How do fans of OTHER RPGs handle new editions?

[jdrakeh]

Many companies use the term "edition" as synonomous with "printing."

I think that this is untrue. I think that fans often use the term "edition" like this, though I can think of only one company that refers to editions like this and, even then, this use seems to apply to only one of their multiple game lines. . .

The best example is Call of Cthulhu which is, I believe, in its sixth "edition"--yet between the first and sixth editions there are almost no significant rule changes.

That's the one company and the one game line that I had in mind. There are still some rule changes in each edition of CoC, though I agree that they're largely negligible. That said, there are some huge differences between the various editions of Stormbringer/Elric (most notably how magic works). Likewise, ElfQuest 1st and 2nd were remarkably different products in terms of organization and presentation.

 

[Mark Hope]

That said, there are some huge differences between the various editions of Stormbringer/Elric (most notably how magic works).

And, as far as I understand it, the magic is getting an overhaul again in the new RQ Elric (being made closer to the runes, summonings, cults, dreamthievery seen in the novels, rather than the obsession with spells and demons from earlier editions). Good move, I say. Never liked the magic systems in the older editions.

 

[prosfilaes]

Because, after all, newer editions are always an improvement, and those who stubbornly refuse to upgrade are doing themselves a terrible disservice.

If you're still playing an older game, you'll never see new material for your game, you're quite unlikely to find someone who's hyped-up about the game, and it'll be harder and harder for new players to get the books. The number of people who are actively familiar with the game will drop, and the number of people who aren't willing to learn/relearn the rules to play with you will increase. RPGs are a social activity, and there's a lot of advantages to picking a social activity that has a lot of fellow players and a lot of activity surrounding it.

 

[billd91]

That's the one company and the one game line that I had in mind. There are still some rule changes in each edition of CoC, though I agree that they're largely negligible.

I think the changes often come down to which previously separate supplements have been incorporated into the main rulebook this time. Plus a little tweaking of the skills.

 

[00Machado]

I think it depends on whether the new edition of for a dead product line, or a new one.

With wotc's first Star Wars for example, none of the old d6 players were complaining about the release of a new edition. Some may not have liked the edition (rules, levels, etc), but I don't think there was something you'd call an "outcry". It would probably be the same if we saw a new Chill RPG, for example. Who is going to complain about the invalidation of all their old stuff that they've been spedning money on for the past few years? I'd guess few to none. Same for the release of Hero 5th, after Champions 4th had a long product hiatus.

I also think it depends on whether the system has been around for "a long time" or a short time.

GURPS 4th, for example. I didn't see a lot of venom over it. 3rd/3rd revised had been out for like 10 years or more, if I recall correctly, before an upgrade.

For something like WoD, or D&D, or wotc Star Wars RPG Revised, I think there are more, probably many, disgruntled people.

I think it also depends on whether a system is getting a face lift, more support, better art, etc.

For example, if GR announced a new version of True20, people might complain, but if they announced a new version that would be full color, to be supported by a monthly magazine, and monthly releases of new full color products, some of the complainers would turn into complimenters.

Other factors too, I suppose

*Have fans been pushing for change? Is this one of those "because you demanded it!" products?

*Is the product going to be a 'deluxe' edition, with the rules largely or completely the same? Say a small press product with no art, or poor art, where the rules barely change or not at all, but the presentation is amped up greatly.

 

[Allura]

You may not have but you should have seen the vitrol flying around Dumpshock.com this time two years ago. Heck, the 3rd ed and 4th ed forums are still segragated and about once a month or so someone will cross into the other editions "turf" and spark an edition war.

Apparently DumpShock was worse than ShadowRN, the old listserv mailing list that's (surprisingly) still alive - and about half that group won't switch.

The problem with Shadowrun's last edition is that it not only changed the rules rather significantly, but they also made a tech upgrade "justified" by a major plot change. So two reasons for people to get upset. I like it, because the old tech (no wireless tech, basically) was starting to drive me BATTY. It's 2065 or so in game, and the tech is older than what I'm using now IRL in 2007. It's the downfall of near-future games, I suppose, that the real world moves faster than some people can predict.

Anyway, I never see the point of getting upset over a new edition. Either you like it and you buy it, or you don't. *shrug* I haven't run into a new edition that I've regretted picking up. And if new editions bring people to the game, that's a good thing to me.

 

[dmccoy1693]

I remember between Exalted 1st Ed and 2nd Ed, the fans were screaming rather loud until the White Wolf boys announced the differences. The majority of the fans give them a chance. The changes proved true and the fans were satisfied. There was still lots (AND LOTS) of screaming between the announcement and the release (and even after the release), but by in large it was well received.

 

[Set]

I remember that the majority of fans seemed to encourage the transition between 2nd Edition and 3rd Edition GURPS. The message boards at Steve Jackson Games has an outpouring of love for 4th edition as well, and while there are many individual components of 4th edition that read like our 3rd edition house rules (no PD! Woo-hoo! Spell damage dice based on Magery level!), there's some, IMO, insanely math-y stuff that I don't care for, meaning that I'm more partial to a sort of 'GURPS 3.5' between the two...

1st to 2nd Ed AD&D had me leery, but I ended up liking it, and the change to 3rd Edition was a *vast* improvement, IMO. 3.5, on the other hand, seemed unnecessary. The DR changes, in particular, were *specifically said* to counter the 'you must have this weapon to beat this monster' syndrome in an interview with one of the 3.5 designers, and they did the exact freaking opposite. The designer flat-out contradicted what the DR change did, and reading it, even before 3.5 was released, I was wondering what he was smoking to think that all of this 'cold iron / silver' crap would eliminate 'golf bag syndrome' instead of literally *creating it.*

2nd Edition M&M had me dragging my heels (since I had just started really playing 1e, so I wasn't really feeling the need for it to be 'made better'), but once some friendly folk on the game's forums showed me how to build some of my ideas in the new system, I now prefer it as well.

I also enjoyed the revamps (pun intended) of the World of Darkness to 2nd edition, and then Revised, for the most part, but the new, new version leaves me cold. I really, really loved Mage the Ascension and Vampire the Masquerade, and the changes stripped away most of my favorite archetypes, and modified the others to the point of taking away the parts I enjoyed most.

So I'm pretty variable. Some new Editions, I love (most of the AD&D revisions, the M&M editions, Star Fleet Battles editions, etc), others I end up not liking (new WoD, GURPS 4e).

 

[Imperialus]

Apparently DumpShock was worse than ShadowRN, the old listserv mailing list that's (surprisingly) still alive - and about half that group won't switch.

Well Dumpshock is much less actively moderated than Wizards, ENworld or I'd argue even RPG.net for that matter. Things have to get pretty out of hand before a mod steps in. Makes for some interesting conversations.

Edit:

Oh, as proof that the Shadowrun edition wars are going strong here is a post from a few weeks ago shortly after a new sourcebook was released.

I thought I was very careful in revealing my bias, but apparently not careful enough. Perhaps I ought spell it out more clearly for the cheaper seats. I don't like SR4, even less since reading this book. Read with that in mind.

I bought the book because I hoped, at least, to use it to keep my SR3 gaming evolving, and I hoped that Augmentation would be of use. to that end It isn't. I intended reverse-engineering it for use in SR3, thus the original post. You seem to suggest my intention to take any new material from Augmentation and adapt it to SR3, and then my disappointment at there being very little new material, as hypocritical. I don't see how.

Unless you decided to buy the book inbetween your first and second post in this thread, then yes, you are a hypocrite. A hypocrite who claims to have wanted to convert all the material in Augmentation to SR3's rules even though there was apparently nothing in there worth converting.

If you weren't being hypocritical you were just being flat out stupid. I just gave you the benefit of the doubt.

I mean, you open a thread begging people to help you convert rules from a system you allege to hate before even knowing what it is you want converted? Then, instead of simply coming back and saying you were no longer interested in doing so, you preferred to go on a rant about how incredibly bad SR4 is and how Augmentation is a rip-off of Man & Machine (yet how you still want to convert stuff in it -- "but SR4 still sucks, even though I rushed out to buy the book a week after its release while claiming to be open-minded!"). All while trying to pretend that Man & Machine was the pinnacle of creativity and advancement in the game despite it being little more than a comparable rip-off to previous sourcebooks from earlier editions.

So which is it? Hypocritical or stupid? It's one, the other, or both. Take your pick.

I intended communicating that the new book contained disappointingly little new material, and what little there was did not strike me as quality work. I feel that a core rulebook such as this one would need to be high-quality work containing substantial new material to keep SR4 running along, or at least viable, and in my view this book falls far short of the mark. If that intention was not clear, I appologise.

Hmm. So, in other words, you're simply crying because it finally dawned on you that Augmentation was a sourcebook intended for the SR4 rules set as opposed to an SR3 expansion? Maybe I was wrong about the hypocritical angle afterall.