"Do you play "obsolete" editions of rules?" Topic

Examples.
WRG Ancients peaked at 7th ed, and them morphed into Warrior.
Do you play earlier editions?

Do you prefer earlier versions of Warhammer?

Do you play Flames of War V1 or V2 by preference to V3?

Discuss and show your work.

Part B.
If you think 3rd edition gives a better game, why do you play 7th?

Since I only have FoW book for Version II I am sticking with that for now. I just need to get some army list books cheap.

VR
James Mattes

I have the book, how can it be "obsolete"?

2nd edition WH40K & Fantasy, WH Ancient Battles.

Mix Classic Traveller with Mongoose Traveller.

Arduin Grimoire with 3.5D&D, Castles&Crusades.

Twilight 2000 2.2

Early variants of Europa boardgames

AK47 Republic first version. Enjoy it so never seemed the need to try the new one.

If by obsolete you mean no longer available by the publisher to purchase… then yes

AK47 v2 rather than the Reloaded version

I'd generally say not … but did enjoy an excellent big game of AK47 not reloaded last night. Probably v2 (I've lost my copy over the years …)..

Great game …

OFM,

I asked a mirror image of this question on CSW.

Board Wargaming…if the numbers fit (ie Combat Strength-Movement) on counters between games that deal with the same subject or period, but not the same rules.

Do you use the older/easier/popular rules to play a game that you would otherwise have to learn new rules to play?

Which I do sometimes.

I also have all the original Warhammer/40k games and still use those rules to this very day.

Hope that helps.

Yes I do.

Yes, if I like it, I'd play it if it was a cave drawing.

I assume you mean more along the lines of "superseded" rules?

When WH40K 3rd came out, we continued to play 2nd (with increasingly larger bits of RT/1st being added in) for years afterward, until my gaming group scattered to the four winds.

Yes. Never bothered to buy new editions of DBA or HoTT, play the older versions of AK47 and Square Bashing (although I have the newer ones). Most of all the other rules I own I only have the first versions I got, the two exceptions being Command Decision and Strategos/Lost Battles.

If it ain't broke, why fix it?

I don't play in tournaments nor are my regular gaming buddies particularly bothered about keeping up with the latest trends, which perhaps colours our approach.

I play versin 6.1.? Of the naval game, Close Action. We have fun with it. My wife enjoys playing as well. That might be the best reason for not getting the later version.

Of course when my game room flooded, the rules took a hit. They are still readable but I have been hunting for a replacement copy. No luck.

Matthew

yes:::
they seem to be more fun and why replace some thing that in not broken.

Since I haven't bought any rules for 15-20 years I guess I do.

Yes. If they give a good game why try to remember rules changes after several years of playing the original game?

Yep. Rogue Trader (with bits of 2nd) and WFB 2/3… various old editions of RPGs. I'm looking at putting Fantasy Rules! back on the table, despite it being pretty much dead.
I like modeling and painting miniatures and playing games far more than I like learning new rules.

Putting out new rules more often seems to be a way to generate sales than it does making the rules 'better'.
I feel the same way about most of the computer programs I use… but with those you're eventually forced to 'upgrade'.

If I'm playing them, how can they be obsolete?

I did with TSATF. Then I started asking questions that started small fuss fests. So I have the newest edition.
I still play my WW2 games using the first version of Jadgpanzer. But I like the rules, so I plan to continue.
If I ever get around to French Colonial games I'll use my old edition of TSATF again. But all my earlier questions have benn answered. Of course, I could find some new ones…

Yep! Some sets make me feel like Iīm being pressured to buy the latest, greatest edition, and if I donīt I wonīt be one of the cool kids. That dog just donīt hunt, if I like a set, why change it?

Of course, I donīt mind if other cool kids buy them so I can try them out

DBA, first edition, does everything l need.

John

It's not obsolete if someone is playing it.

You mean people actually pay attention to version/edition numbers? Hhmmm…..

> If I'm playing them, how can they be obsolete?

Obsolete does not mean not in use.

If I were to play Command Decision again it would most likely be CD2 rather then the new one. Generally I keep up with new editions till I feel I'm just getting ripped off – then I generally end up switching systems entirely…

Sure. If I like them and enjoy them, and I don't think the changes made are changes I want to play, there's nothing preventing me from playing the earlier edition.

Obsolete does not mean not in use.

Oh yes, it does:

"no longer in general use; fallen into disuse: an obsolete expression. "
link

"(of words, equipment, etc.) no longer in use; gone into disuse; disused or neglected (often by preference for something newer, which replaces the subject)."
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/obsolete

Warzone 1st edition amongst some others.

Thanks,

John

All of the attractive co-eds are playing the newest rules, so I try to keep up. I once unknowingly played an older version of Might of Arms. All of the other players were overweight, balding and crotchety old men. I'll never make that mistake again.

The Fantasy Trip
I refuse to buy any more Champions rules they are getting way out of hand.
Necromunda
Man O' War using Pirates of the Carribean plastic cards
With Skippy on WH40k 2nd, obviously
and

It's not obsolete if us diehard old Grognard's are keeping it alive. And some of us are old (65 here)

If I have them in print they are not "obsolete" and if I enjoy them they get played, even if they are from the 70s and 80s. I even play "Le Kriegspiel" by Pat Condray with friends, they are the ones who introduced me to it. We play the ancients variant, a bit simple but fun.

Most of my role playing games are old editions or out of print rules. Most are just right for their genre and I have no intention to shell out money on shiny versions of a game I own (or a game that does something an existing game I own does…only worse). The drawback of that is that a lot of people I game with like the shiny, shiny, new, new games and baulk at black and white artwork, non-D20 rules which aren't hot off the store shelves.

Yes, quite a few: WH40k Rogue Trader, the Fighting Wings rules from Achtung Spitfire! rather than Whispering Death, DBA, DBM (if that is considered an older version of DBMM rather than different rules), FoW v2, WFRP1

Regards

Of course. Napoleons Battles (1st ed), On to Richmond are a couple. I'd happily play older versions of DBA. I enjoyed DBAOL which is based on DBA 1.2.

John

Yep that's me.

Yup…never been part of the "Gotta play the latest edition" crowd.

Keeps me out of tournaments, but I'm OK with that…..

I just play obsolete rules – it's easier than all that editions stuff.

The four that I still play that are no longer in production or are no longer supported that immediately come to mind are:

Johnny Reb II
Tactica
Forlorn Hope
Long Knives

I play the version of the rules which I have bought. Rarely do I pick up a new version of anything. I don't pay much attention to new variants as they appear. The new ones always seem to add complexity I do not desire. Contrarian that I am I have searched for earlier versions of rules which I purchased. Sort of the reverse of this question.

Yes.

Still play 7th edition Warhammer Fantasy and I have the second edition FOW rules and never saw the need to go with third.

OFM I think the better word would be obsolescent instead of obsolete.

Kim

WAB 1.0 with house rules.

DM

I wish I had my old copy of Tractics. I'd play the heck outta that.

Sure. Why wouldn't I?

Doug

As a dinosaur I play whatever I'm comfortable with.

I'm another one who still plays the first edition of Napoleon's Battles. Also still play Squad Leader on occasion.

The "latest and greatest" is a by-product of the tournament scene (which includes store-sponsored games), and I decided I don't like it. Too many people who I wouldn't associate with otherwise.

(Adjusts monocle and sips port.)

My gaming group is not bothered with slavishly following the latest rules. We don;t play in tournaments, but we like non-army-list, scenario-driven, experimental type of games.

We use whatever rules the game organizer decides on. This can be something new, but can as well be something that's 10, 20, or even 50 years old.

Also, we have a tendency of starting to define house rules, modify existing rules etc. A commercial ruleset quickly evolves in our own creation, hence we don't bother checking out later editions.

> "no longer in general use;

The word "general" there is important…

> "no longer in general use;

The word "general" there is important…

Perhaps (although the second definition above does not include the word "general"…), but how do you know whether a particular set of rules is in general use or not?

Warhammer fantasy 3rd edition (still my favorite)
40k 4th edition (liked it couldn't be arsed to go further)
AK-47 1st edition (best game ever didn't see the point in getting the econd edition which seems rather different)
orginal HoTT (if it ain't broke)
orginal 1st edition DBA (see above)
Orginal warhammer ancients (just cuase I couldn't e arsed to buy another rule book)

I guess the answer to the OP would be……….. yes

I generally play the latest edition. Simple reason. if the rules author believes they have improved them, and I trusted them enough to buy the earlier editions, why wouldn't I trust them to produce a better/improved/more historical later version.

I don't generally buy rule-sets where the authors seem to be continuously producing new sets and codexes, yes GW & FoW, I'm looking at you…