|
So what exactly was rivet wars ripping off? It's not that I don't believe you, I just am not up to speed on it.
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 06:31 |
|
|
I believe even the author of that one has come to hate it and is working on some kind of edit. edit: not that this development makes up for it being written in the first place
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
What was bad about Deadlands depiction of Native Americans? This is coming from someone with only minimal exposure to Deadlands asking an honest question, not someone denying that it happened.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
Yeah in all likelihood Jack the Ripper was exceptionally mentally ill. Desborough has no such excuse. Hell outside of murdering prostitutes and possibly being anti-Semitic old Jack might have been a pretty cool dude.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
They also had a positive transgendered character in Reign of Winter last year. Though she isn't as important as Anevia and only shows up in one adventure module. This doesn't really affect my spending habits because I already like their elf game, but it is a very good trend for an RPG company.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
You'd think but succubi are from back in Chainmail where every creature was just stats for a wargame. They've been copy and pasting the stats since then. It's the same reason why most old D&D monsters have really weird "gamist" abilities.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
Whole lot of people springing to the defense of Monsterhearts.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
It just seems like a bit much for a teen drama RPG. Though I do agree that accusations of whizzard stuff is baseless. edit: That isn't to say that people enthusiastically defending elf games is any less silly.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2014 06:58
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:He was already there on account of being a lovely designer who loves wizards a bit too much. Well there are two handed hammers but they're all in weird non-core books. I have no idea why. One of them was actually the best melee weapon in the game, but good luck getting a Monte Cook style GM to approve your weapon from the 4th monster manual.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
You know there are some people you just need to kill. Normally I'm okay with saying the death penalty is bad because you can never be sure of the integrity of the legal system, but with Breivig it's pretty cut and dry.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
Reign has the thing where men can't ride horses into combat.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
Lemon Curdistan posted:No, Reign has a thing where some of the cultures in the setting have a taboo against men not riding side-saddle. Yeah sorry simplified it. Specifically I was using it as an example of male-targeted sexism. That isn't a knock against Reign though as it is a good game, and little cultural things like that make it interesting.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
Based on first hand accounts from ranch hands, it doesn't cause impotence but it does cause sterility.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Under the Skin was also really over the top artsy. The rape analogy was harmed by her victims being violated in an overly surreal and quite frankly comical way.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
I kinda want to open a business in Indiana now, specifically for the purpose of putting out a big sign that says in big block letters "Protestants not admitted". Then explain that it's against my deeply held religious beliefs to consort with heretics against the Holy See.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
So if a LGBT person were to be a part of their religion that supported them or made their lifestyle a religious rite would they be protected then? If not wouldn't it be possible to exclude WASPs by changing it from "members of the Protestant religion" who are banned to "those living lives of heresy". Like I'm not dscriminating against their religion, just the actions in public that I disagree with, that just so happen to be all the ones relating to their religion.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Shooting yourself in the head while wearing a sign that says "the Republicans made me do it" is just as stupid as sitting quietly in a dark room complaining.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 06:42
|
|
|
MalcolmSheppard posted:Meanwhile some folks are trying to head off any discussion of a boycott with the spurious argument that you will harm progressive businesses. This misunderstands the nature of boycotts. *All* effective boycotts inconvenience perfectly decent people. All of them. All boycotts *should* do this, because the die hard bigots won't be swayed by them. Boycotts work when progressives and moderates caught up in them decide they're done with the assholes in their midst. They either put pressure on the assholes, or steamroll them with a solution that doesn't require their consent.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 06:46
|
|
|
MalcolmSheppard posted:The target isn't Gencon. The target is the state of Indiana, which enjoys $50 million/year in economic activity in Indianapolis from Gencon attendees. That Gencon suffers should not be relevant. The company made its choice, no matter how regretfully, but it isn't a loving charity, remember? It'll gross $4-5 million at the turnstiles and whatever exhibitors pay. It's full of perfectly nice people who I'm sure are upset about this, but you don't go to Gencon with nice words. You go with cash. It's just a for-profit convention. There are others. I'm still not quite following. I get that we don't owe Gencon anything, I was going before or after this law passed. My issue is that you're saying that boycotts are to convince moderate or left leaning businesses to act, rather than hardcore bigots. The state of Indiana are those bigots and for Gencon itself it isn't economically feasible to break contract. Who are you trying to force into action by boycotting? Who specifically are you trying to actually pressure? If it's the state of Indiana, the very bigots that passed the law, why bother giving that justification about trying to pressure progressives/moderates? If you just want to boycott anything and everything in Indiana because you don't think the bigots will stick to their guns then cool, that's a fairly solid train of thought. Most of them love their money more than their WASP sentiments. Just admit you're willing to harm decent people as collateral rather than pretending it's some sort of call to action for them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:I don't think you understand how this law was passed, duder. If their were shenanigans please inform me. I was under the impression it was passed by bigots voted into office by other bigots.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Yeah thinking about it you're right. Indianapolis issuing a local ordinance to stop LGBT discrimination would most likely be the easiest immediate solution.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
ravenkult posted:And bomb Serbia. Better than Europe's approval of genocide, but still not good.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
Him leaving was the best thing to happen to Pathfinder. It's good to see that WotC is replicating literally everything bad about the 3.5 era and everything bad about the 2n edition era. Let me guess soon we'll hear about fifty spin off games produced in numbers equal to a MtG release, and eight campaign settings.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
Prone Shooter was eventually errata'd to do something but not really enough to be worthwhile. I don't know who was responsible. It's also a bit telling the book to fix monks and rogues only came out a year after he left.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2015 15:38
|
|
|
Misandu posted:Would it be fair to say it was the best official product of it's type? Do you count a Paizo subscription?
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Misandu posted:I was thinking more "subscription to online tools/content" and less "Columbia House but for RPG books." Granted, but it does still give you copies of the pdfs for each book and their online tools are free anyways. If WotC actually integrated all the stuff they promised with Insider (I only used it for the first year or so) then it'd be the equivalent of and srd, herolab, and roll20 in a single application but i never remember it being more reliable or cost effective than just using those three things separately.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Another company who is (was?) really good at this: Games Workshop. Rebooting and reissuing their game lines, new models, new sculpts, new fluff, always going after new players and new markets with a marked lack of concern for old-timers and continuity. This is actually not even remotely true. Their licensees reinvent things and continuously bring in new customers, but GW itself is so tied to it's horrible game model that it actively forces new players out of the hobby, and their corporate policy is to ignore the old timers who are the only people willing to keep along with the game, mostly out of Stockholm Syndrome.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
Toph Bei Fong posted:They work very hard to give this impression. The figures I've seen had 4e beating Pathfinder right up until essentials was released. At which point they immediately dropped in sales and Pathfinder or some Fantasy Flight system was top dog every quarter. Terrible Opinions fucked around with this message at 16:35 on May 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
May 8, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
From the numbers I've heard it's okay for business but nowhere near as good as owning the rights to either the Star Wars RPG license or the 40k RPG license.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:So, the biggest name in RPGs is now Fantasy Flight? At least the most consistent name in RPGs. They always have at least one game in the top five sellers for a quarter and usually have two.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
He also seemed to have some manner of untreated depression, his mother falling into a coma was probably just the last trigger in an already suicidal man.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Isn't Blue Rose based off the same romantic ideas as Tolkein and the Faerie Queen? Just you know made by someone in the modern era so there are like gay people and female agency isn't seen as a bold change in direction. How can you be "protecting the purity of roleplaying" if you're against what D&D is explicitly based on?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
4th edition wasn't a commercial failure, but Essentials very well might have been. I'm not quite sure why a lot of people on this forum insist that crunchy games are bad or that crunch heavy games don't have broad appeal. There is a huge amount of confirmation bias there due to the sort of people who actually bother to get online and talk about RPGs, especially people who come to Something Awful to talk about it. Not to put too fine a point on it, but RPGs and model trains have a huge market overlap. RPG players tend to be the engineer technican types who like rules and like feeling clever for fitting them all together, at least if you're to look at the big lists of RPG book best sellers. All of them are crunch heavy games D&D, various Star Wars licensed games, FFG's 40k games, Pathfinder, and at one point White Wolf properties. The only rules lite game that makes even a dent in the market is FATE.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Crunchy games are amazingly fun if the crunch actually serves a purpose and is built towards a goal. The problem is mostly that a lot of crunchier games have a lot of moving parts and not a lot of actual design focus. Making a good crunchy game takes a ton of time and playtesting. Saying a game isn't good doesn't mean that a game isn't popular. I'd agree that there should be better crunch heavy systems like 4th edition. However other people have been saying that 4th edition's failing was that it was crunch heavy, which is completely fail given the limited sales figures we have. Halloween Jack posted:I wouldn't say that detailed rules are unpopular, but I have questioned the place of highly-detailed universal systems in the market. By which I mean Rolemaster, Hero, CORPS and EABA, etc. I suppose GURPS is fairly detailed and fairly popular. I'd completely agree with you that generalistic systems tend to be boring and sell very little. It's likely that they just have nothing to grab new customers with. A system needs something for players to actually do. GURPs main strength seems to come in the fact that each of its individual supplements tends to be rather tightly focused around a specific genre, and the ones that stray from this pattern such as GURPS vehicles tend to sell poorly.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:It's just as likely that Next is uninterested in reaching out to new players since Next is basically D&D: Apology for 4E Edition Please Come Back From Pathfinder edition. It's inward-looking, not outward-looking. It fails at that though by stripping out any amount of interesting customization that 3.5 and Pathfinder accumulated over their hundreds of supplements. It's only real audience are 3.5 grognards who insisted on core only. The people who are still on the Paizo boards whining to high heaven about bloat every time a new book is released.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Asimo posted:Oh, I'm not saying that there isn't time for folks to RP, or that it's impossible to get new people involved, or what have you. Just that the social environment has changed drastically since the 70s and 80s and I suspect a fair bit of the grognard sorts had experiences similar to mind and don't really understand that you'd probably need something a lot more rules-light, something that's really focused on online play and interaction, or both to really get good attention and growth these days. To be fair I'm a millennial and it really wasn't that much harder to get people to memorize 3.5 and 4th edition's rules. WoW wasn't really a distraction unless the person playing WoW was one of the hardcore high level raid guys. I think you're jousting at windmills here. RPGs by their very nature take a huge time investment or else have to be built for short term games. If your game is short term and built around one shots it's never going to get a big following because it'll be regarded as just another board game. I would never for instance go online and sign up for a forum to discuss the mechanics of Kobolds Ate my Baby for the same reason I wouldn't join an online community dedicated to Town of Salem. If it's a very small time investment RPG then it is to larger more involved RPGs as iphone games are to huge rear end PC games. The best you're going to hope for in terms of attention and growth is the equivalent of angry birds. A bunch of people would have heard of it and play it from time to time, but it isn't going to appeal to the core audience of roleplayers and isn't really going to compete for their market either.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Well Next isn't very good in a number of respects, but when the head of D&D goes on a podcast and starts making fun of Warlords shouting hands back on it's pretty undeniably clear that a huge part of the attitude that's gone into pitching Next to people is "did you hate 4E? We do too! So buy our poo poo!" Oh I don't doubt it's the intent. I'm saying that it failed to appeal to the main portion of people playing Pathfinder.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
I honestly think that using D&D to draw in huge new crowds to RPG is kind of a lost cause. It's like publishers pumping huge amounts of money into horror video game IPs and expecting them to make AAA money. D&D can continue on as it is making a sizable amount of money off its current customer-base and the engineers of future generations, but it's never going to "make RPGs mainstream" or replace video games or anything. It's like trying to use a hammer to cut down a tree, just the wrong tool for the job. Rules lite and story games can draw in crowds from the drama club kids and the adults they group into, but it still isn't going to be some huge golden age. That's because RPGs like all other forms of media have distinct demographics that very from game to game, unfortunately for RPG developers each demographic tends to be fairly small. So if 4th edition is too crunchy for you it's probably just because you're not the target audience and they don't have to appeal to you. Plague of Hats posted:I'm really sad that so much generally good art is wasted on D&D5. Also reused a lot of art from 3.5 and 4th edition.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:What are you talking about, it's a perfectly viable strategy to spend all your time and effort chasing entrenched tribalist diehards who left for a rehash of an older product and decided to build part of their identity around it, that's why Coke spends so much time trying to placate diehard Pepsi drinkers after all.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 06:31 |
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Give me a loving break, dude. Paizo pushed Pathfinder hard on the "we're the real D&D" platform, that's not even disputable at this point. Lisa Stevens was savvy enough to recognize that she could, in essence, turn edition warring and the "True D&D" crowd into a consumer base. I get that it was a large part of their original marketing, but pretending that they represent the majority of the Pathfinder fan-base is massively wrong. Hell most of those same people who jumped ship because 4th edition "betrayed" have jumped ship back to 5th edition because pathfinder is getting too "bloated". The perpetually angry grognard either never changes his game in the first place or jumps ship to the flavor of the month retroclone trying to replicate the game he played when he was twelve.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2015 02:24
|
|