"What does “supported” mean?" Topic

Does it mean that you expect the rules writer to hold your hand for the foreseeable future?
Must he be on call to answer your questions?

I remember, back in my WRG tournament days, when there would be a "rules seminar" the night before the actual tournament started.
Guys would argue over rules interpretation.
"I have a letter from Phil! And it says …. Blah blah blah."
"Well, I have a letter too, and it says the opposite!"
"What's the postmark date???"
🙄

So, that's how I interpret "supported".

I would suggest it means an active forum where the rules users can post queries, suggestions, and other rules related items that will be answered by either the rules author or one or more designated "experts." A good example would the forums run by BigRedBat for his "To the Strongest!" and "For King and Parliament" rules link .

Jim

1.) They still publish it.
2.) They still sell stuff for it (if they sold stuff for it).
3.) They still publish scenarios/expansion sets and the like. (Less important.)

Why are these things "supporting"? Because they mean that they're still putting the game out there to an audience/customer base, which means you have a likelihood of finding other players who are familiar with the system and want to play it rather than run off after the Next Flashy Thing. (And 3 is actually somewhat optional.)

A discussion forum, blog, or contact method (with responses) is nice and all, but if you need those things to play, that means the rules must be unclear or hard to decipher.

Agree with Parzival's last point. Actually, I think he'r pretty much right on all points. It's just that my interest in tracking down complete strangers for a pick-up game is limited.

Can someone get into the game by buying the product (rules, miniatures, everything you need) from the manufacturer?

Hunting eBay, flea markets and the like does not count. There must be an easy button to start

If a set of rules REQUIRES me to buy the rules and their figures and stuff to play it, then I'm not buying it. I'll play with figures I like, thank you.

PzIV,
I would posit that someone in the group would have to buy the rules. If I play them and like them I'd sure like to be able to get a copy of my own.
Supported would at least mean that you still can.

For me, that means that you can have access directly to the designer , ask your question and receive a clarifying answer in a reasonable amount of time (hopefully before the next game).

I have always thought that if supposedly literate adults can't figure it out for themselves, they need a new hobby.
To me, the designer needs to do no more than get the rules printed and sold.
Roll a D6 for Heaven's sake!

If I have to pay 30-60$ for a rules set, I expect it to be pretty clearly written. If there is some ambiguity or conflict within, sure OFM, I could just roll a 6 to resolve but the occurrence should never have happened! But in resolving such a problem I might as well play old maid! (It's much cheaper BTW)

"
To me, the designer needs to do no more than get the rules printed and sold" ---I have this bridge off the coast of Florida ….. What a low threshold standard to make you happy! Ever think that some of us expect more out of an expensive rules set (That works as a working set) from someone thought that supposedly literate adults can write a "book of procedures" without making a mistake? I suppose such an attitude is similar to buying a new car missing a tire would be the fault of the buyer for not noticing? Perhaps but I bet the new owner would have a case to get that 4th tire! 8>)

What John said. I couldn't give two hoots if a rule set is "supported" or not, I just need to be able to buy a copy so I can read it. It is certainly nice if there is a community playing it or whatever, but it isn't a pre requisite.

I appreciate things are different for tournament players.

The logical fallacy of "the false dichotomy" is strong with some people here.

I remember back in the 70s when I was a young lad playing SPI, AH and GDW board games. SPI had a rules hotline. I could call them almost 24/7 and someone would pick up the phone and answer any rules question. It didn't even have to be one of their games.

I particularly remember one time we were playing classic Diplomacy and some rules question came up, so I called the rules hotline and "some guy" answered, I said something like can the Germans move such a way out of the Baltic and I could here the guy shout out "Does anyone know…" and I got an answer.

Now whether they were right or wrong didn't occur to us. We had a straight line to the source! We called about Panzerblitz, WWII, Kursk, any game. One night I heard my parents talking about the phone bill and my mom asked my Dad "Who is calling New York City!?"

For me and wargaming it means nothing.

You buy some rules, if you like them you play them and modify them.

Nowadays I don't buy new rules as I'm happy with the ones I've got…

As near as I can tell, supporting rules means the maker/author produces figures for said rules -- when they stop making the figures, or they come out with a new version of their rules, the previous versions are no longer supported. This is primarily a Games Workshop (GW) modus operandi.

I saw a YT video recently where the videographer was lamenting the fact that GW had just removed his army which he had just finished painting, three years after he bought it, and he could no longer use it within official tournament games.

I guess I should expand my definition of a "supported game" to tournament-based games (still like GW, as they are the biggest dog in the tournament yard).

I don't play tournament games. I play 2e BattleSystem, OOP since 1993, aside from the PDF version, which has been available since 2004, at least. Note that 2e BattleSystem was marketed as being compatible with 2e AD&D RPG rules, which went OOP in 2000, being replaced by version 3.0, then 3.5, then 4.0, then 5.0, and now the new 2024/2025 version. I need a program to keep it all straight!

Another way to look at a "supported game", might be what happened with my self-published rules for gaming with Army Men figures: I stopped selling them, terminated my web page flogging them, in 2007 (sold from 1998-2007). That is also the last year I taught them in my local Community Education classes for kids. I guess the definitive way of saying they are no longer supported, is when, "they are no longer available in any form." Cheers!

My understanding of the term is that it means the company still produces product, army lists/whatever you want to call it, has an online presence of some type, has an official errata and/or way to ask questions. Not required, but it can be helpful.

+1 Parzival.

GW has numerous classic examples of unsupported games when they stop selling rules and minis. When you have to turn to EBay, the game is not supported.

Fortunately in this age of 3D printing, some games become fan-supported with readily available STLs to print.

For me, supported means if I want to buy some part of the game offered by the publisher (I already have the rules), it is available. The publisher should be on available in a reasonable timeframe to answer reasonable solumes of questions.

I understand the concept of "have to buy their miniatures", but probably in a different way than most. The only case where you "have" to buy the minis to play a set of rules is where force statistics are integrated into the physical figure. Heroclix is the exemplar. Originally, if I wanted to field The Hulk, I needed to acquire that fiture, since its stats were only on the figure itself. Forums got around that, then they started publishing the stats. I stopped playing (shame, since it's a good system) when they started adding additional rules (not stats) with figures. While custom rules are cool, they meant I couldn't have all the rules unless I had all the figures. There is soee merit in all players not knowing all capcatilities in a scenario, but this was not scenario driven, it was market driven.

Aside from that, I don't get the idea some people proffer that a company "forces" you to buy their figures to play their game.

I think reasonable access is a couple of days. If you waited until the 59th minute of the 11th hour to figure something out, that is your problem, not the publisher;s. A FAW is a aresonable way to address commmon questions.

The idea that rules should be completely unabmigous to all people or they shouldn't be published displays a cmoplete lack of undestanding of how language works and how creative people are.

I've recieved some questions about my rules that I though had obvious answers. I have seen some where people came up with really innovative ways to play the game. Happy to answer either one.

Roll a D6 for Heaven's sake!

By your own standards, you should never write rules. you didn't tell how to adjudicate the roll. Apparently, the answer is intuitive…

Roll a D6 for Heaven's sake!

It should be patently obvious that I meant that you don't have to contact the "Supporting" writer over rules conflicts, but to figure it out yourself. As in Days of Yore, act as gentlemen and solve the dispute with a die role.
Obviously, this is far too radical a concept for some to grasp. 🙄

I like having a definitive ruling from the author as to intent, when a rule may not be clear and is hotly debated. Then you can follow that, or not. But at least you have a clear idea what the designer thinks is best. Maybe your issue has already come up in playtesting or since publication, and been resolved?

I nominate Pulp Alley as an exemplar of a fully "Supported" set of game rules. They have a website that sells rules, spinoffs, accessories, stuff that adds to the game experience; and also host a forum that invites discussion, rules questions, a place to post notices about games being put on at conventions, a forum for posting new scenarios and variants -- it's a tremendous resource! Plus you can get feedback and answers from the designer and playtesters about any problems you have. Just superb for veterans and novices alike.

Actually, Death May Die is the best ruleset in this regard. It says something along the lines of if there are multiple interpretations of a rule or apparent conflicts in the rules, pick the situation that is the worst for the players. Simple and very comprehensive.

It should be patently obvious that I meant that you don't have to contact the "Supporting" writer over rules conflicts, but to figure it out yourself. As in Days of Yore, act as gentlemen and solve the dispute with a die role.
Obviously, this is far too radical a concept for some to grasp.

It is certainly a radical concept for me. Resolving it like gentlemen to me means have a reasond discussion and reach a consensus.

Leaving the decision to random fate is tha anthesis of civility. And the antehsis of deciding for yourself.

"Can I do this or not?" is not far from "Why is it a 50/50 chance instead of 1 in 6?".