Can we go back to smaller books?

[Reynard]

I want smaller books. Three 350 page volumes (2E, 3E, 4E -- I am looking at every one of you) is too damn much. And Pathfinder: i love you dearly, but you need to get to the gym. I mean, you've got your own zip code.

Seriously, tho: I have a lot of games packed away downstairs and many of them from the '80s and early '90s packed a whole game in under 200 pages. Even AD&D was trim and sleek by today's D&D standards.

I'd bet a whole month's pay that one could put out a workable, complete version of ANY edition of D&D (or its descendants) in under 200 pages, soup to nuts.

 

[scourger]

I'd like to see it, too.

 

[cildarith]

Absolutely. If a game company cannot package a complete RPG system into 128 pages they are wasting my time and will not get my business.

 

[Ourph]

There are plenty of tiny RPGs around, you just need to look past the D&D label.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Me? I'm happy with great big fat honking goodness.

Ptolus? Could have been longer.

 

[Votan]

I want smaller books. Three 350 page volumes (2E, 3E, 4E -- I am looking at every one of you) is too damn much. And Pathfinder: i love you dearly, but you need to get to the gym. I mean, you've got your own zip code.

Seriously, tho: I have a lot of games packed away downstairs and many of them from the '80s and early '90s packed a whole game in under 200 pages. Even AD&D was trim and sleek by today's D&D standards.

I'd bet a whole month's pay that one could put out a workable, complete version of ANY edition of D&D (or its descendants) in under 200 pages, soup to nuts.

There seem to be several options that fit this requirement. Castles and Crusades is extremely slim, for example. In a lot of ways, if you go with DDI, then 4E doesn't require a lot of rules reading.

 

[ExploderWizard]

It would be nice but I don't see it happening for D&D. The hobby is fine with slim and simple but the industry is all about being bloated and complex.

 

[Reynard]

There are plenty of tiny RPGs around, you just need to look past the D&D label.

Oh, I know. But there's no reason D&D can't do it. Mostly, I am irritated by the size of the Pathfinder book.

 

[bagger245]

Fewer pages means fewer rules, or really really small fonts. D&D has been going up in complexity and the only way to go slim is to go back to rules-light. I agree Pathfinder is rather thick, but considering it's two books in one, it's good value.

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

I want smaller books. Three 350 page volumes (2E, 3E, 4E -- I am looking at every one of you) is too damn much. And Pathfinder: i love you dearly, but you need to get to the gym. I mean, you've got your own zip code.

Seriously, tho: I have a lot of games packed away downstairs and many of them from the '80s and early '90s packed a whole game in under 200 pages. Even AD&D was trim and sleek by today's D&D standards.

I'd bet a whole month's pay that one could put out a workable, complete version of ANY edition of D&D (or its descendants) in under 200 pages, soup to nuts.

Watch out for Pathfinder, its about 10,000 pages long and feels like a brick