Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 262483" data-attributes="member: 2013">Interesting...Very interesting argument indeed...I have found that the so-called "crunch" generally falls into one of three categories:1.) Redundant Crunch - More monsters, more spells, more Feats, more Prestige Classes, etc.  While it's all very neat and nice, it is basically just more variations on the same theme - it's more of the same, just re-arranged.  There are probably upwards of 2000 monsters - do another one or two really make a huge difference?I think this is the kind of "crunch" that most people who say they are sick of crunch - and even some who don't say it - are sick of.2.) Variation Crunch - This is stuff that takes an existing theme and varies it - for example, "new magic systems" from Sovreign Stone to Spells & Magic to Occult Lore to Monte's Bard.  It's not "more of the same, just re-arranged" as is Redundant Crunch, but it does not truly "add" to the system - rather, it presents "another way to do it."This is not necessarily bad, either - in fact, I think having 20 different systems of magic in a campaign can be fantastic for flavor.3.) Expansion Crunch - This is stuff that is totally new to the system.  It's not a variation on a theme, and it's not number-shuffling - it's a completely new add-on.  Examples (to me) include Alchemy & Herbalists (the new alchemical products), Traps & Treachery (detailing and expanding on the basic concept of traps and poisons), Heroes of High Favor: Dwarves (Craft rules) and Lords of Darkness (the part concerning drugs).  This is at once the easiest and hardest to do - easiest because it doesn't need to be balanced against "existing crunch" of the same type, but hard because you have to define the balance yourself.  Personally, this is the kind of crunch that excites me the most.  It frequently is "new uses for old skills" but is potentially limitless - each expansion in this manner pushes the borders a little farther - which of course creates even more "border" for future expansion.  IMO, alchemy and herbalism are more or less defined to the point where future alchemical stuff would be redundant (thanks to A&H and Occult Lore's herbalism section) - but now, we might see a selection on "flora and fauna of the inner and outer planes and their medicinal uses (hmm... maybe I should do this... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> )" - and this would once again expand the horizons.The most glaring hole in 3e that could use filling right now with expansion crunch is Mass Combat, but there are others (Craft skill, for instance, seems WOEFULLY underdeveloped).On the whole, I think that Redundant Crunch may be getting close to hitting market saturation.  While there is always the desire for the "new monsters" and "new spells," eventually there is just "too much" of the same competing for the same dollar.  Variation Crunch lasts longer, but eventually variation crunch starts looking like Redundant Crunch.  It's the Expansion Crunch that I look for - because if I always write/purchase Expansion Crunch I never worry about it becoming Redundant Crunch.Thoughts?EDIT: Oh, and by the way, my absolute favorite type of Crunch doesn't come from a d20 publisher.  It comes from Nestlé. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />--The Sigil</blockquote>

Verification