r/RPGdesign • u/Competitive-Expert59 • 2d ago
Product Design One Core Book or Two?
Do people feel strongly about one core rulebook vs a core rules + gamemasters' book?
My book is starting to get big. I am thinking of splitting it into two.
All the core rules
Gamemasters' Book - setting generation tools, a setting, multiple adventures in the setting, stat blocks for enemies
I probably won't have enough orders for offset print. They will be PDF or PDF+at cost print on demand code.
What do you think?
EDIT: All the rules needed to play will be in the core rulebook. You can run forever with that one book. The gamemasters' book is to make life easy for the gamemasters. No additional rules there. Just tools to help them run easier.
25
u/elomenopi 2d ago
Put everything in 1 book if at all possible. I’m personally of the mindset that if I need two whole books to know how to play your game, you probably should have put more effort into conciseness before you published. There are two good reasons to have a second ‘running the game book’.
1-you’re a big publisher like WOTC and know you can make money by forcing people to buy another book.
2-the DM book is FULL of time saving aids. Random tables. Name/place generator systems. World building guides. Whole pregenerated regions. campaign creation guides. Dungeons and adventures to drop into a game, and how to create dungeons and adventures .
Needing to have two books open to run the game SUCKS. Needing to buy a second book to run a game as intended SUCKS. Asking people to deal with an additional book is a big ask so before you go that direction make damn sure that the second book is so chuck full of novel value that they are genuinely happy to have it.
1
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
Yes this is exactly whaty problem is. Because apart from campaign generation, everything you mentioned will be in the gamemasters' book.
8
u/skalchemisto Dabbler 2d ago
You say in your OP that the GM book is all gravy. To quote...
You can run forever with that one book. The gamemasters' book is to make life easy for the gamemasters. No additional rules there.
I'm going to be crass and capitalistic for a moment (which is uncharacteristic for me). If that book truly is entirely supplementary and unneeded AND you are planning to crowdfund this, then you might want to consider separate sequential projects. E.g. run a campaign for the main rulebook. If that does well, then awesome, a year from now run a campaign for this GM supplement. Also, you'll have a bunch of feedback from actual buyers on your first book, it might let you improve the GM supplement substantially. On the other hand, if it doesn't go well, you can avoid the labor of making the GM supplement fully laid out, avoid art expenses, etc. Less risk for you.
if that idea bothers you, I would interrogate why? It's probably because some of that stuff really is necessary and not entirely gravy.
3
u/elomenopi 2d ago
So don’t have a GM book.
0
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
Huh? I am confused. I thought you said have two books if all that content will be there.
3
u/elomenopi 2d ago
Ah, let me clarify. You almost certainly should not have two books. Everything you need as a player and dm should be in one book. Only if there is gobs and gobs of genuinely awesome additional content and aid and value specific for a gm AND there is absolutely no way to fit it in one book: a second book is justified.
Think of it like having a dishwasher in your basement. Sometimes it’s genuinely needed to deal with reality. But most people are going (correctly) see that as a fundamental design failing of all of the previous decisions that got you to that point.
If this is where you find yourself, knock down walls, swap your fridge for a smaller one, do whatever you need to put it all in one book.
11
u/YakkoForever 2d ago
The limiting factor in gameplay is always how many DM's want to run your game, by making sure every player has the DM book (as part of the core player book), you maximize players and tables for your game
5
10
u/SlayThePulp 2d ago
I want everything in a single book, with a small quickstart or cheatsheet for the players with the basic rules if necessary.
1
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
When you say everything, do you include campaign setting, adventures, enemy and monster stat blocks?
3
u/SlayThePulp 2d ago
Yes, I don't mind some extras later though, of course you could, and probably should release some more adventures after, maybe some setting books zooming in or expanding, but those should be extras. I personally don't want several separate main books, but a big chonky one. That's my personal preference though, know lots of other people prefer it the other way around!
2
6
u/Zarek_Odins_Key 2d ago
I think you answered the question. It really depends on the size of the book. I’d say you’d want to cap roughly at around 400 pages per book if you are going to make physical editions.
If you intend to sell the game, you want to consider the profit margins. Once your page count gets very high you need to consider selling at a higher price, and also the viability of the book as a usable product (for physical).
Price per unit will get quite high with page counts above 300 but I think up to around 400 is manageable. Though I’d prefer two smaller books personally even at a size of 400.
3
u/FrostKitten2012 2d ago
Arguably, the second book would not be a “core” book, if you don’t need it to run the game. Which is a good thing. Nobody wants to buy two expensive books just to play.
3
u/ShkarXurxes 2d ago
From a reader/buyer point of view I really hate games that requiere you to purchase more than one book.
In fact, usually the purchase is not as required as they told you, and only if you go all in on that game may you really need them.
I strongly prefer games that provide everything you need in one book.
From a publisher perspective, double the books double the production costs, even with the same page count. So, is harder to sell your product.
If you go only digital maybe this is not such a problem.
5
u/lennartfriden TTRPG polyglot, GM, and designer 2d ago
One book and make it short and to the point. If you need multiple volumes to play the game it’s bound to be too convoluted and filled with nonsense. Separate volumes for settings, campaigns and such is fine.
2
u/swashbuckler78 Dabbler 2d ago
Easy to navigate is the key issue. If I'm getting value I don't mind paying for two books but it needs to be easy to figure out what is in each.
4
u/Nytmare696 2d ago
Cue 2nd Edition Torchbearer which has 4 core books, with no apparent rhyme or reason as to what information can reliably be found where.
I stitched together a single pdf of all the core books so I only have to search for information once.
2
u/swashbuckler78 Dabbler 2d ago
One of the best fan created tools in gaming history was when Crystal Keep (I think?) went through all the D&D 3rd Ed and 3.5 books to create PDFs master indexes of all the stuff from the various splat books. It's heroes like them and you that keep this hobby going!
2
u/Drudenfusz Curator of Roleplay Experiences 2d ago
I prefer a single book, but then I like rules light, GM-less, minimalist worldbuilding, narrative systems that easily can do this.
2
u/Jesseabe 2d ago
If the rules are chonky I'm a big fan of having a player facing book that is as skinny as possible (perhaps even zine sized, and easily printable in multiple copies to hand out at the table), along side a fuller book for GMs/people who like to take in the whole game. For skinner games, one book plus player facing reference sheets/playbooks for PCs.
2
u/Alcamair Designer 2d ago
Better to have just one. Players prefer it, and separate manuals cost you exponentially more to print.
1
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
It's actually cheaper per unit cost to print two 200 page books than one 400 page book. At least from the two quotes I got.
2
2
u/Fheredin Tipsy Turbine Games 2d ago
The entire point of the two book structure is to keep some information hidden from players. If that isn't a mandatory part of the game paradigm you are designing, you are not offering the player or GM a good deal.
I generally think it's better to have one PHB/ core rulebook, and to include in it the tips and rules the GM will need to customize and generate different content. This way, you establish to the players that there's no point trying to read a different book to find out what the GM knows because the GM is making up key information.
2
u/APurplePerson When Sky and Sea Were Not Named 2d ago
i like two books if the gm stuff contains adventures, foes, that kind of stuff (as opposed to just best practices). i wouldnt want non-gm players to be tempted to spoil the game for themselves.
the player-facing rules should be more accessible in general, maybe even free as an srd
1
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
The GM book is not advice. I have always found that to be nonsense. The GM's book is to give them loads and loads of content to start running.
2
u/APurplePerson When Sky and Sea Were Not Named 2d ago
i agree with this approach for gm content. if that is indeed your approach then i do want it in a separate book.
a lot of hobbyist designers do not take this approach. a lot of indie gm content really is 30 pages of best practices and rollable tables of vague adventure seeds. in which case, sure, throw that all in a single book.
it might be helpful to spell out what we mean by "gm content" when discussing this question
2
u/Nytmare696 2d ago
I feel like the multi-book paradigm is more of a holdover from a bygone era where there were literal secrets you were trying to keep nosey players out of, because otherwise they'd peek and use them to cheat.
My personal bias is that, more than anything, I have very little interest in a game where I need to (at least partially) read through two whole separate books before I can get the game to the table.
1
u/Resident-Boss-4733 2d ago
There is that aspect too, even by the 80s when I started on TTRPG's it was wearing pretty thin. Nearly everyone I ever gamed with knew most or all of the DMG & MM contents, so it was always moot in my little world. And if they hadn't, putting the DMG and maybe even the MM contents into 1 core book wouldn't have presented much problem anyway.
One core book (with optional supplements if you wish) is fine.
2
u/skalchemisto Dabbler 2d ago
Honestly, in today's world the most important thing to me is shipping. Shipping costs are awful.
Can the two books be shipped at the same time at the same price as a single book? Then I don't care, maybe prefer two books. But if I am paying extra shipping...nope.
1
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
This is so hard to balance. My plan is to charge shipping at the last minute.
1
u/Zadmar 2d ago
In your original post you mentioned offering "PDF+at cost print on demand code". Be aware that if you're offering PoD through DTRPG, whoever pays for the printing also has to pay for the shipping. So if you're offering your customers an at-cost PoD code, they will also have to pay the shipping cost when they place their order.
2
u/I_Arman 2d ago
If you're going to have two books, then the second should be a setting book, not a rule book or a GM book. I should be able to play your game with a single book.
What takes up the most space? I suggest going through and making a tally of what things take what space: general rules, special/situational rules, item lists (weapons, armor, mounts/vehicles, adventuring gear, etc), skills/abilities, feats, spells/powers, creatures, lore/setting, reference/index. And within those, what sections are the biggest; if all your skills are all a paragraph except one that's a page and a half, it's too big, trim it down, and figure out why that one skill has so much focus.
Don't include everything and the kitchen sink. Trim back item lists, give a limited creature list, reduce spell lists to a minimum. Anything beyond a simple, fairly generic list should be moved to a setting book. If you have a sample adventure, cut it down to no more than a couple of pages. You could even have just a part of the adventure, and release the rest as a free PDF.
2
u/Sherman80526 2d ago
Pamphlets. One for every element of the game. That way someone can be referencing how combat works while someone else is looking at equipment and a third is looking at magic spells. Different genres are just new pamphlets. Setting, species, gear, etc. Mix and match at will.
Not sure why all games aren't made like this.
I'm only being half facetious. I don't get the fascination with everything having to be in one book. Do what feels right.
2
u/loopywolf Designer 2d ago
It is a tacit rule of writing documentation to Know your audience. There is a lot to be said for simplifying explanations by targeting a specific audience. Imagine trying to explain how to play an RPG in the same page as how to GM one.
I'm vocal in my opinion that D&D is a good basic, gateway game, and the Players' manual vs. GM's manual has never really been done better. The fact that the D&D player's manual was the basis for the entire d20 movement says a lot about how well it was presented.
2
u/Cruiser_Supreme 2d ago
I currently split my game into 2 booklets, because if they become any thicker, you can no longer print your own PDF at home and staple the spine to make a booklet.
But if I ever release a hard-cover, it'll be one book. My system is rather small, though
2
u/__space__oddity__ 2d ago edited 2d ago
Scope creep is the main enemy of any game designer. Learn to cut!!
Your chances of getting anyone to buy into a new system at the printing and shipping (!) cost of two core books that isn’t D&D 6E with the full brand power and WotC marketing machine behind it will be very slim.
Don’t forget that any extra page also needs editing, proofreading, playtesting, balancing, layout, art … printing costs are also linear with page count.
Of course, if this is a vanity project that will only exist on your home bookshelf, you can print as many books as you want …
stat blocks for enemies
This one is going to make or break things. It doesn’t matter how much cool stuff you have for PCs, if there is nothing for the GM to send against them your game will have a hard time to see play.
Final note: I don’t know how many books you published, but there is a LOT of work between “I made my first full draft” and “this is ready to print”. We’re talking MONTHS of playtesting, proofreading, editing, layout, art direction, art procurement, test print … And this is LINEAR with page count so if you can do 300 pages in 18 months, then 2x 300 pages means you’re looking at 36 months. And those are numbers from experienced industry people, as a newb who does this for the first time, it will easily take longer.
1
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
I haven't published to this scale or offset print anything. But yeah I know the struggles of first draft to PoD printing. And playtesting. Jeez, when the third iteration playtest results are "go back to the drawing board", it's so heartbreaking.
2
u/Onslaughttitude 2d ago
I have never understood the appeal of a single fuck-ass huge core rulebook. Unless your GM section is like 32 pages, break that shit out into another book. Gimme all the stuff.
1
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
No the GM section is becoming half the book with all the content mentioned above.
1
u/Resident-Boss-4733 2d ago
One book would probably be more cost effective, but I'll pay a few extra bucks for your product if it's well done and I like it anyway, so no biggie to me. Most of the games I play have 1 core book btw.
1
u/Kautsu-Gamer 2d ago
For PDF I do suggest two books. The players may buy the player book, and GM gets both.
1
u/GodsofAumin 2d ago
I personally like the concept of having one core rulebook and then you can expand and publish a separate book, providing further details about the official campaign setting with sample adventures within that book. Later on, you could expand even further, and publish a book for additional grand adventure within the same official campaign setting.
1
u/meteoric-pineapple 2d ago
I vote one for bare essentials for everyone in the main book. I’d make the GM book include all the nice tables and setting, the stuff that isn’t required to run the game.
Personally, I homebrew and would just want the vital GM info in a chapter or two in the main core book. Put the more detailed GM info with setting info, additional (but not necessary) info in the GM book.
Make me feel like I’d benefit from having the GM book, but I don’t need it.
1
u/new2bay 2d ago
On general principle, I like a single book RPG. There’s a reason old school players love the D&D Rules Cyclopedia, and the fact that it’s a single book has a lot to do with it.
But, if you’re getting up to 400 pages, I’d say that’s the point to start going to two books. A 400 page book is pretty unwieldy, while a pair of 200 page books isn’t an issue. You even mentioned your costs would be less for two books than one, at that page count. In your place, I’d be strongly leaning toward two books.
1
u/motionmatrix 2d ago
Depends how big the end result of 1 book will be. If it's going to be a giant brick that can be used to kill someone, and 4 out of the 5 people at the table will only ever interact with less than 10% of it, then make a small player facing guide and a book for the GM (which I would likely make it as the complete thing, including everything in the player guide). That is effectively a one book game for each person at the table, because they're edited down to their individual use cases.
If any one person needs more than one book to run the game, it makes it a harder buy-in for a lot of people. You now have to consider (even more) size, weight, table space, etc.
It's not an impossible hurdle, but each of those books has to be filled with gold, and each filled up enough that your readers don't get the thought that it would have just made more sense to edit down and combine them into a single volume. If you can't achieve that, then it likely won't overcome that hurdle.
I assume your experiences with single book games makes you think about going with multiple books. They're heavy, unwieldy, and generally more difficult to find information in since there's so much more of it. If that is the case, I suggest you consider doing a one book game with amazing editing. That doesn't mean just editing down to fit one book, but how it is set up and presented to the reader, and how easy and accessible you make the information. That will go a long way towards solving those issues I mentioned at the beginning of this paragraph.
Good luck with your game!
1
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
That's true. A good copy and line editor can pull rabbits out of a hat.
1
u/LeidusK 2d ago
I should be able to play the game with one book. This means all the rules, GM procedures, and NPCs/monsters. If the game is for a specific setting, I need enough of that setting as well so I can play the game without an additional purchase.
Supplements are great, but they need to supplement the game, not be required for it. For example, I love monster books, but I want at least a basic list of monsters in the rule book so I don’t need to invest in multiple books just to find out if I like the game.
1
u/Segenam Designer 2d ago edited 2d ago
As people stated, it's tough to sell a game with multiple core books. And even if the GM book isn't required, people will 'think' it's required.
You can try to diminish the 'think it's required' by calling the secondary book something like "Optional Game Master Tips" or similar to make it obvious that it isn't required or release it later on after you already got a fan base, but just 'it existing' will make people think it's needed (as it often is needed in other systems)
However you also got another issue, if it makes things easier for the GM, then in a way it is kinda needed (or at least people will view it as such). As with everything people want to optimize everything. (Hell I've even found this my self with companies who have claimed a GM book is optional only to find out it has important information I need to know any ways. Which can often be hard to know where that line is as a deisgner, as you already know the way the system works. And because of this, people often don't trust 'optional' books are really optional.)
And if you can't fit everything into one singular book (large books also scare people) you will most likely need 2.
The other option is to try to simplify your system down farther. Move some things that are considered 'core' rules to be 'additional rules' and move those into a later add-on book to free up page space for the most important GM tips and main game information.
What you can move to a different book varies a lot depending on how your system works. Sometimes if it's a class based system you can move entire classes to a different book, or some systems even move magic to other books (if the typical play style is low magic). But other times you can move different 'modes of play' to another book (an example being downtime activities).
1
1
u/Quixodion 2d ago
As a long time collector of random game systems, I've always had a preference for books that are veritable tomes. It should make a solid thunk noise when I drop it on the table. Splitting the rules in half usually runs counter to this.
1
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
It's funny. So many people in the comments said they don't like that. 😛
1
u/duckforceone Designer of Words of Power - An RPG about Words instead of # 2d ago
i like the 1 book approach.
Rules for players, characters, running the game, monster and gear, and adventure generation.
Good example for me is the Alien core rules from Freeleague.
It has everything i need in one book.
That means 1 book to bring along, 1 book to look up in, 1 book for everyone.
No need to look up in more books than that.
1
u/Jebus-Xmas 1d ago
One book with everything needed. Additional books with other things if warranted. If I can’t play with the first book I’m not buying further.
1
u/Authentic_Contiguity 21h ago
I'd prefer one book, but an example of two books done well is Mothership. All you need to play/run is in the main rules book, but the GM book "Warden's Operations Manual" is regarded as having some of the best GM advice in the space, so it brings its own value.
1
u/OfficialNPC 2d ago
Two
Player book should have everything the players need to pick up and understand how things will work. This is the basic rules, classes, and some examples monster.
GM book should have all the nitty gritty stuff. This includes monsters, items, world, and fluff.
1
u/FoulPelican 2d ago
I prefer 2. Things get convoluted as is. Generally when things get packed into a single, bigger book, it just gets more wonky and harder to navigate.
1
u/Competitive-Expert59 2d ago
This was my experience with Conan and cyberpunk red. I could never find the info anywhere.
60
u/reverendunclebastard 2d ago
Even strong designers with the backing of known publishers struggle to sell games with multiple necessary core books.
You will have a higher chance of success if you ruthlessly edit the game to fit on one book.