Games with "terrible" follow-up editions

[jdrakeh]

I'm gonna go with Everway here. The original boxed set was a really innovative, beautiful, thing. The world wasn't ready for it and it had some rough edges, but it's overall an amazing product, IMO. Recently, a new edition was published. It is both extremely expensive and, as far as I can tell, doesn't improve on the original (still widely available) game in any appreciable way. I don't know that I'd call it "terrible" but it seems to be perfunctory, at best.

 

[WayneLigon]

Traveller has had this edition since 1981...

T4 aka Marc Miller's Traveller was the next "core traveller"... but set 1100 years prior to the CT, 1116 prior to MT, and 1210 years prior to TNE. Back to Classic attributes, but skills more numerous than in TNE. Many fans tried it and hated it.

HeroTraveller was on the market for a few months. It has almost no fanbase. It was written for Hero 5E... but released just as 6E came out... but the license had to end due to....

Then there was T5, AKA The Six Hundred Page Doorstopper Book of Charts and Tables.
I'd never heard of HeroTraveller. Apparently neither did anyone else.

 

[WayneLigon]

So there is Gamma World, mentioned up thread.

1e and 2e remain the best editions. So many have come since, and some, like the gonzo D&D 4e inspired one have some fun stuff, and some are just terrible.

3e Gamma World probably is the most disappointing game product I have ever bought and tried to use.

I seem to remember that Gamma World 2e removed the Social Wars as the cause for the 'disaster'. Did they ever restore that?

 

[TerraDave]

No idea about that, but the back stories were similar.

An an issue of Dragon—in the Ares section—had a detailed timeline. And of course we are now on it.

Edit: “The social wars” which were on outcome of general decadence, are in 2e.

 

[Bluenose]

Traveller: the New Era, as already mentioned, was very controversial and still have people expressing outright hate for it where Traveller is discussed. Changing the system and tearing down huge parts of the setting at the same time didn't go over well with existing fans. I sometimes think if they'd started with one of the areas that had remained largely the same (the Regency, probably) and run with that for a while before moving out into the Wilds and starting to establish that as another adventuring area it might have been a little better (Charted Space already had a distinction between relatively safe Imperial space and areas outside it) but I suspect the whole concept was doomed from the start. The similarities with the reception of 4e and how FR fans reacted to that settings changes is uncanny.

For an unmentioned example, Tunnels and Trolls 5th and 7th edition both altered the system significantly. Many fans disliked the changes, since they'd made older material incompatible both times.

And of course Pathfinder 2e has plenty of naysayers who hate the changes. Considering how devoted some people were to aspects of 3e/PF1 that PF2 reduced it's hardly a surprise, and some of the Golarion changes don't seem to be popular in the same circles.

 

[Weiley31]

Since calling something "a terrible follow-up" is largely subjective, my hot-take is that WEG d6 Star Wars is better than d20 Star Wars. But Saga edition is better than d20 Star Wars. And then the FFG version is the worst of the lot - for my tastes.
Also going to say that FASERIP Marvel Superheroes is the best RPG based off the Marvel characters we've seen.

Saga also has the best Sourcebooks for Star Wars as well. Now if only it didn't suck so much to get a copy of its Knights of the Old Republic book.

 

[LongTimeLurker]

Yeah, I guess it is the obvious elephant in the room that needs mentioning, but yeah let's not go hard on this, we don't want this thread to blow up into one of those.

Do you remember what was contentious about it? Removed too much stuff? Added too much stuff?

Made it into Warcraft, the table top edition. It was the first, and so far last, edition that I didn't even bother buying the core books for. 4E may have been a fine game but it wasn't D&D.

 

[Retreater]

Made it into Warcraft, the table top edition. It was the first, and so far last, edition that I didn't even bother buying the core books for. 4E may have been a fine game but it wasn't D&D.

I find that all editions of WotC D&D substantially different from the version I started with (AD&D 2e). TSR-era D&D (OD&D, BECMI, AD&D 1 and 2) is a very different style of game than the WotC versions. I'm not stating anything about quality or my preference.

If you haven't already, I'd suggest taking a look at 4e and maybe try a game of it. Try it on its own merits, as a game that isn't trying to replicate the experiences of other editions.

I was running my wife through some solo adventures of "D&D through the ages" so she could experience the history of the game. To my surprise, she loved it (maybe partially because she wasn't around for the marketing snafus and bad vibes from the community), and constantly tries to find someone to play 4e with her.

 

[Retreater]

And of course Pathfinder 2e has plenty of naysayers who hate the changes. Considering how devoted some people were to aspects of 3e/PF1 that PF2 reduced it's hardly a surprise, and some of the Golarion changes don't seem to be popular in the same circles.

I prefer PF2 to PF1 (I also prefer 4e to 3.x), and I consider PF2 the spiritual successor to 4e. It uses encounter-based design and starts with more heroic and capable characters. I do prefer PF2's release schedule - more quality adventures, a more thorough Core Rulebook, focused splats.
If I were going to make it even more suited to my style, I'd lean into some elements of 4e design. I'd change all measuring to 1 square = 5 ft. (regardless of diagonal or orthogonal). I'd add more "encounter" (or every 10 minute) abilities - probably making them focus-based - for every class just to shake up the routines. More ways to get healing in the encounters so you're not dependent on the Heal spell. Clearly defined class and creature roles. (Some of the classes, I have no idea what purpose they serve.)

 

[LongTimeLurker]

I find that all editions of WotC D&D substantially different from the version I started with (AD&D 2e). TSR-era D&D (OD&D, BECMI, AD&D 1 and 2) is a very different style of game than the WotC versions. I'm not stating anything about quality or my preference.

If you haven't already, I'd suggest taking a look at 4e and maybe try a game of it. Try it on its own merits, as a game that isn't trying to replicate the experiences of other editions.

I was running my wife through some solo adventures of "D&D through the ages" so she could experience the history of the game. To my surprise, she loved it (maybe partially because she wasn't around for the marketing snafus and bad vibes from the community), and constantly tries to find someone to play 4e with her.

Nope. I downloaded the core books, read them cover to cover and knew the game was nothing that I had any interest in. Still don't.