>>43928808
Bump it up to 4-5 months and you've got a deal.

>>43928832
well it doenst have to be an earth shaking 20 page update every month. it could be like 1 or 2 slight tweaks if something weird pops up

Outside of errata or fixing serious oversights I don't think rpgs need it, but I'd be totally on board for that sort of constant tweaking for a wargame.

Warmahordes could rock this fairly easy if they worked on making Warroom less buggy.

>>43928808
I'd hate it.

It'd bad enough trying to get people to remember use the most current errata on anything let alone something continuously changing.

>>43928877
Slight tweaks I think would actually cause more problems since unlike vidya, not everyone is going to be immediately aware of these changes. Though I guess good communication within the group could negate that.

>>43928955

I could see a rules app making staying updated pretty easy.

>>43929002
Cue pissed off /tg/ers that technology isn't stuck in the 80s and that .pdf and smartphones are a thing.

>>43929030
>>43929002

I don't think the tech is a problem, it's the ol' human brain that'd be the problem. Having to constantly check the rules to make sure you're doing it right for whatever the current version is not only slows down game play through book-checking time (something that good game design minimises) but a player could never really learn the game as it's continually changing.

If anything, slight tweaks happening a lot is even worse than major changes because they're harder to keep in mind or have collected as a reference to have to keep referring to what changed since the game was initially learned.

There's a lot of good reasons as to why erratas and updates tend to be clumped together rather than spread out, and full-on edition changes happen should big changes need to be made rather than a continual update stream (not counting expansions/supplements). And most of them stem from the fact that players have to do all the computing.

>>43928808
Keep in mind that many patches are just debugging, which is not a problem in tabletop, unless you manage to break reality.

>>43929422
Well, I did one time manage to balance a carnifex model on it's head...

>>43929422
>many patches are just debugging, which is not a problem in tabletop

have you seen RAI vs RAW arguments?

>>43928808
Didn't WotC do this with 4e? They had an online database they updated.

>>43930003
was it frequent though?

warhammer has had online FAQs and Erratas since like 4th edition but it updated very slowly and it didnt really affect balance. it was mostly a word clarification.

>>43928808
I would like it for Wargames, but also a bit less frequent.
RPGs not really except you have things that are so blatantly overpowered like the Astartes-Heavy-Bolter in Deathwatch, which of course was fixed in later games of the line.
>give it the Damage of a Plasmacannon and slightly lower AP
>make it fire ten times as often
>Balance
In General RPG's leave so much more things to be factored in, as well as the fact that uneven odds for factions in combats are sometimes good for the general flow of a story.

Wargames though are competetive at heart, houserules are hard to apply outside of your local group and the fact that the full release of an edition for all factions might span over 2 years makes it hard to keep things comparable.

>>43928808
>Hey /tg/ how would you feel if Wargames (and maybe also RPGs) got updated pretty regularly (like every 1-2 months) with statlines or points or rules being slightly/dramatically changed much like various video games?

I would think it would bne the awsomest thing ever

>>43928808
As long as we're not talking EA or Bethesda, sure.

Trying to imagine rpgs being made to deal with other splatbooks

Game has stats for humans
Splatbook 1 add more detailed tables for humans
Splatbook 2 add animals, but their tables is as simplified as humans core tables