Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 9348566" data-attributes="member: 4937">Sure 1e AD&D has over 1000 pages in its rule books alone.  Just the core rules have as I pointed out have about 500 pages, but as I pointed (and in this case most people seem to agree with me) 1e AD&D isn't a complete game system and it's always supplemented by a lot of house rules.  WEG D6 goes over 1000 pages I'm pretty darn sure based on the scale of the fan compilation content, and that's not even getting into the fluff as it were of documenting what makes the game a Star Wars game.  Traveller I'm pretty sure goes over 1000 pages.   The "Storyteller" games setting/system that started with VtM collectively go over 1000 pages.    I previously outlined how 7e CoC, in my opinion the best edition of the game and the first edition in a long time that demanded my money from me to upgrade my books, goes up to 1000 pages and probably could go over that usefully.   Pendragon comes pretty close I'd think despite it's extremely narrow focus of just one setting with just one sort of gameplay.  I know I own 5e rule books totalling around 500 pages and I don't have the full system.  And frankly, Pendragon is a game that I really think could do well by branching out a bit.  I would love a Tortall based setting guide for example, with the necessary crunch to support that.   I would shell out $79.95 for that, because as much as I love Arthurian myth and legend, it's a fandom that's really gone by the wayside since the 1950s as more modern fantasy epics are told and I could a lot more easily get players for a more modern setting that was easier for a modern person to relate to.  There is a reason a lot more people don't play Pendragon despite how solid the system is.  GURPS is an example of the opposite problem.  A lack of coherent design and planning from the start led to a bunch of unnecessary rules bloat.  I wouldn't be surprised if GURPS hit like 10000 pages of rule books.  It's just a mess.  D&D 3.5 is the same sort of problem with poor planning and brand management leading to unnecessary bloat.  Pathfinder 1e despite a bit better planning and a good attempt to produce a complete fantasy game system, still is let down by the inconsistent quality of what they put out, but it's definitely over 1000 pages and if anything is too verbose.Even with that problem though, those were extremely popular game systems.Most game systems, sure.  Most games that are actually played are not using those systems though.  If you make any attempt to enumerate what games are actually being played, I'd expect the number of 3.5e D&D and Pathfinder 1e sessions that have been played exceed the total number of game sessions in all those other systems that are under that threshold.  I mean, I can't even get those games offered at conventions to try them out, compared to all the offerings in big crunchy rules heavy systems that people seem to prefer and which sell well.I don't disagree.I don't disagree either.  For one thing, the M-16 and AK-47 are both medium caliber assault rifles, so you could easily classify them together.  For another, there isn't a need to necessarily differentiate different weapons in gun play unless gun play is expected to be or likely to be a big part of your system.  But if there is a high likelihood that gun play is expected to be a big part of your system, then there is also going to be a high likelihood of players who understand the difference between a shotgun and a battle rifle and have experience with both and so you probably need to provide for that.I may have missed the point where Reynard said that there are good solid reasons for D&D to have 1000 pages of rules.  Could you point it out to me?</blockquote>

Verification