Tabletop Roleplaying Games are Too Long
WARNING: This is long and half-formed nonsense that came about because of other nonsense that I posted on Twitter. You are better off skipping this; maybe there’s something good on TV. Hell, even something bad will be more entertaining than this.
Earlier today, while reading through a book, posted on Twitter:
Why can’t we have complete and playable tabletop roleplaying games in 32-pages or less?
That was just intended as a random question and not as an opening to a discussion, but the response on Twitter left me with many questions for clarification. And as I thought through how to clarify my question I realized that Twitter just wasn’t the vehicle for the discussion. After all, I do love to ramble.
Roleplaying Game Books are Too Long
And without even jumping into sourcebooks I’m comfortable saying that the majority of roleplaying game books hitting store shelves these days are just too damned long. The core rulebook for the quite-impressive Pathfinder Roleplaying Game* (the successor to Dungeons and Dragons) comes in at 576-pages. The Battletech roleplaying game, A Time of War*, is over 400-pages. And even Shadowrun* comes in at almost 400-pages.
That’s too many pages for a game. How, exactly, is someone new to tabletop roleplaying supposed to get excited by a tome that makes textbooks look like light reads? And regardless of how much beautiful artwork is jammed between the covers the fact remains that these books are simply too damned thick. It’s a lot to expect someone to read and absorb all of these rules, let alone then convince friends to play a “game” that has such a massive rulebook.
We need shorter games. Games that don’t scare and intimidate the average person who might, just maybe, have an interest in a tabletop roleplaying game.
“Complete” Games
I think it was the word “complete” in my tweet that caught quite a bit of the attention. What, exactly, is required for a tabletop roleplaying game to be considered complete? How much needs to be packed into the game for someone to consider the game “complete?”
Well, the answer to that question is no doubt different for each and every person you ask. Since I was the one who posted the tweet I’m going to say that my definition of a complete roleplaying game is one that includes:
- Character Creation – Everything I need to create a character — excluding things like dice, pencils, paper, imagination — should be in the book. And there should be enough variety so that each character is different but not so many decisions to make that a potential new player feels overwhelmed. I am fine with the concept of archetypes — a ready-to-play character — and feel that the original Star Wars roleplaying games is one of the best examples of this type of “out of the box” character creation.
- Character Advancement – After a game session ends there should be enough in the book for me to improve the characters, some way to show measurable advancement so that (over time) the characters get better. People are greedy and want to see something for the time they invest in a game. Character advancement is how many roleplayers feel they can show achievement.
- Basic Gear – I don’t need seven pages of handguns. Really, I don’t. I know that I have shelves and shelves of game books that make that statement sound like a lie, but in the end a handgun in a roleplaying game is just a tool and I’ll be fine if the “flavor” of the world is limited to names and not different statistics for each and every handgun out there. And this applies to cars, horses, rocketships, and nuclear missiles.
- Flexible Rules – And by flexible I mean “rules that can be adapted to any situation.” I hate when a ruleset tries to cover each and every possible event in a game with long and complex — and different! — rules. Please don’t give me rules for grappling, throwing, jumping from a plane, swimming through a river of lava, and holding my breath on an airless world. What I would like instead is a core system that a gamemaster can use as he sees fit to cover all of these things. Broad and not tight strokes. Granted this type of system relies on players who can trust and work with each other, but I’m an adult and willing to work with others in the interest of having fun. As you progress with your experience by playing different games at ì•„ì¸ì¹´ì§€ë…¸, you will additionally acquire more rewards in the form of free spins or rounds.
- Monsters/Opponents – A dozen or so core concepts is plenty. Don’t give me a dozen different dragons. Instead, give me one dragon and a paragraph of “suggestions” on changes to the core dragon to make it different. I know this goes against the way a lot of games handle the situation — Monster Manual V* demonstrates the opposite of what I am proposing — but in the end I am creative enough to take a monster’s description and tweak it to make something different.
- Adventures – I really don’t need a “sample” adventure in the game book. Instead, direct me to a one-page PDF or a blog post where I can see the outline for a standard adventure for the game. In fact, in today’s connected world all things like adventure structure, adventure ideas, and even gamemastering basics may work better as blog posts than as a book. Yes, people like books, but for a game book all of that material gets in the way and shouldn’t be in the rules. The rules, if I can veer from my path for a moment, should be the core of what I need to play. Advice on playing shouldn’t be in the rules; once I have read the advice and played a few times those become wasted pages.
Is there anything else that needs to be in the game for it to be complete? I don’t think so. We’ve got characters for the players, stuff to use to attack the monsters, and rules for attacking, jumping, and even improving after the monsters are dead. Adventures are a bit of a cheat since I am suggesting that you can go to an outside source, but I’m personally fine with that cheat since I’d rather read a website once than be stuck with worthless pages in my game book forever.
This Post is Too Long and Random
I’ll admit that this post doesn’t shout anything new or give any solutions to my original tweet, but there was enough feedback on Twitter that I wanted to expand on the tweet. And I know that none of what I say here lends itself to commercial success — sales prove that what I am saying is financially a bad idea; players want massive books — but since the original tweet was a random thought and not a demand that someone create something new then I don’t feel like my thoughts here are worth any more than what you paid for them.
Is this completely thought through? Not at all. This is my brain churning and making a stupid wish as I pick up another heavy roleplaying game book. And my brain does like to make stupid wishes . . .
I think this’all makes a lot of sense.
Shorter games also makes it easier for folks who write material for it. I’d love to write for GURPS Basic.
I couldn’t help but think “one more paragraph and it’ll be Phil’s turn to come up with GURPS Medium.”
Completely agree and will keep this in mind if I ever convert Kaiju Kaos over to RPG from minis (something I’ve been considering from day 1).
As someone who only played D&D a few times in High School, I couldn’t agree more. I wanted to love tabletop gaming but I was just too overwhelmed. Now I wish they were more accessible because I think I could get my wife into them if they weren’t so daunting.
Sounds like you’re singing the praises of the Old School Renaissance! 🙂
If you look around you’ll find that there are actually a TON of game systems just like you describe. I remember browsing Kings Hobby years ago amazed at the number of smaller-rulebook games available (and this was before the internet).
I think the problem arises is the gray areas. When a player believes that his character should be better at something than the GM believes, it comes down to a matter of the GM laying down the law. While this is part of what GMs DO, being able to reference a specific rule that backs the GM up, makes things easier.
Also, the concepts you’re talking about are for experienced players. Noobs won’t be (competently)able to make their own characters, let alone create quality monsters, nps, etc.
So they will start with a system that spells out everything for them. By the time that they feel comfortable enough to use a system that isn’t as restrictive, they have learned the system they started on, so why not just stick with that?
The long form troubles you highlight here is exactly what killed the D&D group I used to play in. Our grouped gained some people along the way so gameplay between turns took way too long and things moved too slow, which resulted in everyone losing interest.
Tabletop games need to take on the A-Team Model where you have some characters ready to go, a problem (bad guy) and you can solve that problem with tactics and luck in about an hour. Okay, maybe 2-hours but we would have 4-hour sessions that never moved the group forward.
Fact of the matter is, we’ve been spoiled by video games that deliver a lot of things quickly and easily. The stories are pre-defined and quests are digestable…tabletop games need to find some happy balance between the tabletops of yore and the sit-n-play of video games. However, like you, I don’t have any solutions but I can tell you if there was a game that solved this issue, I’d be happy to start gaming again.
@Morning Toast – “However, like you, I don’t have any solutions but I can tell you if there was a game that solved this issue, I’d be happy to start gaming again.”
And I think this is true for a lot of people. If Wizards of the Coast could actually create a D&D game that’s concise, complete, and fun then I think they would gather new players and old players alike. The problem, in my opinion, is trying too hard to cater to the existing fanbase and not stretching to capture new and gone players.
I suspect that even a game in a box with two 32-page books would do well IF it was written to be complete and NOT as an introductory product. Plan a roleplaying game that is ONLY six sessions, for example, in which players work together to tell that one story over six two hour sessions. If it’s $25 or $30 and we have a hell of a lot of fun with the game then I promise we’ll be back for the sequel.
@Neal – “Noobs won’t be (competently)able to make their own characters, let alone create quality monsters, nps, etc.”
That’s where the idea of archetypes comes in. The original Star Wars roleplaying game in 1987 gave a variety of characters that you just photocopied, made a few choices on, and then you started playing.
Monsters and NPCs could be treated the same way. But as I think about it I can see where a game designed to be contained and NOT run for years may work better for both players and publishers.
More groups might be able to schedule time to play if a game was locked to six meets and then they finished the game. Truly inventive players would no doubt find ways to extend the game, but those with little time or experience would know going in what they were committing to in terms of time.
And for me, personally, the time commitment is one of the biggest problem with modern day fat and heavy roleplaying games.
@Jay – Hey, I read Grognardia just like everyone else! 🙂 http://grognardia.blogspot.com/
@Tommy – “Now I wish they were more accessible because I think I could get my wife into them if they weren’t so daunting.”
Agreed. I have tried to get people into some RPGs in the distant past and failed BECAUSE they saw the book. And when it’s D&D and at least three books it really chases people away.
Please check out my recently released game, Destiny Beginner. I wrote it because I thought exactly the same about getting new people to play RPGs. You will find it’s pretty much what you ask for. If you like it, please spread word. Thanks!
The Fate 2.0 rules are pretty short. And I think there’s a version of the Fate 3 rules which fitted onto a double-sided A4 sheet. IIRC, it was called “So you want to play a Gorilla flying a Biplane” or thereabouts.
Chivalry & Sorcery Essence
22 pages for the game, extra 20 for a brief bit of world setting, an adventure, character sheet and a rules-light skirmish game for handling bigger combats.
System is flexible, there uaed to be a free Victorian game based on it and it’s cheap, $6 from Drivethrurpg
And that can’t be the only game out there mat hing your requirements
Sorry, man, unless we are the exception that proves the rule, I can’t agree with “And I know that none of what I say here lends itself to commercial success — sales prove that what I am saying is financially a bad idea…”
We may hit not hit 64p (160p for the Deluxe rules), but I think every other point you made could almost be a description straight from the book.
So it’s not that none of those things or even a combination of them are a bad financial idea. It is possible to be commercially successful with smaller books with comprehensive rules.
But I think the point is still valid; the question becomes how hard is it to be commercially valid designing a game to appeal to beginning players in a market that is saturated with experienced ones.
I play tabletop RPG’s, and have bought a few of those massive tomes, including Pathfinder, but I agree that there needs to be an easier, more compact (and affordable) way. And despite how huge the main book is, there’s still the GameMastering guide, the Advanced Player’s Guide, a few Bestiaries, and several others I probably am forgetting. Gaming background info shouldn’t be a hernia risk.
There are a few issues with short rpgs. The big one is that the mainstream market is accustomed to big games, and thus short ones are perceived as inferior and lacking simply on account of their size.
Price is the second big thing, tied to the first. No matter how awesome your compact game is, people will think it’s not a good deal. If nothing else, you will get size queens who will point out that $10 gets you 32 pages, or $40 gets you not 128 pages, but 400 pages.
Then you have the fact that a short game is going to be much higher on the narrative/fluff/freeform side, and much much less on the detail/rules/crunch side. The market is accustomed to crunch, so a lack of crunch is not only seen as incomplete… but it requires a very different play style which can be hard to adjust to. This makes players reluctant to branch out.
This does impact the financial side of things, and makes PDF/DriveThruRPG really the only viable channel.
That being said, there are smaller games hitting the market and doing well.
The recent Marvel Heroic RPG is a great example.
125 numbered pages in the “Operations Manual” (minus 7 full-page art) , 4 pages credits, foreword, TOC and index, 2 page glossary, 2 page character sheet. That’s a complete game, hitting most of your buttons listed, in less than half the size of any other major game out there.
It misses out on Opponents (it provides templates, using the same basic framework as players) and Gear (not relevant to the genre).
The book includes an adventure, clocking in at 48 pages… of which 15 pages are just various opponents (the adventure is a breakout at the supervillain prison) and 4 pages are full-page art.
It covers a lot of sample opponents, and many of them are great templates for more, which covers that request.
As the game is primarily intended to have people playing as existing Marvel heroes, it provides 23 of them (46 pages) on top of that.
Overall, it clocks in at 232 pages. Pretty small compared to a lot of games, but 40% of it is really optional material.
@MIB5799 – “Overall, it clocks in at 232 pages. Pretty small compared to a lot of games, but 40% of it is really optional material.”
Yes, but at a glance it is still a book over 200-pages in length. Someone has to first get past the “wow, that’s a game?” response when they see the book and actually read the book to figure out exactly what you said.
@Clint Black – “But I think the point is still valid; the question becomes how hard is it to be commercially valid designing a game to appeal to beginning players in a market that is saturated with experienced ones.”
Unfortunately, I suspect a major license would have to be involved AND a company large enough to get the game onto shelves in stores like Barnes and Noble, Hastings, and Books A Million. And if you’re big enough to get in Wal-Mart and Target then you’re gold.
I know Wizards tried a Pokemon RPG back in 2000 — Pokemon Jr Adventure Game — and even that never took off. But I think the problem there was the game required one player (a parent) to read a bit more than the age range was ready for. And how many average parents will play an RPG with a group of little kids?
I do know about the 200 page length. I was more bringing it up in that the whole game itself fits in 128 pages if you leave out the adventure and pregens (and could be compressed a lot further with smaller margins and less 1/3 page art). Not down to your 32-64 page ideal, but a hell of a lot less than most games on the market.
It’s compact enough that when they release the upcoming “Event Books” (basically packaged campaigns), you can get them in Essentials (the campaign itself), or Premium edition, which includes the WHOLE core game rules as well for only 10 bucks more.
Interestingly enough, the page count difference between the editions is 64, suggesting that the game can fit into that page count.
The only other small RPG I can think of is Savage Worlds. The Explorers Edition clocks in at 160 pages, is a complete universal system, includes a small bestiary, and a 2 page sample adventure.
Not only that, it’s 160 pages DIGEST sized – 6.5×9 inches, which is only 60% of the page size compared to typical 8.5×11 games, meaning that the 160 pages really work out to be 96 pages if they were on letter size paper.
There are smaller games out there, but the micro sized ones you’re advocating for (and I support!) are very unlikely to ever be anything but niche indie productions.
Best example is Don’t Rest Your Head, which is 82 pages, digest sized (49 pages letter). Absolutely mind-rending amazing game, tiny package. Well regarded in the indie circles, but not widely known outside them. Absolutely worth the money, though.