Duplicate entries in the sourcebooks: Yes or no?

[MGBM]

I was browsing through the forums and found this entry by Vincent:

That is the catch-22 I am in. If I reprint the relevant material (which is my inclination), people complain. If I don't reprint the material but simply say where it can be found (which was the rule given to me around the time I wrote that book), people complain.

Which brings me to my question, do you want duplicate entries on the sourcebooks? In other words, do you want to see reprinted in future sourcebooks information found in older sourcebooks?

I am hoping that with this poll Mongoose will get a better perspective to what we want regarding duplicate entries.

Do participate in the poll and please, after voting do write some words that justify your choice.

As for me, I don't mind duplicate entries too much and I have all the Conan books. However, I think duplicate entries shouldn't be more than 5% to 10% of the sourcebook at the most.

[Oake]

I voted Yes, on things like stats. For example, where it says next to an entry for say, some item or monster, "see xxx book for details" then reprinting the stats is very useful. Not so much for things that can be found in the core rulebook as most people have that, but being expected to own all the supplements is a bit much. Or rather, buying a supplement only to find you cant use parts of it without another supplement is annoying.

Thats my opinion anyway, based on the fact that some books for me have been hard to get hold of due to stock availability or the area i'm in.

[Clovenhoof]

Well, as I noted in the other thread, I prefer having some entry duplicate over not having it at all. Even if you have one thing in several books, it simply saves time when you don't have to get out the other book to look it up. Hello, not everyone will learn every rule by heart. And it's not like half a book would be made up of recycled content.

[Halfbat]

I fidd it a real pain when something key to a particular sourcebook is merely referred a reference elsewhere. For some things, it's fine (Grapple(!) rules, weapons, general stats about Pict tribes, for example) but when it is a more technical, key component of a new book the content _should_ be duplicated to stop the criss-cross of referrals in-game or in-design.

It probably applies to key NPC stats, too.

[Majestic7]

I'm more annoyed about duplicate entries of the same material within the same book! The Stygia sourcebook, for example, contains exactly the same section of text about the Stygian military - twice.

Reprinting stuff is fine if it takes only minority of the page count. If a feat or similar technical stuff is reprinted in a different, it would as well be nice to say if it replaces an older version. Right now there are two different versions of Greater Feint (or something like that, too lazy to check) in two different Conan books.

[rgrove0172]

Personally I hate duplicate entries. I realize not everyone can own every book but when you do manage to scrape together enough cash its fairly dissapointing to realize several pages of your new prize is just a reprint of what you already have. I think each book should be a work unto itself specifically.

[Clovenhoof]

Again, I can only counter that I find it much MORE disappointing if I can't use a portion of a book because it refers to another book that I do not have.

Come on, it's not that bad if two or three pages of a 96-page book are previously published content. Usually we're talking about stuff like feats or spells -- how much space does the average feat description take? Maybe 1/6 of a page. But it is bad if you can't use 30 pages because those two to three pages are missing.

I realize that publishers want to sell their stuff and need to make a living, but the "every rule appears only once" policy is NOT inciting people like me to buy more. I rather show a spite reaction, so the odds I ever buy any further books of that line are actually lowered.

After all, if I buy book A for $30, and find out I need Book B for abother $30 to use it to its fullest... then I'd also want to use all of Book B, and odds are that I'm gonna need a Book C for another $30 to use all of Book B, and so forth. No, I'm definitely not getting on that sliding slope. If I buy a book, it should be because I want to have it, not because I can't use my other stuff withouth it.

So I repeat: every splat book should only depend on the core rules and otherwise be able to stand just by itself, even if that means a few duplicate pages.

[Kyorou]

As I don't give a damn about the rules, I'd rather get new background info than reprinted stats, feats, skills,...

Also, to read the same paragrph twice in the same book (Shadizar, Stygia,...) drives me mad.

[B_Steele]

Well, as I am neck-deep in the Conan 2E Bestiary right now, you all should be happy to know that although a chunk of it is the revisitation to the 1E monsters in the new format - people will need to look a little closer at each entry to see what has been changed.

I'm adding skills, feats, SQ and the like that the critters should have, and altering some of their text to better fit the Conan 2E RPG.

I don't normally like the idea of simply 'cut-n-paste'; so every entry has gotten a little 2E love from your truly...

I hope it passes the scrutiny of our readers!

Cheers all,
Bry

[MongooseMatt]

I am hoping that with this poll Mongoose will get a better perspective to what we want regarding duplicate entries.

We wil, and I am quite surprised by the results at the moment!

[Soulmage]

I think the "best of" from older sourcebooks should be carried forward into newer ones.

In addition, I think as newer books come out, corrections/revisions to older material could be included where appropriate.

[Soulmage]

I really hope the 2E core rules incorporate a lot of the "best of" feats and rules clarified and revised as part of the core product. It would be a shame to simply convert the old core material without expanding it to include the gems of what has been released since.

[Kyorou]

It would be a shame to simply convert the old core material without expanding it to include the gems of what has been released since.

This is dangerous as the rules already are pretty complicated. Adding more rules in the MRB might discourage new players.

[VincentDarlage]

I prefer the sourcebooks to have an encyclopedic take - everything should be included.

As a GM, if I want to run an adventure in Shem (or just prepare an adventure in Shem), I don't want to have to lug around the core rulebook, Road of Kings, Shem, Faith and Fervour, the Hyboria's F... books and so on. I should just need the core book and Shem.

As a Player, if I want to play a Shemite character in all possible detail, once again I would just want the core rules and Shem. As a player, I definitely would not want to have to buy Faith and Fervour just to get the best description of their religion for that one character. It would bother me to have to buy seven different books just to get a complete picture of one culture.

If something belongs in two or more books, then put it in two or more books - don't make me buy a book I don't really need just for a bit of information I do need because the book I have didn't want to reprint the relevant stuff.

If it belongs there, then put it there. That is my take on it.

Of course, I apply that to a lot in life. For example, I have couple shelves of vampire books. I also have several shelves of classics. I also have a shelf of favourite novels. Where does "Dracula" go? My solution was to buy three different copies and put one on each shelf. If it belongs there, put it there. It works for me.

[Clovenhoof]

Word, Vincent! ^^

[argo]

I think its a bit of a catch-22, you do want a book to be as complete as possible - as Vincent said there is no reason why the info on religions from Faith and Fevor shouldn't appear in the appropriate regional sourcebook for example.

OTOH there is no doubt that I would feal cheated to open a book and find that a significant portion of it is a re-print of material I already paid for in a different book (barring books which are advertised as re-prints, such as Tito's or the Compilation of course).

But OTOOH I think one of the absolute worst things a company could do would be to write supplements TSR-style where you open Book X only to find that it relies heavily on rules introduced in non-core Supplement Y.

So, in the end I cast my vote for "No" meaning that I think the goal should to produce as much origional content as possible for each book. Re-prints should be included only for the sake of completly covering the topic.

Later.

[The King]

Of course, I apply that to a lot in life. For example, I have couple shelves of vampire books. I also have several shelves of classics. I also have a shelf of favourite novels. Where does "Dracula" go? My solution was to buy three different copies and put one on each shelf. If it belongs there, put it there. It works for me.

This is a good point but your example is about the same novel and 3 same books.
Personaly, I dont want a book which has 3+ pages which are identical to those found in another.

I'd rather like "definitive" books on specific subjects like "faith & fervour", Tito's trading post, etc., and something more restricted in the other books when it comes to the subjects.

Example: For the Shem book (even if it's too late) a brief description on the gods with a reference to the above mentioned book (this was very usual a policy before).

[Kyorou]

I go along with The King on this one.

I'd add that, as the range of Conan OGL products is nowhere near TSR's, references to material found in other books should be far between.

Besides, if you don't happen to have the book where the appropriate rule, monster, feat,..., can be found, you can always make it up.

[Aholibamah]

I find that repetition is fair enough where it is just a rule entry or a spell description or something. Now it is fair if you are going to use sorcery in your game a lot to have to buy the Scrolls of Skelos for instance if you want to use some stuff outside of the main rulebook. However if we're just talking about a cult description or something, no way do I want to buy a sourcebook I'd have no intention of using apart from for that. I want to just buy books for the settings and situations I actually plan to use in the game.

[Bjorn the Barbarian]

I am with Vincent on this one!

It is good to have the releted information in the book you are using, so that you don't have to lug around extra books just for a few pieces info, or even for one entry.