When Is a RPG "Complete" From a Publishing Perspective?

[Reynard]

The issue is that RPGs are such an inherently diverse medium that there cannot be a one-size-fits all answer of X number of books.

The point at which, say, Draw Steel, Cypher System, Runequest, Ironsworn, and Honey Heist are going to feel complete are entirely different, due to the completely different design goals and scale of each game.

How so. What about Ironsworn requires it have a different "complete point" than Honey Heist? (Just to be clear, I am asking as a point of discussion, not argument. I am honestly curious why you believe this.)

 

[Brendan Byrd]

"...from a Publishing perspective" sounds like this is directed at publishers. I'm pretty sure that's not the case, though.

If you will forgive me for comparing RPG (publishing) to buffet dining:

The core ruleset is like the plates and utensils. (Can get messy if parts are missing.)
Setting and adventure materials are like the tables and chairs. (Doable without, but perhaps not the most comfortable)
Supplemental materials, expansions, "gazetters", support of various types (errata, FAQs, message boards, keeping the backlist available) etc. is the range of food desert items available at the buffet.
[---]
Ideally, there is a reasonable selection of well prepared dishes, from which the diner may select that which is most appetizing. (Mix and match is nice. But you still have the option of cooking at home instead (and if you happen to be broke that's how it's going to be)).

That's my perspective on it.

 

[Laurefindel]

Hesitating between…

1) A game is complete when the producers published everything that is necessary to play the game and provided all necessary guidelines (implicitly of explicitly) for fans and 3rd parties to expand upon the rules and setting(s).

and

2) A game is “complete” when the appetite of their players for new material is satiated.

1) is when a game starts to be fun. 2) is when it’s time to move to another game.

 

[Micah Sweet]

In your opinion and/or based on your preferences, when is an RPG complete? That is, at what point in the publication life cycle would you, as a fan and customer of a particular RPG, say "Yeah, that's enough, I will take it from here."?

NOTE: This includes 3rd party support, but not necessarily fan support. I know the line between the two is very blurry these days, but what I am trying to get at is when is it okay that nothing else is published for a game.

For the poll, choose your "end point" as close as possible with what I included.

A game is done by default whenever they stop making it, but generally I'll keep buying a game I like so long as it is recognizably the same game (or can become so with a little work). L5R is a good example. I bought everything for that game from 1e to 2e, d20 (still based on a game I liked), then 3e and 4e, but stopped once the IP changed hands and they released an incompatible game with changed lore.

 

[dbolack]

There is no singular answer for all products.

 

[Reynard]

"...from a Publishing perspective" sounds like this is directed at publishers. I'm pretty sure that's not the case, though.

If you will forgive me for comparing RPG (publishing) to buffet dining:

The core ruleset is like the plates and utensils. (Can get messy if parts are missing.)
Setting and adventure materials are like the tables and chairs. (Doable without, but perhaps not the most comfortable)
Supplemental materials, expansions, "gazetters", support of various types (errata, FAQs, message boards, keeping the backlist available) etc. is the range of food available at the buffet. Ideally, there is a reasonable selection of well prepared dishes, from which the diner may select that which is most appetizing. (Mix and match is nice. But you still have the option of cooking at home instead (and if you happen to be broke that's how it's going to be)).

That's my perspective on it.

This analogy suggests that core-only is simply not playable (no food) and I do not like that at all. In a perfect world, all RPGs would be complete with core only.

 

[payn]

Nevah. Id play Traveller and Pathfinder Classic stuff as long as they made it.

 

[Brendan Byrd]

This analogy suggests that core-only is simply not playable (no food) and I do not like that at all. In a perfect world, all RPGs would be complete with core only.

Good point. I happen to agree with you.
Perhaps a default assumption that there is food, and the supplemental parts are the desert buffet?

Edited my comment above to (hopefully) better reflect what I meant.

 

[dbm]

Looks at shelves of Savage Worlds books; looks at list of six active Pinnacle crowd funding campaigns

I’d like to think there is a point of ‘enough’ but I haven’t found it yet…

I like buying new content, it’s a fun part of the hobby for me. Endless possibilities.

 

[Reynard]

Looks at shelves of Savage Worlds books; looks at list of six active Pinnacle crowd funding campaigns

I’d like to think there is a point of ‘enough’ but I haven’t found it yet…

I like buying new content, it’s a fun part of the hobby for me. Endless possibilities.

This underscores an important point: the difference between "fun" and "necessary." I believe that Shadowdark is complete in the core rulebook. That absolutely does not mean I did not back Western Reaches at a high level.