|
Quick question; do older D&D campaign boxes carry much value as collectors items? I was just in a shop that had original Planescape and Dark Sun campaign boxes for cheap. Fair condition, and they looked like they were complete as well.
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 06:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 22:18 |
|
|
Bloody Hedgehog posted:Quick question; do older D&D campaign boxes carry much value as collectors items? Those in particular, you could probably sell for $50-100 or more depending on the market.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 06:56
|
|
|
Bloody Hedgehog posted:Quick question; do older D&D campaign boxes carry much value as collectors items?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 07:06
|
|
|
You just struck nerd gold.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
eth0.n posted:The vast majority of modern roleplaying is by people who have never played a tabletop RPG, and have absolutely no interest in doing so. A Catastrophe posted:Most of the time, Freeform collapses under it's own weight for want of system. There's no way to reach a collaborative resolution in a freeform space, and contrary to what those strange second cousins of railroading GMs will tell you, acting out a bunch of prescipted stuff isn't what makes roleplaying special. Yeah, the internet is absolutely filled to the brim with Harry Potter or Nightvale or Doggon RonPaul roleplaying, and so on, and so forth. The thing is, this is absolutely unconnected to D&D. While I think there IS a fairly big untapped market on how to sell these people a product, you will never, ever find it in D&D, or in any sort of "Traditional roleplaying" system, and I can point at one reason why: the DM. Freeform roleplaying does not need a DM and often doesn't want one. The harder D&D clings to the DM, the farther away it falls from this market. What's needed is a a) simple, b) EXTREMELY lightweight, c) internet/tumblr/livejournal/facebook friendly conflict resolution system. That d) uses as little math as humanly possible. That means no minmaxing. Hell, no character creation period. There is no character creation involving numbers, it's all involving fiction. This is a place where I think "storygames" could expand into, but D&D? Never. MalcolmSheppard posted:You shouldn't take Mearls' communications in his professional capacity as a reflection of what he's really, truly into. I would say that 4e is far more indicative of his interests as a designer. For example, healing surges in 4e can be traced back to his WotC interview where he said he wanted to emulate the concept of Halo's regenerating shields in D&D. If you know him personally then maybe you have experience with the rest of us do not, but I think his statements and design philosophies for both Essentials and 5e speak more then enough in of themselves. The fact is, he was not the lead dev for 4e's core system, even though everyone now desperately tries to claim such - that was Heinsoo. And since 5e was announced, Mearls has taken every opportunity he could to attack the system and put down both it and it's fans. Like, when asked what 4e fans could get from 5e, his official line was "You can always keep playing your old game." That's a) hilariously terrible marketing the likes of which I've never seen before, and b) not a very good sign that 5e is made by a dude who just LOVES 4e.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 07:44
|
|
|
I'm a fan of rules for collaboratively defining the setting, which basically amount to a systematic approach for dividing the responsibility of coming up with facts that apply to everybody. I also like bidding systems for conflict resolution, like FATE points or the scoring system in The Adventures of Baron Munchhausen. I think that rules are important so that all participants are guided, at least at the beginning, towards successfully participate in the kind of collaborative story that they decided they wanted to. Based on this, I think I can try to come up with something. Maybe. But that's nothing to do with D&D.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 08:07
|
|
|
Yeah, the thing is that there may be some huge untapped market out there waiting to be catered to, but if someone does figure out how to design a tabletop roleplaying game that appeals to the masses beyond the niche that already exists there's a real good chance that it won't resemble D&D, or maybe traditional RPGs period. It'll be something that appeals to a whole new crowd and it might very well not have a lot of crossover potential with "older" RPGs, just like how not everyone who enjoys World of Warcraft is eager to rush out and buy the PHB. This has nothing to do with the quality of Next either. Next could be the best RPG ever created but there are plenty of great games out there that haven't caught fire in any way...rules heavy, rules light, licensed, original, etc. "How do you get more people into elfgaming" is, I strongly suspect, an issue that's orthogonal to "game quality" as it generally gets discussed here. The best D&D in the world is still D&D and D&D is probably about as popular as it's going to get.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 08:14
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Yeah, the internet is absolutely filled to the brim with Harry Potter or Nightvale or Doggon RonPaul roleplaying, and so on, and so forth. The thing is, this is absolutely unconnected to D&D. While I think there IS a fairly big untapped market on how to sell these people a product, you will never, ever find it in D&D, or in any sort of "Traditional roleplaying" system, and I can point at one reason why: the DM. Freeform roleplaying does not need a DM and often doesn't want one. The harder D&D clings to the DM, the farther away it falls from this market. I think this is a real point - when i was a kid, I played freeform forum RPGs in a couple of places that basically consisted of 'describe your character, describe what they're doing' with about 6 rules (which were more about when you should post and how you should behave, than about what you should be doing - the only ones about the latter were 'don't play someone else's character', 'no killing someone's character without their say-so', 'no god-mode' (i.e. you have to be flawed and respond to challenges by accepting them, not just outright beating them all the time) and two threads, one for in-character, one for out-of-character. They did tend to have a storyteller who set up what was going on. I'd love to get back into that sort of play sometimes, but finding a space to do so where the people aren't creepy as balls is difficult. But it's difficult as hell to SELL something like that, because it's SO simple and SO low-mechanics. If D&D's going to survive it needs to embrace online play thoroughly. It needs to court and win (not hate and denigrate) the MMORPG market in particular - these are a bunch of people who DO do the sort of chargen and development mechanics D&D is known for (hell, WoW is based on Warcraft, which in turn is based on WarHAMMER, which in turn is based on a melange of D&D and Tolkein) AND the sort of storyline, AND the sort of gameplay. It just needs to make itself appealing enough to that crowd (and to some extent, to their parents) to draw them away from the computer and into rooms with their friends. I've never understood why people in the D&D world hate on WoW so much. It's the single most successful RPG in the world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 09:20
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:My point is that people have been trying to find the secret blend of herbs and spices that will catapult tabletop roleplaying into a bigger, broader audience for decades now and they have gotten no closer. I strongly suspect that there is no ultimate RPG that will move tabletop roleplaying out of the hobby niche it exists in because, fundamentally, not that many people want to engage in traditional tabletop roleplaying ala D&D compared to pursuits like video games, board games, watching television, or getting together with friends to tell stories in a way that doesn't require a bunch of rules and dice and poo poo. D&D has to compete with all these things and it starts the competition with a high opportunity-cost buy in and terrible marketing. I'm with you actually. As a player, not a marketing exec, I'd rather focus on making the hobby more welcoming so that those who are naturally inclined will show up rather than trying to come up with a secret plot to get everyone in the world to play Shadowrun. There's nothing wrong with being a niche, if it's not an insular and toxic one. A Catastrophe posted:Most of the time, Freeform collapses under it's own weight for want of system. There's no way to reach a collaborative resolution in a freeform space, and contrary to what those strange second cousins of railroading GMs will tell you, acting out a bunch of prescipted stuff isn't what makes roleplaying special. I used to engage in freeform roleplaying myself and I've seen so many cobbled together systems made by people who are striving for the kind of resolution in tabletop games. Many of those people who try to develop something cribbed together from that one time they played Baldur's Gate actually do move on to tabletop. The place where I used to freeform is essentially now a chatsite where people get together to plan tabletop sessions now. However at the same time, many people happily enjoy forums for pretending to be Hogwarts students for years with the only resolution system being a PM to a mod if someone harasses someone else. It's unfair to say that all freeforming breaks down, to say that their brand of fun is inferior to your own because it's maybe less polished or designed. thespaceinvader posted:If D&D's going to survive it needs to embrace online play thoroughly. Official partnership with Roll20 and similar services? Lightning Lord fucked around with this message at 09:36 on Aug 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 09:28
|
|
|
One thing that would be useful would be an integrated video/chat tool that made it easy to play with friends who had the audacity to move away for school/work/relationships. If it were part of a package that had searchable/printable books, the ability to easily bounce in and out of private/protected conversations/chats with the DM, and an integrated rolling mechanic for people that dont care about dice (maybe an optional split-cam window for the hardcore dice fans) ... theres nothing that does that that I have ever heard about. Its still not as good as sitting in a room with friends (IMO), but would definitely fill a gap.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 09:32
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I have to say I continue to not really understand the "is like an MMO" critique. What does this even mean exactly? Like I genuinely don't understand the point it's trying to make. What is it about 4E that's "MMO like" that other roleplaying games like Pathfinder somehow avoid? Is it really just "they have clearly differentiated class roles and those sound similar to MMO terminology?" I think that's a big part of it; clearly differentiated roles, sort of MMO-ish terminology. Also, I think: 1. A really large shift in how the game felt. 2. A lot of people saying it was "trying to be like an MMO". 3. A lot of whom had never played an MMO. 4. And a lot of other people who hadn't played an MMO saying "yeah, this is just like an MMO". For years I thought the "doesn't feel like D&D" complaint was incoherent, finally I found someone who could frame it in terms of resource management; the at-will/encounter/daily thing meant that you didn't have resource management the same way you did in previous editions (and do again in 5th), and for a lot of people, that was a big part of the "feel" of D&D.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 09:45
|
|
|
Yeah, a lot of the 'like an MMO' commentary was actually poorly-framed 'different and I don't like it' commentary.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 10:21
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:In Pillars of Eternity, rope kid is making the 4e CRPG that never was, basically. And it has better math systems and ability scores, even! But it's a single player game, and it's mission is to make a game like the IE games. Wizards are high complexity in POE, and Fighters are low complexity. I'm also not convinced that the Fighter's defender mechanic will pull its weight- while they have put a lot of time into their version of OA, I suspect the Fighter's 'edge' in using it will end up being anemic and rarely come into play. The other non-spellcasters look to be faring better, but they're still making a game like BG, not a game like 4e. MalcolmSheppard posted:You shouldn't take Mearls' communications in his professional capacity as a reflection of what he's really, truly into. I would say that 4e is far more indicative of his interests as a designer. For example, healing surges in 4e can be traced back to his WotC interview where he said he wanted to emulate the concept of Halo's regenerating shields in D&D. quote:The thing is, most pros of any worth are interested in a bunch of different games, and can't afford to be dogmatic because it keeps them away from inspirations they can make their own. On the other hand, D&D is traditionally marketed by crapping on the prior edition. Part of the audience likes to view RPGs as a technology that gets progressively improved instead of a twisty, wobbly thing where one discovery would sacrifice something else you like if you follow it far enough. 5e feels much more like the version of D&D WotC told itself to make to sell D&D, instead of what its designers actually wanted to do. quote:To pick up on another post, lots and lots of people like 4e just fine. Ethan Skemp (Werewolf, now working on the electronic game Lichdom) runs it. I've played it for over 5 years (warforged ranger closing in on 18th level). A Catastrophe fucked around with this message at 10:48 on Aug 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 10:24
|
|
|
MalcolmSheppard posted:The thing is, most pros of any worth are interested in a bunch of different games, and can't afford to be dogmatic because it keeps them away from inspirations they can make their own. Hadn't spotted this before, and I think it's a really, really good point. To go off on a slight tangent into board games, probably the single best boardgame designer currently working is Vlaada Chvatil. He's got a magic touch that lets him consistently make absolute hits - but here's the real thing, they're all in TOTALLY different genres. You look at Mage Knight, Dungeon Petz, Tash-Kalar, Space Alert and Galaxy Trucker, you'd never figure they were made by the same guy. What I'm really trying to say: imagine if Vlaada was designing TTRPGs 
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 10:36
|
|
|
Genre is one thing, design philsophy is another. Vlaada wold never deliberately make a crappy game that didn't work very well and was motivated by a political agenda because That's How Lizzie Magie Made Monopoly, Dammit. I'm not down on people who say, work for Pathfinder, that's an established product, ect, ect. It is what it is, not ever Dev job is about making a new game. But I am doubtful about the type of person who say, creates pathfinder, or 5e, if the argument is that they could just turn around and create 4e or a game like it as another project. Lightning Lord posted:I used to engage in freeform roleplaying myself and I've seen so many cobbled together systems made by people who are striving for the kind of resolution in tabletop games. Many of those people who try to develop something cribbed together from that one time they played Baldur's Gate actually do move on to tabletop. The place where I used to freeform is essentially now a chatsite where people get together to plan tabletop sessions now. However at the same time, many people happily enjoy forums for pretending to be Hogwarts students for years with the only resolution system being a PM to a mod if someone harasses someone else. It's unfair to say that all freeforming breaks down, to say that their brand of fun is inferior to your own because it's maybe less polished or designed. In my opinion, the Key thing about RPGs is the take freeform, improvised, shared creation, and they smoosh it together with rules, creating something different, unpredictable, that allows people to collaborate in ways they could not if they were just all sitting around saying 'here's how I think the story should go'. That's something worth preserving, and something I think could reach a larger audience. A Catastrophe fucked around with this message at 10:47 on Aug 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 10:41
|
|
|
ritorix posted:You just struck nerd gold. Yeah, kinda sounds like it. I was talking to the owner, and he even said he didn't know a whole lot about D&D and it's ilk, and simply stocked the stuff to capture that segment of the market. Might have to pay him a visit and pick up those two boxes. $25 bucks each can't be beat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 11:24
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:One thing that would be useful would be an integrated video/chat tool that made it easy to play with friends who had the audacity to move away for school/work/relationships. Except for the books/references, roll20 has all of that. It's an excellent product. But it's system agnostic (even if it does lean heavily toward D&D) and should remain so, for the reasons we've all been discussing. An actual partnership with them to get the D&D books in useable format into their databases and UI would be nifty, but seems a very remote possibility.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 12:29
|
|
|
Daetrin posted:Except for the books/references, roll20 has all of that. It's an excellent product. But it's system agnostic (even if it does lean heavily toward D&D) and should remain so, for the reasons we've all been discussing. An actual partnership with them to get the D&D books in useable format into their databases and UI would be nifty, but seems a very remote possibility. Does RollD20 already have rules and stuff built in? Where you could hop in and go I want to play 3.5, or Pathfinder, or whatever, and then it's already set up for that? Or does each individual DM have to code their own rules in? Or am I totally over-thinking this, and it's just really a mapping program with some multiplayer ease of use stuff attached, and all rules have to be figured out by the players themselves in the real world?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 12:47
|
|
|
Roll20 has some character sheets that are set up to automate basic things like skill checks but if you want it to handle powers without typing out rolls every time you need to do a bit of scripting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 13:02
|
|
|
Hmm, oh well. Some genius needs to take RollD20 to 11, monetize it (sucks, but hey, real world realities) and get game devs on board. Have official rulesets, campaign modules, art packs, sounds packs, etc etc, and make it a Steam-like one-stop shop for digital versions of tabletop. Have discounts available if you own physical copies of rulebooks, handbooks, and bestiaries. Seriously, if you could log in on day one of a new games release, and just start playing with official high-quality assets and rule coding, gently caress, it's a license to print money. It could certainly draw in the vast crowd of gamers who simply don't have the time, or even desire, to play tabletop games amongst a group of real people. Let's face it, despite multiplayer gaming continuing to rise, the physical aspect of gaming is becoming ever more solitary, and offering an option to those who'd like to try these games out but are uncomfortable with potentially having to physically meet with a bunch of strangers could be a big draw.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 13:18
|
|
|
Bloody Hedgehog posted:Hmm, oh well. I literally cannot meet my players. One is in Michigan, one is in Louisiana, one is in North Carolina. For me that's the main reason to use it - people's friends are more ageographic than they used to be. Roll20 actually has an internal marketplace where you can make campaign materials and sell them to others. Combine that with the premade character sheets they just introduced and the only thing it doesn't have is the actual D&D manuals. Which, of course, they couldn't use due to licensing issues. Same with other games - there's nothing to stop them from adding things under the roll20 aegis but licensing rights, and that's a pain that's not going to go away soon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 13:43
|
|
|
Fantasy Grounds does exist, but it's $40/player just to start out, rule sets run from 5-15, it requires XML editing to do your own stuff, and the UI is apparently terrible. I suppose it's the difference between just doing it and doing it WELL, but it's being tried at least.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 13:55
|
|
|
Another thing I've been harping on since day 0 of 5e development is that they could make a LOT of mileage out of a decent digital play platform. Something that does the bookkeeping, at all levels from character and campaign creation to dice rolling and HP management at the table to maps. But again, D&D division has basically no money, and sucks at IT. I wonder if CN:MS is going to be any good. Anyone beta testing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:What's needed is a a) simple, b) EXTREMELY lightweight, c) internet/tumblr/livejournal/facebook friendly conflict resolution system. That d) uses as little math as humanly possible. That means no minmaxing. Hell, no character creation period. There is no character creation involving numbers, it's all involving fiction. One difficulty with this would be that you would probably have to offer an integrated application to do this. If you just make up super light rules no one will ever buy them, because they'll think they can do better even if you put years of research into your rules. seebs posted:For years I thought the "doesn't feel like D&D" complaint was incoherent, finally I found someone who could frame it in terms of resource management; the at-will/encounter/daily thing meant that you didn't have resource management the same way you did in previous editions (and do again in 5th), and for a lot of people, that was a big part of the "feel" of D&D. I would love to know what size the group of people whose actual complaint was "They shifted a lot of the resource management from tactical to strategic level." In my experience with 3rd edition, a lot of people just hate resource management and drop as much of it as possible, so maybe some of it was actually "I don't want to make these sorts of decisions when I'm 'telling a story' but 4th edition pushes me to"?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
A Catastrophe posted:No doubt there are plenty of professional devs who like 4e. In fact IIRC Ethan Skemp commented on my 4e monster designs when I was doing one a day for a month, back before 5e was announced. That's actually good to know. Now we only need a company willing to pay them to develop 4e-like games. Which I think isn't happening anytime soon. Best case scenario — the nostalgia trend* we see today will, like everything in fashion, come to pass: maybe 6e will be closer to 4e. Worst case scenario — this hobby is a nostalgia latrine through and through, and so we'll get 4e returned when it's old enough to be groggy (and therefore irrelevant design-wise, and plagued by cargo cult mentality instead of the desire for innovation that gave us 4e in the first place). *Pillar of Eternity, like 13th Age and 5e, has this "let's take the 'best' parts from 'classic' D&D editions and do something that seems modern but really isn't" vibe that reeks of grog tax. Regressive is the new progressive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:I wonder if CN:MS is going to be any good. Anyone beta testing? Beta hasn't opened yet, but they will be running it at Gencon so I'll see it there. The PHB and the 1-5 module Hoard of the Dragon Queen will both be on sale starting on the 8th, that's this friday. But only at the WPN stores. Gencon is the week after.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
Bloody Hedgehog posted:Might have to pay him a visit and pick up those two boxes. $25 bucks each can't be beat. I'd do this sooner rather than later. "Investors" buy stuff like that on-sight to scalp on eBay with a Buy It Now or starting bid of the highest it's on record selling for. And you'll see it years later, with the same hundreds-dollars opening bid and no buyers. I'm looking at you, Player's Guide to the High Clans and DA:Fae.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
The depressing thing is when 4e came out, you had the OSR already, you had Paizo doing their thing, I was happy to think for years "great, everyone gets the kind of game they want, some people innovate and some do the traditional thing." But nooooo, that wasn't enough, the traditionalists had to win. And now there's a real vacuum with 4e's departure. We've got some people doing projects here that fill that void (Sacred BBQ etc.) but no critical mass of awareness/saturation. What can be called the "industry" has just given up on tightly balanced tactical design.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:The depressing thing is when 4e came out, you had the OSR already, you had Paizo doing their thing, I was happy to think for years "great, everyone gets the kind of game they want, some people innovate and some do the traditional thing." But nooooo, that wasn't enough, the traditionalists had to win. The "Edition Wars" was never about having a game you wanted to play. It was always about the "heart and soul" of D&D.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:I've never understood why people in the D&D world hate on WoW so much. It's the single most successful RPG in the world. You just answered your own question there. It's way, way more successful and popular than D&D, open to a vastly broader audience including "filthy casuals" who don't care about D&D lore or Gary Gygax. It's one part unjustified sense of superiority, one part sour grapes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
what would people think about a somewhat crunchy 4e styled tactical game, with relatively flat math and simplified 5e styled advantage/disadvantage to speed up combat, that separates out feats from more RP centric "talents" does that sound appealing at all?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
treeboy posted:what would people think about a somewhat crunchy 4e styled tactical game, with relatively flat math and simplified 5e styled advantage/disadvantage to speed up combat, that separates out feats from more RP centric "talents" I hate harping it, but that's literally what SBBQ is doing. The math is completely flat (to the point where you don't roll damage, attacks just do fixed amounts), feats are barely things with RP-related stuff as a separate mechanic (traits and tricks, I think), advantage and disadvantage are the only real bonuses so there's no +2 to hit or whatever, and instead of a d20 and adding stats to see if you hit you just roll a d6 and hit on a 3+ with varying degrees of success. It uses grid combat and powers like 4e, and it separates Role and Class, so you can be a Blaster (aoe striker) Martial Artist or a Defender Martial Artist or a Defender Wizard or whatever. And yeah it's real cool, I'm excited to see the kickstarter when that happens soon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
treeboy posted:what would people think about a somewhat crunchy 4e styled tactical game, with relatively flat math and simplified 5e styled advantage/disadvantage to speed up combat, that separates out feats from more RP centric "talents" It sounds great, but I think I'd really struggle getting my group actually playing it. We tried Dungeon World once, and intend to try it again, but we're a bit stuck in the mud when it comes to trying indy systems.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
I still can not fathom that Hasbro/Wizards can be so hands off on D&D They are clearly looking to make use of the name still if they're fighting to get the game and movie rights back; to make use of them in new productions. But what is the name worth when nobody is playing the actual drat game anymore? When there's no buzz or interest surrounding it, and nobody new is coming in and bringing their friends with them. Back in the 80s D&D was in about as many households as there were copies of Asteroid or Missile Command. Like there was a genuine interest. In 2007 there were twice as many players as in 1981, about 6 million, and that I think that is quite a bit considering it's a make believe elf-game. But think about how many more there could be if it was actually marketed again outside of the closed-off milieu of the hardcore gamers. Make it have more appeal to someone who just wants to take it easy with friends and roll some dice and fight some orcs; not have them fight the system and wrestle with a lot of unnecessary busywork in numbers and writing up new character sheets after their fighter died to a random Save versus death spell. There might never be same numbers as in the video-game industry, but dang if the D&D name---as it currently is---couldn't allow them some great grip in broadening their player-base if they just tried. With the word to mouth from that, everything else to follow would have that much more appeal; video-games, movies, maybe even another TV series (truly the world needs more Uni). And that goes vice versa, if they got back the right to all media aspect they could just go hog wild in bouncing things back and forth, ideas and appeal. I don't know, I'm not in charge of the world's largest toy and board game company, but why not make the most of all possible means of gaining revenue, good will, and advertising by making the most of a brand they paid to acquire. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
General best guess is 'Hasbro bought WotC because MTG is like printing money, and basically gives not fucks about D&D'.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:I hate harping it, but that's literally what SBBQ is doing. The math is completely flat (to the point where you don't roll damage, attacks just do fixed amounts), feats are barely things with RP-related stuff as a separate mechanic (traits and tricks, I think), advantage and disadvantage are the only real bonuses so there's no +2 to hit or whatever, and instead of a d20 and adding stats to see if you hit you just roll a d6 and hit on a 3+ with varying degrees of success. It uses grid combat and powers like 4e, and it separates Role and Class, so you can be a Blaster (aoe striker) Martial Artist or a Defender Martial Artist or a Defender Wizard or whatever. And yeah it's real cool, I'm excited to see the kickstarter when that happens soon. Will it be getting renamed? It could use something a little less "inside".
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Will it be getting renamed? It could use something a little less "inside". I think Countblanc and/or Jimbozig mentioned that yes, it will.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
Yeah it is. I'm not really sure what I can and can't say about it but the current title he plans on using is really cute and a lot less of an inside joke.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
Nancy_Noxious posted:*Pillar of Eternity, like 13th Age and 5e, has this "let's take the 'best' parts from 'classic' D&D editions and do something that seems modern but really isn't" vibe that reeks of grog tax. Regressive is the new progressive. So what do you mean by "modern"? PoE and 13th Age add a lot of fun mechanics and do a really good job of modeling the Dungeon Adventure genre. (I'm assuming PoE will be good.) They don't hand narrative control to the players because that's not their focus. 13th Age wants fun and drama to come from die rolls and Icon relationships. The Icon rolls you do at the start of a session certainly seem modern. PoE adds adventure and conversation options based on your race, class and roleplaying choices rather than rolling Speech. They aren't Fiasco. Their genre is old school. They lightly update player agency to stay true to the genre. What's not modern? How could they better do Dungeon Adventure with modern mechanics?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 22:18 |
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:General best guess is 'Hasbro bought WotC because MTG is like printing money, and basically gives not fucks about D&D'. But if that were the case they wouldn't be licensing the movie rights to Universal Studios, and fighting Sweetpea (the former owner of the movie rights) and Warner Bros (the ones THEY licensed it to) tooth and nail to get it back. https://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie-talk/hasbro-sues-stop-warner-bros-planned-dungeons-dragons-222544028.html Like as good as MTG does as a table-top game, it does not nearly have the same cultural gravitas as D&D does, and that shows in how two major studios would still be interested in potentially producing another D&D movie (Especially considering the original one) Of course then again they did a movie out of battleship, but still my point stands! Despite it being a utterly generic and very loosely defined mish-mash of setting and mythologies, D&D has much more room to grow than Magic, I think; which again makes it so bizarre they wouldn't expend even an ounce of effort in managing the original base product that made the name so famous. ObMeiste fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Aug 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:40
|
|