"Rules with a second or third edition?" Topic

Do many rules ever successfully produce a second, third or greater edition?

Johnny reb
Command Desision
Close action

Shako
General de Brigade
Flames of War

It rather depends on your definition of many.

There are a fair number of rules on the market that are on their second or third edition. Some are on their 6th or higher :O

I would say that no more than 25% of sets get a second edition though

D&D 3.5
Star Wars Saga Edition
Blood Bowl 2nd

WRG
DBM
Warhammer and Warhammer 40K
Advanced Dungeons and Dragons
DBA
Hordes of the Things
Mein Panzer
Empire
Epic 40K/Epic Armageddon

Armies of Arcana
Full Thrust
Dirtside
Stargrunt
Starmada

Volley and Bayonet
The Sword and the Flame

I can see a second edition that comes out 5 or so years later, that fixes minor details to make a good or great ruleset better. If you produce a ruleset that needs to be fix in six months or sooner you have cheated everyone who bought the first edition. Any ruleset that has more then two editions in less then 10 years is a rulesset not worth buying.

That is why "The Sword And The Flame" is so great. Two editions in 30 years and the second edition didn't really change any rules. Just added another game and some minor variations.

The third edition of I Ain't Been Shot Mum is miles better than 2nd (I never had 1st).

An "edition" really needs to be an improvement – either in fixing mistakes or introducing changes. It should not be a "scheduled reinventing itself" kind of thing to inject some extra cash into the business.

It would seem unlikely that most smaller companies could produce rules that would not need subsequent editions. The amount of people play testing a ruleset would need to be fairly large to find all of the flaws in it and it would be key to have people play it who have never had the writer or writers involved in the play test.

Certainly it could happen but I would imagine that the really hits the fan when rules are released to a large audience. So it seems that 2nd editions, revisions and so forth are fairly inevitable if a game is to be played at all.

Agree with Pictors assessment. Even with extensive playtesting, inbalance and quirks pop up. Then there is the inevitable gamer that finds a way to exploit some nuance or gimmick that is unintended.

I also love it when people bash a set of rules, then complain that revised edition is still the same, fixes problems that didn't exist and then still refuse to try them again… sigh…

WRG Ancients (Editions 1 – 7)

DBA is at 2.1 (?)

AD&D Battlesystem
Chainmail
Combat: WW2
Adventures with Gun, Sabre & Horse

Dozens!

Classical Hack,
DBA
Empire
Shako
Johnny Reb III

on and on.

VR
James Mattes

Song of Blades & Heroes Revised -- creator took lots of player feedback and kept the development process fully transparent. Players were using the WIP new rules and offering feedback as the book came together. It was really the model on how this sort of thing should be done.

From the Piquet family of rules, 2nd editions of:

Master Rules
Archon
Band of Brothers
Hallowed Ground
Din of Battle
Cartouche
Point of Attack: The Blitzkreig
Field of Battle

Sometimes it's a vast improvement, like The Sword and the Flame.
Other times, it's an excuse to make people throw out the old ones and buy new. Any number of tournament style rules would fit this descriotion. Naming no names…

I forgot:
Infinity

Perhaps it'd be easier to list the ones that HAVEN'T gone to a second edition?

Blitzkrieg Commander

Pretty much all the rules I buy go to a new edition within a few months after I buy them. 8^(
Grelber

My two favoured Napoleonic Rules Sets are 3rd Editions – La Feu Sacre and General de Brigade. Both were good rules in their second editions but are real winners in their 3rd release.

It's probably quicker to list the rules which had an unsuccessful second or third edition.
Apart from WAB, what would they be?

Pictors is exactly correct. We had played PRIDE OF LIONS 100+ times before it was published, but still found -- and are still finding -- new wrinkles that need clarifying. Mind you, it's things that only happen very rarely, or unusual combinations. But there's too many variables ever to pre-test all of them.

So 2nd edition PRIDE had some longer or clearer expanations. But I also added a lot of new stuff as well. Plus the Yahoo group members who had bought first edition got a very low price on 2nd.

Second or maybe third, yes.
Fourth, fifth, sixth, etc… no.

Initial revision/editing/minor rules changes and clarifications is generally a good thing. Designers tend to get things right after some playtesting and 2-3 revisions.

Change for change sake is just a money-making excercise in modifying/rewriting rules that were better left alone. One major game company comes to mind immediatley…