Will there ever be new editions of the major systems?

[darjr]

Traveller is an odd one to list as a stable version.

It actually changed quite a bit and strayed from the original quite a bit, if you were close to the game, if you weren't they did look very similar. Except Traveller 5th edition (not the 5e D&D version upcoming, but that actual 5th version of the Traveller rules) which I think was obviously different while still being somewhat compatible.

Then there is T20 and the GURPS versions (yes TWO!).

Then Mongoose went back to much closer to original Traveller with their own subtle but great changes (imho) and it's drifted some from there.

 

[darjr]

Traveller is a REALLY WEIRD example to use here because it sure changed over the years. I mean its main rule engine was the Twilight: 2000 rules for a while, then GURPS. The fact that it (in the form of Mongoose Traveller) appears to have not changed much is because it came back around to it roots.

Oh you beat me to it!

I had forgotten about the Twilight: 2000 version! I'm very foggy on that. The strange thing now is that Twilight: 2300 game uses the Mongoose Traveller rules.

 

[SableWyvern]

I had forgotten about the Twilight: 2000 version! I'm very foggy on that.

That's Traveller: The New Era, which uses the same system as 2nd edition Twilight 2000. I believe there was a brief period when GDW was looking to use it as a house system for various games.

 

[darjr]

Where’s my low berth? I gotta lie down.

 

[MGibster]

I mean I'm on record as a major Fate skeptic (and even more major Fate Accelerated hater) so it really does not surprise me to see their FitD stuff selling much better, but Fate was practically the center of the "but what else?" discussion in TTRPGs for so long, and I know it has it's devoted fans, so it would seem weird to see it fade away entirely.

I used to think you were cool! I jokingly refer to Fate as "That game where you try to convince your GM your Aspect applies to the situation even if it makes no sense." I haven't played it in a number of years.

They really seem to be pivoting more towards Beyond as a service to customer for business purposes, rather than a rules treadmill.

This is where I suspect WotC would like to take D&D but they've been failing since 4th edition at least. They want recurrent spenders and a subscription seems like a good way to get them.

So, like the above non-TTRPG examples - do you think we've reached a point where the major systems have calcified? And if we want new game mechanics we look to Draw Steel and Daggerheart and Nimble and so forth?

Yes. I think once you have a good way of doing something you're unlikely to want to change it. New RPGs might want to do something totally different or the same thing in a new way, so you're better off looking there for new game mechanics.

 

[Gradine]

I used to think you were cool!

I jokingly refer to Fate as "That game where you try to convince your GM your Aspect applies to the situation even if it makes no sense." I haven't played it in a number of years..

If you haven't played Fate Accelerated, it's still just basically that, only instead of Aspects everything is boiled down to five "approaches" and everyone tries to use the one they have the biggest number in, even if it makes no sense.

I love the idea of Fate but I've never been particularly thrilled with the overall execution

 

[dbm]

I think it depends on where a company gets it money from.

Smaller RPG companies with one tent-pole property kind of need to keep generating content that will sell, and that usually means player content, typically new classes or the equivalent. That tends to mean the game starts to sag under its own weight over time, plus the volume of stuff becomes a barrier to entry and sales start to dry up. So the commercially viable thing to do at that point is to publish a new edition to re-baseline the rules, generate some repeat sales (hopefully a lot of repeat sales…) and make onboarding new players easier.

D&D is the main outlier in this regard, since WotC and Hasbro are looking for alternative long-term revenue streams like D&D Beyond and merchandising / multi-media as the main way of generating repeat revenue. So they are a poor indicator for over all trends in my opinion - no one else has the scale or market presence to pull this off.

The other outlier are games which are basically static. No new materials are being published and the ‘company’ is primarily just making existing materials available as PDF / PoD for existing players and opportunistic sales to new players. They are a side-hustle for the people who previously might have put more focus on gaming but have come to the reality that they aren’t going to get rich as an RPG publisher. (Shocking revelation, I know!)

The mid-tier publishers with active lines are the interesting ones. Companies like EN Publishing and Free League. Their model seems to be more horizontal growth than vertical growth - add new lines rather than endlessly adding to a small number of lines which accelerates the point where a new edition becomes essential. I am sure there will eventually be a new edition of Level Up but I wouldn’t expect to see it a long time.

GURPS is another outlier as SJG get their money from Munchkin so GURPS is more a passion project than a stand-alone commercially viable offering.