No More Massive Tomes of Rules

[TwoSix]

There is a difference between "fun" and "interesting." I could have fun with a character that rolled a d6 and on an even number succeeded and on an odd failed. That doesn't mean the game rewards interaction with the mechanics.
Sometimes a game can be so simple that there's nothing to think about outside of the session. You don't get excited for a new ability, you don't crave a new magic item, you don't hunger to learn a new spell.
To me, that's sort of what Dragonbane is like. That's largely because skill advancement is random.
Did the GM give you a chance to use the ability? Check it. At the end of the session, did you fail your check? If so, subtract a number from it. If not, I guess you get nothing.

Ture, but you can have "character growth" without granting a ton of corresponding "player options". Just give mechanical rewards in play, magic items or new spells or new mechanics that are rewards, not player-chosen options automatically earned by leveling.

 

[aco175]

Therer is no reason that 5E (or any other edition for that matter) can't be presented in a concise, complete, robust form like Dragonbane.

I'm reminded of the saying about product design or customer service.

 

[Celebrim]

After sitting down and reading through the Dragonbane rulebook last night, I have realized that I just don't want to pour through 1000 pages of rules to run/play D&D anymore.

The core rules of almost any game can usually be presented in 30 pages or so.

But I have a hard time taking seriously any game that doesn't intend to publish at least 1000 pages of "rules". Three thousand might be a more realistic target.

You'll notice I put quotes around "rules". Because another way to look at this is content. This is your description of a whole universe, and a good game description is interweaving its core system into everything so that the boundary between rules and content is blurred.

You name the game or the genre, and no matter what you name I guarantee you that if you intend it as more than a one shot, I can explain why you need more than 1000 pages of rules. Maybe you can find an exception with a game meant for a single setting and limited imaginative play? But I suspect even that game wants to eventually do a ton of setting books.

Maybe if you are happy with everything being fiat? Sure, if you are happy with everything being fiat, why bother with rules?

 

[Reynard]

The core rules of almost any game can usually be presented in 30 pages or so.

But I have a hard time taking seriously any game that doesn't intend to publish at least 1000 pages of "rules". Three thousand might be a more realistic target.

You'll notice I put quotes around "rules". Because another way to look at this is content. This is your description of a whole universe, and a good game description is interweaving its core system into everything so that the boundary between rules and content is blurred.

You name the game or the genre, and no matter what you name I guarantee you that if you intend it as more than a one shot, I can explain why you need more than 1000 pages of rules. Maybe you can find an exception with a game meant for a single setting and limited imaginative play? But I suspect even that game wants to eventually do a ton of setting books.

Maybe if you are happy with everything being fiat? Sure, if you are happy with everything being fiat, why bother with rules?

FWIW, my definition of "rules" does not include either settings or adventures. First of all, neither of those things are necessary -- that's what the GM is for. So if they exist, they are by definition optional. I do mean stuff like player facing mechanics, though. You can have that stuff, but you still need to make it concise.

 

[Celebrim]

FWIW, my definition of "rules" does not include either settings or adventures.

I'm not including adventures and I'm not including setting dressing that is pure fluff - lists of locations and persons, for example.

 

[Emberashh]

An angle thats worth considering is that having plenty of flavor text (and art) isn't necessarily a bad thing, particularly if you care about firing up peoples imaginations so that they want to play.

DCCRPG for example is a thick and pretty dense book. And you could probably distill that whole thing down into may be 30-50 pages of streamlined rules.

But DCC wouldn't be the same for it, and a lot of the vibes the game is going for would be lost in the translation, precisely because you'd be losing all that tone setting and neuron activating material. DND, for all its faults in overusing natural language, does a lot of the same thing.

Personally, as another idea I have for how I'll do up Labyrinthian, I think a way forward is to have both a condensed set of quick reference pages and the more traditional flavor/rules text combination.

I'd keep the QR section all together in a single area of the book, and then instruct that people use the rest of the text to fall in love, and the QRs to make the relationship work, to make a clever analogy.

 

[Reynard]

I'm not including adventures and I'm not including setting dressing that is pure fluff - lists of locations and persons, for example.

Ok.

I'll bite. What additional 900 pages does Dragonbane need?

 

[Autumnal]

Ok.

I'll bite. What additional 900 pages does Dragonbane need?

Spells and critical fumble charts, of course. Oh, and polearms.

 

[General_Tangent]

I wondered if something like the old Mongoose Pocket Players Guide would be a better option, then I remembered that it has 400 pages so I guess not.

 

[TwoSix]

Ok.

I'll bite. What additional 900 pages does Dragonbane need?