Do you miss the good old days? Boxed sets and single books.

[Calico_Jack73]

I got to thinking after participating in a Twilight:2000 discussion that I really miss the good old days where an entire campaign could be played with the materials included in only one boxed set or one book. Twilight:2000 was such a game as was the old D&D when the boxed sets were wrapped up in the Rules Cyclopedia. Star Frontiers and Gamma World also included everything you needed in a single boxed set. Nowdays it seems that in order to start a campaign of pretty much anything WOTC puts out you need a minimum of two books. For D&D you need the PHB, MM, and the DMG (though not so much). If you want to run an Urban Arcana game of d20 Modern you need the d20 Modern book and the D&D MM as a minimum and the Urban Arcana game if you need help with the setting. I miss that I could buy one boxed set or book and be ready to run.

How about the rest of you out there?

 

[delericho]

For D&D you need the PHB, MM, and the DMG (though not so much).

Well, as far back as 1st Edition (at least) (A)D&D has required those three books.

If you want to run an Urban Arcana game of d20 Modern you need the d20 Modern book and the D&D MM as a minimum and the Urban Arcana game if you need help with the setting. I miss that I could buy one boxed set or book and be ready to run.

Provided the DM is willing to put in the work, there is no limit to the number of campaigns that can cbe run using just the "d20 Modern" rulebook. Even Urban Arcana can be run using just the campaign model notes in that one book. "Mutants & Masterminds" requires one book. "Exalted", "Shadowrun", "Star Wars" (d20 or d6), "Serenity", "Babylon 5", "Warhammer FRP", and many other games require one book to play. In fact, I suspect the majority of games require only a single book to play these days, and the bulk of the remainder only require one in addition to the D&D PHB.

It's easy to mistake an availability of supplements for books that are required to play the game.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

Single books to play a game are fine but I would not be interestdin boxed sets ever again. Far to easy to lose things from it and most boxed sets have cheap, flimsy books ime.

 

[Staffan]

Single books to play a game are fine but I would not be interestdin boxed sets ever again. Far to easy to lose things from it and most boxed sets have cheap, flimsy books ime.

Boxed sets do have the advantage that it's easy to include accessories - most notably maps, but also illustration cards and the like. For example, the 2nd ed FR boxed set had a total of four poster maps (as opposed to one in the 3e FR book), eight MC sheets (total of 15 monsters), and six sheets with various coats of arms, holy symbols, and way runes. The Land of Fate boxed set (Al-Qadim) had eight MC sheets, 12 sheets with various illustrations and city maps, and three poster maps.

They also provide the ability to compartmentalize information. In the Land of Fate book for example, one book was "public" information that anyone could know, and the other was DMs only. In an adventure, you could include a book of illustrations to show the PCs, and a book with all the stats for the creatures and NPCs included (thereby reducing the need to flip back and forth in the main adventure book). If the adventure was really big, you could also split it into several different parts, making each book a little more managable.

Now, I'm not sure if these advantages are enough to justify the higher costs of a boxed set, but it does have clear advantages.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

Boxed sets do have the advantage that it's easy to include accessories - most notably maps, but also illustration cards and the like. For example, the 2nd ed FR boxed set had a total of four poster maps (as opposed to one in the 3e FR book), eight MC sheets (total of 15 monsters), and six sheets with various coats of arms, holy symbols, and way runes. The Land of Fate boxed set (Al-Qadim) had eight MC sheets, 12 sheets with various illustrations and city maps, and three poster maps.

They also provide the ability to compartmentalize information. In the Land of Fate book for example, one book was "public" information that anyone could know, and the other was DMs only. In an adventure, you could include a book of illustrations to show the PCs, and a book with all the stats for the creatures and NPCs included (thereby reducing the need to flip back and forth in the main adventure book). If the adventure was really big, you could also split it into several different parts, making each book a little more managable.

Now, I'm not sure if these advantages are enough to justify the higher costs of a boxed set, but it does have clear advantages.

All fo the things you list as positives I keep thinking about how easily I seem to lose them. Most of what you describe could be better made as a downloadable pdf. I still would not buy a boxed set ever again.

 

[WayneLigon]

I got to thinking after participating in a Twilight:2000 discussion that I really miss the good old days where an entire campaign could be played with the materials included in only one boxed set or one book. Twilight:2000 was such a game as was the old D&D when the boxed sets were wrapped up in the Rules Cyclopedia.

I liked boxed sets for the ability to put everything else I need in the box: notes, campaign world, supplements, dice, pencils, etc. Except for the Chaosium sets, which were always about an inch too tall to fit in a standard bookshelf.

The D&D Cyclopedia, though, was a collection and revision - previously, they'd soaked you with, what, six boxed sets before that?

I would vastly prefer a single book D&D myself, and I don't mean a giant tome, either. You could do a perfectly good basic D&D all-in-one book smaller than the PHB.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

You can play the moment you have the World of Darkness book and a single 10 sided die. The good old days aren't gone. There's always been games like that (Toon was like that, way back when) even when other games (AD&D) weren't.

 

[Tsillanabor]

I still have four of the old Marvel Super Heroes RPG boxed sets. Those were great.

 

[Staffan]

All fo the things you list as positives I keep thinking about how easily I seem to lose them.

That's why you keep them in the box.

I'm not the best in the world at keeping my stuff in order, but I don't think I've ever lost an RPG map or similar accessory.

The main problem I see with boxed sets from a practical point of view is that they're designed around US paper, which means that properly-formatted paper (i.e. A4) is just a liiiitle bit too big to fit. Otherwise, they'd be great for keeping character sheets and the like in as well.

 

[Odhanan]

There is something magical in boxed sets. It's the closest feeling I have from a pirate opening a treasure chest, I guess. I miss the "old days" in that sense, and in the sense that I like to get all the material necessary at once, not buy books in series.

But I should say I've had my "old days" feelings satisfied recently by the Wilderlands of High Fantasy boxed set (for the treasure chest), and with Ptolus (for the completeness of the product).