is that Holmes took 48 pages to detail a 3-level game, while OD&D took only a few more pages to describe a game that comfortably goes to 10th level (and probably could be used for much higher). That's not to knock Holmes Basic, which I adore, but it is telling to compare not just the page counts but also the amount of content in each subsequent iteration of D&D. |
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Mar 11, 2009 10:01:32 GMT -6
The thing is... was OD&D right for total begginers?
Maybe not that good as Holmes or B/X.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Maliszewski on Mar 11, 2009 10:15:45 GMT -6
The thing is... was OD&D right for total begginers? Oh, I'm not saying that OD&D, as presented, is ideal in any respect. I think it was seriously in need of a "restatement" to make it more clear and accessible, but I'm far from convinced that the extra verbiage in Holmes or Moldvay/Cook/Marsh was felicitous. I think it's quite possible to present a complete, playable version of D&D whose rules are not abstruse in less than 100 pages. Finarvyn's White Box version of Swords & Wizardry is a good example of this. |
|
edsan
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
MUTANT LORD
Posts: 309
|
Post by edsan on Mar 11, 2009 11:35:55 GMT -6
I have always found game fiction in RPG books boring and a waste of space. Even when it is good, a very rare occurrence I might add; I can't help feel the space could have been used for better purposes or that the page count could simply be reduced and the product made cheaper.
That said, one thing I do like are are small clips of conversation or lines from characters of the setting, and by this I mean run-of-the-mill folk not unique-snowflake a.k.a. Dritz/Elminster character types.
You can more effectively convey the feel of the game world with a simple line than 6 pages of 3rd-quality game fiction. E.g.
"Yes, everyone knows goblins are a nuisance in these parts, but those of the Ku'u-zum tribe are downright vicious. They take drugs to become immune to pain and throw themselves at you without any fear. It was one of the little dastards that gave me this wound..." - Jetrel Andlos, Firsian mercenary, while convalescing in the free town of Maurth.
Of course, this assumes the RPG book belongs to a setting in the first place. Having fiction or clips in a rulebook such as Labyrinth Lord or S&W would be idiotic.
|
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Mar 12, 2009 2:49:15 GMT -6
I like my games roughly the size of the red boxed set. Not too light, not too heavy, just right  I also really like separate player's and referee's booklets. To me, it enforces the notion that the rules are something that the referee will deal with, while the players need only immerse themselves in the play of the game. It can also help the referee maintain a certain sense of mystery -- at least until the players get their hands of the referee's book! As far as paying for extra (possibly spurious?) art, prose, layout etc. I have no problem supporting hobbyists who go to the amazing effort of producing a set of house rules -- especially since most of this material is very cheaply (even freely) available. Big name brand products... I'm rarely interested in them any more. |
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Mar 13, 2009 5:47:06 GMT -6
One thing I was thinking is that there's not a lot new under the RPG sun. I've seen a lot of games (several times more than I've actually played) devoting a lot of pages to pretty much the same old stuff. At this point, elaborate systems seem likely basically to reprise something done before, and probably not much better.
Longtime gamers probably already have material to suit their taste in much-covered areas. Considering the variety of tastes (Skills! No skills! Cool templates! Combat detail! Magic detail! Economic detail! More lasers! More cowbell!), it may be best to publish targeted supplements if one is of a mind to get rules-heavy.
Now, if someone is earnestly fired up about his great new set of mechanics, then maybe he's got something that can inspire enthusiasm in others. Short of that exceptional excitement about a particular way of crunching numbers, maybe it's not something to do a lot of just because it's become "expected" in an RPG.
A limit on length could be a help in keeping focused on what makes the game special. What is it mainly "about" that others are not?
|
|
|
|
Post by chgowiz on Mar 13, 2009 9:59:55 GMT -6
@dwaynu - every game needs more cowbell.
I wonder if that's why we should concentrate on the playing and the adventures/settings versus core rules? I was thinking that along with the final of m74, and the 2nd printing of S/W, and the upcoming final edit/hardcover(I hope) of OSRIC, I'll have all the games I need to cover just about anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Mar 13, 2009 12:00:10 GMT -6
I agree that many projects might be handled better with supplements for existing games. Sometimes a particular rules-set reference is not really necessary. A fantasy scenario might work about as well with D&D, T&T or C&S. GURPS setting books seem to get more use than the rules!
On the other hand, I see a lot of potential for new stand-alone games on the compact old-school model. Chaosium's Worlds of Wonder boxed set, three games (Future-, Magic- and Super-world) based on the stripped-down Basic Role-Playing engine, got a lot of play in my circle.
There's a sense of "just enough": just enough mechanics, and just enough (often merely implied) setting to give the imagination something with which to run!
|
|
|
|
Post by machfront on Mar 17, 2009 18:20:45 GMT -6
Oh, my, how I used to fall for the bigger-is-better attitude. I think I can "blame" Palladium Fantasy 1st ed. for that, but I'm not certain.
Odd to look back now and think that I thought things were "missing" from the likes of B/X and T&T, etc. And I called myself creative!
As far as being "fair" concerning Holmes: Yes, it only covers three levels, but Meepo's Companion is also a testament (I think) of how little it takes to expand the game. That's only four pages. Format the spell description a bit larger as in Holmes and it would probably still only reach five pages. So, Holmes would still be the 'winner' at only 53 pages.
|
|
|
|
Post by Random on Mar 17, 2009 20:02:52 GMT -6
@dwaynu - every game needs more cowbell. Glgnfz's upcoming Under Siege! LL adventure will contain Christopher Walken battle tokens. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 17, 2009 20:40:05 GMT -6
The thing is... was OD&D right for total beginners? Sure it was. I say this because it was the first and only RPG out there when I first learned to play. OD&D might not have taught you how to role-play in a step-by-step manner like the “modern” games do today, but it wasn’t that hard to read and get the gist of what was supposed to happen in the game. And the fact that it encouraged a person to improvise was a definite plus, because if you didn’t understand something you would just go with your gut call and it was okay. I think that OD&D made a heck of an introductory game! As far as being "fair" concerning Holmes: Yes, it only covers three levels, but Meepo's Companion is also a testament (I think) of how little it takes to expand the game. That's only four pages. Format the spell description a bit larger as in Holmes and it would probably still only reach five pages. So, Holmes would still be the 'winner' at only 53 pages. I was going to make this exact point, but you beat me to it. Sure, Holmes only covers the first three levels, but the unofficial expansions seem to only fill a few pages. To truly expand Holmes you’d be mostly adding spell descriptions and not significant rules content. |
|
|
|
Post by machfront on Mar 18, 2009 3:25:20 GMT -6
As far as being "fair" concerning Holmes: Yes, it only covers three levels, but Meepo's Companion is also a testament (I think) of how little it takes to expand the game. That's only four pages. Format the spell description a bit larger as in Holmes and it would probably still only reach five pages. So, Holmes would still be the 'winner' at only 53 pages. I was going to make this exact point, but you beat me to it. Sure, Holmes only covers the first three levels, but the unofficial expansions seem to only fill a few pages. To truly expand Holmes you’d be mostly adding spell descriptions and not significant rules content. I suppose one could say that it's also "missing" wilderness info, but I bet that could be covered in probably less than a three pages, even. The amount of wilderness info in U&WA is about 51/2-6 half pages (about 3 full pages), and about 3 1/2 pages in B/X. Of course, then Holmes matches OD&D's approx. 56 'full' pages. I still think the good Dr. could have boiled it down to something more general, thus taking up less space. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.  |
|
jjarvis
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 278
|
Post by jjarvis on Mar 18, 2009 6:13:21 GMT -6
Of Metamorphosis Alpha, Holmes Basic , OD&D, Gamma World, Traveller & 1E AD&D, , Holmes Basic is the only one with a complete playable sample adventure. The whole experience that version of the game offers can be enjoyed after one solid reading of the rules with no additional work for the neophyte DM.
The whole sample adventure is vitally important to new players IMHO.
|
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Mar 18, 2009 14:43:30 GMT -6
Sure it was. I say this because it was the first and only RPG out there when I first learned to play. OD&D might not have taught you how to role-play in a step-by-step manner like the “modern” games do today, but it wasn’t that hard to read and get the gist of what was supposed to happen in the game. And the fact that it encouraged a person to improvise was a definite plus, because if you didn’t understand something you would just go with your gut call and it was okay. I think that OD&D made a heck of an introductory game! Exactly. Have an exalt for that. Besides, the game isn't supposed to teach you how to roleplay. Actually playing it does that. Well, that and a good referee, but everything comes down to having a good referee... |
|
