Another visit to my local game store revealed the presence of Labyrinth Lord, and I do have to say Goblinoid Games has done a fine job of representing old school. It's my understanding that there has been a group playing the game at the store in the past, but not recently. I've been out of the game for a while and missed that.
Now, this store has the heavy dose of D&D and Pathfinder you'd expect. What makes it cool is he has a good supply of older versions of D&D and is always adding more. Nothing from the Basic line at the moment other than a Mentzer Expert Box. There are other games there and Knights Of The Dinner Table. Had to get a copy of that. It's been a while, and it helps me feel close to the game reading those strips.
Anyway, I was pleased to see Labyrinth Lord and Realms Of Crawling Chaos on the shelf. It was a year or so ago when I saw the LL book and Advanced LL there as well as a copy of Village Of Larm, which I bought. When I was active on the old LL forum, I had a few discussions with the writer of that excellent module. I went on to help edit his Mountain King module.
Now that was an interesting concept. The mountain king was a kobold with Gauntlets of Ogre Power and a nice sword. In one forum post, he related that a play test resulted in a total party kill in that big encounter. That was one kobold you didn't want to mess with. I understand there was a sequel to that one too.
Now when the LL forum was opened it was pretty busy in the early days. There were lots of ideas flying around and a desire that everybody seemed to share that LL be successful. When Daniel put up the map of The Known Lands, I started a thread about filling the lands with stuff. There were lots of ideas, but Mortiz was the one who started making it happen. The Mountain King, The Road to Dolmvay and Village Of Larm were three of them.
What's cool is Daniel put that map out that is totally inspired by a certain other map from a blue book we all remember and said, "Do what you want with it." And people did. I'm sure some of the ideas came from people's old game sessions from way back when too. What a cool thing. I mean, OSRIC and LL made this happen, and suddenly new adventures were added to the old school canon.
When I ask where that Basic game is, I know where it is. It's been here for about five years now as Labyrinth Lord, just not backed by a big company. It's always been my game style of choice. I'd like to see one of the big companies of choice get behind a basic style game, and that seems to be happening now. But old school basic is alive and well with LL.
When Daniel released LL and hinted at Advanced LL being next, nobody said how about Basic LL. Let me qualify that statement. You see, LL is more based on Moldvay's work than Mentzer's, and it does a great job. This is just a new thought that I had while looking at the Starter Set Box with the Elmore Dragon on the shelf at the game store.
You see, Frank did so much in capturing the imagination when he did that Basic Set in 1983. Moldvay's red book probably had the rules in an easier to access format, but Mentzer made it come to life. You don't hear the phrase "Kill Bargle" for nothing. Poor Aleena, why did she have to die? People talk about that too. I recall that solo adventure, wondering what was in that treasure chest I couldn't get to due to a lack of a thief.
In short, the Mentzer Basic Set told a story, while also explaining the rules to play levels 1-3. Heck, you were playing before you knew the rules. I would guess one reason for the lack of such a book for LL is because the rules are already in that book and this wouldn't be cost effective. But, the idea just hit me and I thought it sounded cool.
Imagine a similar, but different where it legally has to be, Basic LL book with a solo adventure. A few NPC's introduced. Somebody dies. The story can be different, but the goal is the same. Engage the imagination of the new gamer. Of course, Frank did that so well, maybe we don't need that now. I don't know. I just thought it was a cool idea.
Anyway, my main point is I'm happy that Labyrinth Lord is still alive and well entering it's fifth year, and even happier I'm hearing NOTHING about a new edition. The cool thing is, if it ever came down to it, you may see some new art or a change in wording here or there, but I doubt you'll ever see the game change. It really doesn't need to.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Thursday, January 12, 2012
A New Edition? I'm Shocked!
Well, maybe not that shocked. Okay, let's face it, it was inevitable.
In 2007, I finally made the trip to Gencon. I write about that elsewhere on this page, but it was an opportunity for me to meet so many people in the RPG business that I respect. Tom Moldvay had passed away earlier that year, so I knew I had to go when the opportunity presented itself.
Anyway, I was there when something occurred that I wasn't anticipating. The Wizards announced 4e D&D was on the way. I admit I'm not as in the loop about these things. When the Basic line was dropped in the mid 90's, I walked away from the table. What was left of my group was pretty much gone anyway, so I played the D&D computer games and continued to add books to my collection when I could.
Here's the thing, though. They introduced 3e in 2000. Some complained, and some hailed it as the update that was needed. It was a good thing for the game. Plus, The Wizards were the ones who sort of ended the Gygax/Arneson feud (maybe feud is a little strong?). What I mean to say is Gary and Dave were at the table together at Gencon that year talking about D&D, Gary wrote an article for Dragon on the history of the game, which I have. Both of their names were at the front of the new books as founders of the game. Both got a chance to contribute to the game going forward, though Gary opted to do his own thing. Dave returned to Blackmoor with new books. Both were involved in the two movies as well.
I liked that about 3e. People went back to playing when Wizards sold to Hasbro and suddenly in 2004, 3.5 came about. Time for new books. There was complaining. Can't say I blame people. I'm of the opinion the core books should have a run longer than 4 years, like maybe 10? But people still played, and the vibe I got was one where the people who played had fun. That's the point, isn't it? The impression was they would stay with that edition for a while when suddenly, in 2007, the announcement came for 4e.
What is going on here? Do you need me to spell it out for you? It's pretty obvious that Hasbro has higher expectations for this franchise. TSR probably would have stayed with what they had for a while and supported it with the usual supplements. WotC before the sale probably would have done so as well. But the bigger corporation has bigger expectations. This has been mentioned by people who know more about this than I do.
There were plans for a virtual table, new legal documents for third party support in an effort to put the old OGL in the past. Hype for 4e buried versions of the game people like. I recall seeing some of that at Gencon. Of course, isn't that the point when selling the new version, to tell people why they should switch? From what I understand, initial sales were good. At this point, I was focusing on other things.
While I was gone, Paizo had taken the OGL and cleverly put out Pathfinder as an RPG to support their adventure paths. In looking at past threads on forums, there were plenty of predictions of failure. But it was a brilliant move by Paizo. They opened the door for people who preferred that style of play to stick around, and people did. Still, 4e enthusiasts cried foul. How dare Paizo! Ha! How dare Wizards leave the door open for this to happen with the OGL. It was a brilliant move by Paizo. They became the company of the little guy, AND they ate into D&D business.
Wizards answer was Essentials and an attempt to explain the game in simpler terms. My observation. You still don't get it, do you? The 4e core books were fine for that style of game play. People who would play it, knew what to do. No, what you should have done is maybe pick up a phone and call Frank Mentzer. Take a look at BECM. Get a clue. No, that doesn't mean present the old rules, but rather, present a streamed down version of current rules in a way similar to the way those four boxed sets did it. It's NOT rocket science people, really. To hear some people talk, this just gets frustrating to me.
I hear can't a lot, and I say nonsense. I hear you'll split the fan base. Really? #1 It's a little late for that, isn't it? #2 If it's Wizards doing both sets, the money goes to the same place. #3 As per the TSR downfall argument, Basic was gone when the stuff hit the fan there, and in its place were tons of boxes of campaign settings for 2e. There's your overkill, and maybe, just maybe a Basic Set would have been a positive. I know it was for over a decade.
But, that aside, 4e got less than four years, including a reboot before this new announcement. 4 years! The new version will "probably" be out in 2013 if I had to guess, so a five year life span that included the reboot. Guys, this has to stop. The game can't keep taking this nonsense. Already I see comments like 6e in six years. Lets gets some stability back. The Monte Cook rehiring strikes me as an atempt to go in that direction. Still hate to see Winter and Baker gone as they are two people who have been there for some time now. It's good to have some people around with a long time perspective, in my opinion.
So, really, I don't want to complain here. There are enough people out there doing that. I want this edition (They seem to be backing off of the 5th edition term in describing what it is) to succeed, and I want all new edition talk to go away for longer than 5 years after this. They will hopefully have the online stuff working well on launch. They will hopefully have a good computer game on the way when the books launch. The books will make more people happy this time, hopefully. I hope they have a good basic version ready this time for beginners AND those of us who like rules lite games (signs point to that as a possibility, but we'll see). Maybe they will explore avenues for marketing this game, such as movies, t.v., cartoons or whatever.
When Gary and Dave put the first game together, the rewrite for AD&D 1e came about due to a need to clarify rules and have a rule set adequate for tournament play. Gary put his phone number in the original book and got all kinds of calls at ALL hours of the night asking for rules clarification. AD&D 1e went all the way to 1989. 2e bumped things up a bit, but didn't rock the boat too much. It lasted another decade. THIS is the kind of stability that is needed. Let people get back to the game and not worrying about new sets of rules being immanent.
Also, I should add I would love to see them work on getting older editions out there for Print on Demand. For one, it's a real olive branch to players of the older games with worn out books, and secondly, it will bring in some extra revenue. Also, a way of getting official new material for those editions should be explored, and these rule sets should be playable on the virtual table. Why not? It's more money and some people would subscribe if their version of the game were supported in that way.
Some of the things I'm reading make me think they are working on something like that. They appear to want to reach out to the older gamers. Newer gamers sometimes cringe at that thought, but why can't they attempt to reach out to all camps? D&D is a big tent, and it's high time that everybody is acknowledged, while the game moves ahead with whatever new ideas are considered good enough to put the logo on it.
So, I don't know where they are going, but I feel it's important that they get this right. They are reaching out to the fans to play test this different version. That is a good step, but it's just one step. I don't envy them their task, because I know it won't be easy. They know the sentiment out there isn't all positive, and they see the negative reaction to 4e pretty well in what Paizo was able to accomplish with Pathfinder. But, dammit, D&D is my game. I've played others, but I want these guys to be successful. I won't support blindly, but I am hoping they pull this off. I'm hoping this will be their biggest success yet. Only time will tell if that turns out to be the case.
In 2007, I finally made the trip to Gencon. I write about that elsewhere on this page, but it was an opportunity for me to meet so many people in the RPG business that I respect. Tom Moldvay had passed away earlier that year, so I knew I had to go when the opportunity presented itself.
Anyway, I was there when something occurred that I wasn't anticipating. The Wizards announced 4e D&D was on the way. I admit I'm not as in the loop about these things. When the Basic line was dropped in the mid 90's, I walked away from the table. What was left of my group was pretty much gone anyway, so I played the D&D computer games and continued to add books to my collection when I could.
Here's the thing, though. They introduced 3e in 2000. Some complained, and some hailed it as the update that was needed. It was a good thing for the game. Plus, The Wizards were the ones who sort of ended the Gygax/Arneson feud (maybe feud is a little strong?). What I mean to say is Gary and Dave were at the table together at Gencon that year talking about D&D, Gary wrote an article for Dragon on the history of the game, which I have. Both of their names were at the front of the new books as founders of the game. Both got a chance to contribute to the game going forward, though Gary opted to do his own thing. Dave returned to Blackmoor with new books. Both were involved in the two movies as well.
I liked that about 3e. People went back to playing when Wizards sold to Hasbro and suddenly in 2004, 3.5 came about. Time for new books. There was complaining. Can't say I blame people. I'm of the opinion the core books should have a run longer than 4 years, like maybe 10? But people still played, and the vibe I got was one where the people who played had fun. That's the point, isn't it? The impression was they would stay with that edition for a while when suddenly, in 2007, the announcement came for 4e.
What is going on here? Do you need me to spell it out for you? It's pretty obvious that Hasbro has higher expectations for this franchise. TSR probably would have stayed with what they had for a while and supported it with the usual supplements. WotC before the sale probably would have done so as well. But the bigger corporation has bigger expectations. This has been mentioned by people who know more about this than I do.
There were plans for a virtual table, new legal documents for third party support in an effort to put the old OGL in the past. Hype for 4e buried versions of the game people like. I recall seeing some of that at Gencon. Of course, isn't that the point when selling the new version, to tell people why they should switch? From what I understand, initial sales were good. At this point, I was focusing on other things.
While I was gone, Paizo had taken the OGL and cleverly put out Pathfinder as an RPG to support their adventure paths. In looking at past threads on forums, there were plenty of predictions of failure. But it was a brilliant move by Paizo. They opened the door for people who preferred that style of play to stick around, and people did. Still, 4e enthusiasts cried foul. How dare Paizo! Ha! How dare Wizards leave the door open for this to happen with the OGL. It was a brilliant move by Paizo. They became the company of the little guy, AND they ate into D&D business.
Wizards answer was Essentials and an attempt to explain the game in simpler terms. My observation. You still don't get it, do you? The 4e core books were fine for that style of game play. People who would play it, knew what to do. No, what you should have done is maybe pick up a phone and call Frank Mentzer. Take a look at BECM. Get a clue. No, that doesn't mean present the old rules, but rather, present a streamed down version of current rules in a way similar to the way those four boxed sets did it. It's NOT rocket science people, really. To hear some people talk, this just gets frustrating to me.
I hear can't a lot, and I say nonsense. I hear you'll split the fan base. Really? #1 It's a little late for that, isn't it? #2 If it's Wizards doing both sets, the money goes to the same place. #3 As per the TSR downfall argument, Basic was gone when the stuff hit the fan there, and in its place were tons of boxes of campaign settings for 2e. There's your overkill, and maybe, just maybe a Basic Set would have been a positive. I know it was for over a decade.
But, that aside, 4e got less than four years, including a reboot before this new announcement. 4 years! The new version will "probably" be out in 2013 if I had to guess, so a five year life span that included the reboot. Guys, this has to stop. The game can't keep taking this nonsense. Already I see comments like 6e in six years. Lets gets some stability back. The Monte Cook rehiring strikes me as an atempt to go in that direction. Still hate to see Winter and Baker gone as they are two people who have been there for some time now. It's good to have some people around with a long time perspective, in my opinion.
So, really, I don't want to complain here. There are enough people out there doing that. I want this edition (They seem to be backing off of the 5th edition term in describing what it is) to succeed, and I want all new edition talk to go away for longer than 5 years after this. They will hopefully have the online stuff working well on launch. They will hopefully have a good computer game on the way when the books launch. The books will make more people happy this time, hopefully. I hope they have a good basic version ready this time for beginners AND those of us who like rules lite games (signs point to that as a possibility, but we'll see). Maybe they will explore avenues for marketing this game, such as movies, t.v., cartoons or whatever.
When Gary and Dave put the first game together, the rewrite for AD&D 1e came about due to a need to clarify rules and have a rule set adequate for tournament play. Gary put his phone number in the original book and got all kinds of calls at ALL hours of the night asking for rules clarification. AD&D 1e went all the way to 1989. 2e bumped things up a bit, but didn't rock the boat too much. It lasted another decade. THIS is the kind of stability that is needed. Let people get back to the game and not worrying about new sets of rules being immanent.
Also, I should add I would love to see them work on getting older editions out there for Print on Demand. For one, it's a real olive branch to players of the older games with worn out books, and secondly, it will bring in some extra revenue. Also, a way of getting official new material for those editions should be explored, and these rule sets should be playable on the virtual table. Why not? It's more money and some people would subscribe if their version of the game were supported in that way.
Some of the things I'm reading make me think they are working on something like that. They appear to want to reach out to the older gamers. Newer gamers sometimes cringe at that thought, but why can't they attempt to reach out to all camps? D&D is a big tent, and it's high time that everybody is acknowledged, while the game moves ahead with whatever new ideas are considered good enough to put the logo on it.
So, I don't know where they are going, but I feel it's important that they get this right. They are reaching out to the fans to play test this different version. That is a good step, but it's just one step. I don't envy them their task, because I know it won't be easy. They know the sentiment out there isn't all positive, and they see the negative reaction to 4e pretty well in what Paizo was able to accomplish with Pathfinder. But, dammit, D&D is my game. I've played others, but I want these guys to be successful. I won't support blindly, but I am hoping they pull this off. I'm hoping this will be their biggest success yet. Only time will tell if that turns out to be the case.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Crawling Around In The Dungeon
The frustrating thing about wanting to game is not being able to. My group has long since broke up and gone our separate ways. It happens. I'm not a big fan of the rules heavy stuff out there, so not playing Pathfinder or D&D means not getting into games at the local store. I readily admit that's what the gamers playing now want for the most part, but there's always been a segment who wanted lite rules. How else did Basic last for so many years? Somewhere along the way the designers just decided that it all needed to be complex and rules heavy, and THAT was the ONLY choice.
Try and suggest the alternative and you get shouted down in the forums and told how stupid you are for wanting it. It's sad, but true. Now, Paizo seems to have stumbled into this debate, and I say stumble because of what they were aiming for with the Beginner's Box. It was not put there for a rules lite version of the game. It was there as an intro that eases you in. Well, they did it so well that people who loved the old Basic and Expert books started asking for the Expert rules. Problem was, this was not part of the plan, and they don't want to splinter off the game base as they say.
I'll be interested in seeing how they feel after examining the holiday sales numbers. Paizo is s smart company. From the moment they were licensed to make Dragon and Dungeon magazines to all that followed, it's been a series of moves designed to make gamers happy. If they can cover the bottom line, I don't see why they wouldn't at least make Beginner Box 2. To be honest, 10 levels is all that you need for this. I know Mentzer did wonders with BECMI, but many gamers never went past BE. They could say if you want more than 10, get the core books, and I'd say, that's fair. Thank You. It can be done, and I don't buy that this a a case of a hard no from Paizo. More like a, "Maybe, if it's financially feasible, based on numbers from the Beginner's Box."
At the moment, I've been thinking about what I would do with HotDC if I went back to it. I feel very creative at the moment, but that could go a number of ways. I could always use the energy for a module for Labyrinth Lord too. I did just make two purchases over the holidays, one was Stonehell Dungeon and the other a look at what Dave Arneson's original game might have looked like called Dragons at Dawn. I bought the latter for the fantasy glimpse at the past, and it is interesting. I enjoy a good contemplation on the idea of what if. They did this to make a full fledged game, and it seems adequate. Not all RPG's need a mountain of rules.
The Dungeon Crawl has always fascinated me. Stonehell Dungeon is the biggest one I've ever seen for what is essentially the old Basic game. I've only skimmed through it. I like the concept. It's pretty much shorthand in areas I'd like more details, but if you are the one running the game and know the rules, it's a snap. This is a basic game after all. All in all, it looks like an adventure that will take quite some time to complete and would be lots of fun. Isn't that what it's all about?
Now from the time I got the old Modvay Basic book, I devoured it's contents. I knew the rules in and out. I could run the game without the books and people would have fun playing. Towards the end of my gaming, the last few years, I usually just threw a map together, decided what the plot was, what main monsters would be there, what rewards and off they went. It really just took as long as it takes to roll up a character to make an adventure. The characters from that campaign are central people in the Dragon Vale campaign I was designing for HotDC.
Dragon Vale got it's name because the mountains nearby had dragons. This comes from the Three Kings Island campaign from my younger days, but Dragon Vale is a newly founded town by three characters of the last campaign, Vanz, Tyranius and Fitertu. I didn't realize how much I had written down in the HotDC notepad until reviewing that recently. The basic idea was that the three adventures had an ulterior motive for founding Dragon Vale. Yes, the people are happy there, but the trio are in search of something, an ancient, lost and still thriving city.
The founders of the human colonies of the island one by one disappeared. Where? Nobody knew. The king and his son both left, and the grandson does what he can to keep rule, but his power is a fragment of his heroic grandfather King Robert I. There are whispers of a secret society running things on this island and neighboring ones, possibly reaching onto the mainland. But, who are they and what are they up to? Nobody knows, not even the king. Does it tie into the disappearance of all the early human colony founders? The trio of Dragon Vale founders think so, and they believe the secret city is the answer.
I originally called the city Moldayvia, but I'm not crazy about the name. The city is based underground. I had the concept jotted down, but I had written a couple of other adventures before walking away from HotDC. One was Danger in the Dwarven Dungeon, which was a five level dungeon crawl for characters of 0 or 1st Degree. I want a Dungeon Crawl for this game, a good one with storyline material, but plenty of Hack N Slash too.
What's funny is when I started down this road and was looking to name my little enterprise, I settled on Basic Old School Games. My friend, who is good this sort of thing and has never gamed suggested the name, Die in a Dungeon. I think, now, that he meant call the game that. It makes sense, as I always envisioned this game to have lots of action in dungeons. The name popped up when I was looking at the notes, and I realized the module could be called that. I envision a whole dungeon world beneath the land with cities, towns and villages at certain points.
I envision it starting with a character or characters waking up in the room of a dungeon. Where are they? How did they get there? How do they get out? The adventure begins there, but where does it end? It is essentially a campaign setting with everything they need to survive somewhere in this dungeon world. It is an insanely huge idea though and would require several modules to complete. I've actually considered using Neverwinter Nights 1 to help me create that vision. A pity I don't have a group to game with. It would be an excellent way to really put HotDC thought its paces.
Try and suggest the alternative and you get shouted down in the forums and told how stupid you are for wanting it. It's sad, but true. Now, Paizo seems to have stumbled into this debate, and I say stumble because of what they were aiming for with the Beginner's Box. It was not put there for a rules lite version of the game. It was there as an intro that eases you in. Well, they did it so well that people who loved the old Basic and Expert books started asking for the Expert rules. Problem was, this was not part of the plan, and they don't want to splinter off the game base as they say.
I'll be interested in seeing how they feel after examining the holiday sales numbers. Paizo is s smart company. From the moment they were licensed to make Dragon and Dungeon magazines to all that followed, it's been a series of moves designed to make gamers happy. If they can cover the bottom line, I don't see why they wouldn't at least make Beginner Box 2. To be honest, 10 levels is all that you need for this. I know Mentzer did wonders with BECMI, but many gamers never went past BE. They could say if you want more than 10, get the core books, and I'd say, that's fair. Thank You. It can be done, and I don't buy that this a a case of a hard no from Paizo. More like a, "Maybe, if it's financially feasible, based on numbers from the Beginner's Box."
At the moment, I've been thinking about what I would do with HotDC if I went back to it. I feel very creative at the moment, but that could go a number of ways. I could always use the energy for a module for Labyrinth Lord too. I did just make two purchases over the holidays, one was Stonehell Dungeon and the other a look at what Dave Arneson's original game might have looked like called Dragons at Dawn. I bought the latter for the fantasy glimpse at the past, and it is interesting. I enjoy a good contemplation on the idea of what if. They did this to make a full fledged game, and it seems adequate. Not all RPG's need a mountain of rules.
The Dungeon Crawl has always fascinated me. Stonehell Dungeon is the biggest one I've ever seen for what is essentially the old Basic game. I've only skimmed through it. I like the concept. It's pretty much shorthand in areas I'd like more details, but if you are the one running the game and know the rules, it's a snap. This is a basic game after all. All in all, it looks like an adventure that will take quite some time to complete and would be lots of fun. Isn't that what it's all about?
Now from the time I got the old Modvay Basic book, I devoured it's contents. I knew the rules in and out. I could run the game without the books and people would have fun playing. Towards the end of my gaming, the last few years, I usually just threw a map together, decided what the plot was, what main monsters would be there, what rewards and off they went. It really just took as long as it takes to roll up a character to make an adventure. The characters from that campaign are central people in the Dragon Vale campaign I was designing for HotDC.
Dragon Vale got it's name because the mountains nearby had dragons. This comes from the Three Kings Island campaign from my younger days, but Dragon Vale is a newly founded town by three characters of the last campaign, Vanz, Tyranius and Fitertu. I didn't realize how much I had written down in the HotDC notepad until reviewing that recently. The basic idea was that the three adventures had an ulterior motive for founding Dragon Vale. Yes, the people are happy there, but the trio are in search of something, an ancient, lost and still thriving city.
The founders of the human colonies of the island one by one disappeared. Where? Nobody knew. The king and his son both left, and the grandson does what he can to keep rule, but his power is a fragment of his heroic grandfather King Robert I. There are whispers of a secret society running things on this island and neighboring ones, possibly reaching onto the mainland. But, who are they and what are they up to? Nobody knows, not even the king. Does it tie into the disappearance of all the early human colony founders? The trio of Dragon Vale founders think so, and they believe the secret city is the answer.
I originally called the city Moldayvia, but I'm not crazy about the name. The city is based underground. I had the concept jotted down, but I had written a couple of other adventures before walking away from HotDC. One was Danger in the Dwarven Dungeon, which was a five level dungeon crawl for characters of 0 or 1st Degree. I want a Dungeon Crawl for this game, a good one with storyline material, but plenty of Hack N Slash too.
What's funny is when I started down this road and was looking to name my little enterprise, I settled on Basic Old School Games. My friend, who is good this sort of thing and has never gamed suggested the name, Die in a Dungeon. I think, now, that he meant call the game that. It makes sense, as I always envisioned this game to have lots of action in dungeons. The name popped up when I was looking at the notes, and I realized the module could be called that. I envision a whole dungeon world beneath the land with cities, towns and villages at certain points.
I envision it starting with a character or characters waking up in the room of a dungeon. Where are they? How did they get there? How do they get out? The adventure begins there, but where does it end? It is essentially a campaign setting with everything they need to survive somewhere in this dungeon world. It is an insanely huge idea though and would require several modules to complete. I've actually considered using Neverwinter Nights 1 to help me create that vision. A pity I don't have a group to game with. It would be an excellent way to really put HotDC thought its paces.
Look! A Dungeons & Dragons Ride!
I noticed in a thread on one of the boards recently that somebody suggested there was value in a D&D cartoon potentially attracting new players to the game. Well, obviously Gary Gygax thought that or we wouldn't have had that old treasure from the 80's. I bought the Special Edition DVD when it was released. For all the bashing of that cartoon, and admittedly it wasn't the best, even for a children's cartoon, I think it was an effective tool for bringing new players to the game.
The Basic Set helped, I'm sure. Kids had an easy way into the game. It would seem the latest Basic attempt, the Starter Set, was their best in years, but that's not saying much. They can, and hopefully will, do better. Now, couple a good basic version of D&D with a cartoon. There's got to be some place for it.
What would it be about? A continuation or sequel to the original? Maybe not. How about a combination where we have kids gaming at the table and their imaginations coming to life via their characters in the campaign they are playing? Perhaps we show touches on the kid's lives, school, doing well, sometimes getting into trouble and restricted by parents from playing, where another kid comes in to play? We'd see the picture of a fun game, while teaching the lesson that other things in life are important too. Well? Maybe not.
Or, a cartoon just based on one of the campaign setting worlds, or even story arches from various rotating campaign settings? Hmmm... Maybe there is something here. Actually it could be a good tool for introducing a new setting when you think about it. Point is, a cartoon could be a good way to market the game to a younger audience, even going so far as having a commercial for the entry into the game.
On a side note, I would love to see a cartoon for Knights Of The Dinner Table. That would be perfect for Adult Swim.
The Basic Set helped, I'm sure. Kids had an easy way into the game. It would seem the latest Basic attempt, the Starter Set, was their best in years, but that's not saying much. They can, and hopefully will, do better. Now, couple a good basic version of D&D with a cartoon. There's got to be some place for it.
What would it be about? A continuation or sequel to the original? Maybe not. How about a combination where we have kids gaming at the table and their imaginations coming to life via their characters in the campaign they are playing? Perhaps we show touches on the kid's lives, school, doing well, sometimes getting into trouble and restricted by parents from playing, where another kid comes in to play? We'd see the picture of a fun game, while teaching the lesson that other things in life are important too. Well? Maybe not.
Or, a cartoon just based on one of the campaign setting worlds, or even story arches from various rotating campaign settings? Hmmm... Maybe there is something here. Actually it could be a good tool for introducing a new setting when you think about it. Point is, a cartoon could be a good way to market the game to a younger audience, even going so far as having a commercial for the entry into the game.
On a side note, I would love to see a cartoon for Knights Of The Dinner Table. That would be perfect for Adult Swim.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
It's The End Of The RPG As We Know It, And I Feel Fine
With the conclusion of 2011, the experts have all come out and begun the proclamation that Dungeons & Dragons and the RPG are doomed. Why? Well, The Wizards released a couple of their long time employees, while rehiring Monte Cook of 3e fame. That must mean 5e is around the corner, right? Secondly, all indications are that Pathfinder was outselling D&D for most of last year. Surely, this means 5e is on the way, right?
I want to get into two things, the OGL and the idea that people aren't buying 4e. On the second point, You have to factor in the DDI subscription rate. This is several thousand subscribers, or so I've heard. If that's the case, they are making six figures per month, at least 300k. Not chump change, and no need to print anything for that. Just maintain the online system. As for book sales, how much is being sold online at various sites? Now, I'm not disputing the success of Pathfinder. That's pretty self evident. But, just how bad is it for D&D?
Now, to the OGL, let me quote the man who was there and is now currently doing business with the main competition, Ryan Dancey from a recent post at Enworld:
"One of the goals of the OGL and the D20 project was to ensure that no single company would ever have the ability to kill Dungeons & Dragons. TSR almost did so; near the end of its existence it had pledged the copyrights and trademarks of the D&D franchise as security against loans it could not afford to repay. Had TSR gone into bankruptcy it is likely that for at least some time, and possibly an extremely lengthy period, nobody would have had the right to publish using that IP while the bankers fought over the carcass of TSR."
I've seen him say words to this effect elsewhere. Now, I do think the OGL was pretty cool. It gave rise to the old school revival. I wonder how much that may have influenced Paizo's decision to go with Pathfinder when they lost the rights to Dragon and Dungeon magazines as 4e came into being. I know there was more to it than that, of course. OGL inspired OSRIC, and OSRIC gave rise to the old school movement where works compatible with 1e and the old Basic game could legally be published.
Having said that, the OGL was an incredibly bone headed move, as written, for WotC to make. Make it open with an expiration date, but not indefinite. Every time a new version of D&D came out, some people chose to stay with the old one or went elsewhere. But, there wasn't a clone supported by a company that had the funds to make a dent in the D&D empire. Until 4e came out. Was 4e really needed? And if so, was it needed this soon? The usual fury greeted that release, but this time something else followed. An option. Play 3e under the name of Pathfinder. Brilliant move by Paizo, but an option that never should have existed.
I find it hard to believe that death of D&D was really a motivating factor for the OGL, especially coming from the company that brought us the Magic Collectible Card Game . WotC wasn't going out of business, and giving away the rules wasn't a smart BUSINESS move. From a gamer standpoint, sure. Business-wise, no way. This move did make a dent in 4e. It effected their hold as the leader of the market and allowed the competitor to compete using rules that came from D&D originally. Not smart, but what's done is done.
Now, because of corporate demands, there may be higher expectations with Hasbro for D&D. Is 4e a failure? I don't have enough information in front of me to make that call, but something tells me no it isn't. Not as successful as they would like? Probably. The OGL a factor? Yes. There's one way to put an end to that. Release 3.5 again. What would be the point? For one thing, a gesture to that crowd. Release material compatible with 3.5 and 4e. A little more work? Sure. Doable? Yes. Pathfinder may still be a factor after that, but people can go to D&D for 3.5 material now too.
But, let's not stop there. Drop the idea of 5e for now. It's not needed. D&D already has enough competition with itself without adding a new edition. However, if they are as interested in winning over the old schoolers as recent columns from their site would seem to indicate, old editions could be officially released again. This could be done with a limited print edition and Print on Demand or just the latter. D&D Retro, if you will. What this does is show that they really do want everybody back under the D&D umbrella, whatever edition you prefer.
One of the reasons to do this is to attend to the leak of D&D customers buying older versions of the game under different names and bringing some of that money back home. Of more immediate concern is the rift between 3.5 and 4e that led to Pathfinder stepping in. I also favor a new Basic game done with longer playability the way it was done over 20 years ago, but that's a side issue. You handle the loss of old players by giving them what they want, not telling them 4e or nothing. That's what caused this mess.
The problem with the idea of 5e is you continue the cycle, this time pissing off a segment of 4e players and fragmenting the game some more. 5e can wait. If the state of D&D is so bad that a new edition is needed to "save" the brand, than they really are screwed. If they can't then make the greatest RPG ever, the brand is screwed. By restoring 3.5 and supporting both it and 4e, you are mending fences and restoring consumer faith. The Retro D&D idea, even as a POD with occasional new adventure mods, further adds to that effort, though some may say screw those people. With PoD, however, it would be a money maker in the long run.
But, it's all just speculation. I'm just somebody with an opinion like anybody else. Where they go with the game is anybody's guess. I don't see the doom and gloom others may see. The game will go on. Hopefully, if they do go the 5e rout, it will be a uniting factor in the community, and D&D will also make use of technology in a way that ensures a long life for the game. That's what really matters. Plus, we'll always have the older versions no matter what comes in the future, but maybe the future game will offer something everybody can enjoy. Now, there's a nice thought.
I want to get into two things, the OGL and the idea that people aren't buying 4e. On the second point, You have to factor in the DDI subscription rate. This is several thousand subscribers, or so I've heard. If that's the case, they are making six figures per month, at least 300k. Not chump change, and no need to print anything for that. Just maintain the online system. As for book sales, how much is being sold online at various sites? Now, I'm not disputing the success of Pathfinder. That's pretty self evident. But, just how bad is it for D&D?
Now, to the OGL, let me quote the man who was there and is now currently doing business with the main competition, Ryan Dancey from a recent post at Enworld:
"One of the goals of the OGL and the D20 project was to ensure that no single company would ever have the ability to kill Dungeons & Dragons. TSR almost did so; near the end of its existence it had pledged the copyrights and trademarks of the D&D franchise as security against loans it could not afford to repay. Had TSR gone into bankruptcy it is likely that for at least some time, and possibly an extremely lengthy period, nobody would have had the right to publish using that IP while the bankers fought over the carcass of TSR."
I've seen him say words to this effect elsewhere. Now, I do think the OGL was pretty cool. It gave rise to the old school revival. I wonder how much that may have influenced Paizo's decision to go with Pathfinder when they lost the rights to Dragon and Dungeon magazines as 4e came into being. I know there was more to it than that, of course. OGL inspired OSRIC, and OSRIC gave rise to the old school movement where works compatible with 1e and the old Basic game could legally be published.
Having said that, the OGL was an incredibly bone headed move, as written, for WotC to make. Make it open with an expiration date, but not indefinite. Every time a new version of D&D came out, some people chose to stay with the old one or went elsewhere. But, there wasn't a clone supported by a company that had the funds to make a dent in the D&D empire. Until 4e came out. Was 4e really needed? And if so, was it needed this soon? The usual fury greeted that release, but this time something else followed. An option. Play 3e under the name of Pathfinder. Brilliant move by Paizo, but an option that never should have existed.
I find it hard to believe that death of D&D was really a motivating factor for the OGL, especially coming from the company that brought us the Magic Collectible Card Game . WotC wasn't going out of business, and giving away the rules wasn't a smart BUSINESS move. From a gamer standpoint, sure. Business-wise, no way. This move did make a dent in 4e. It effected their hold as the leader of the market and allowed the competitor to compete using rules that came from D&D originally. Not smart, but what's done is done.
Now, because of corporate demands, there may be higher expectations with Hasbro for D&D. Is 4e a failure? I don't have enough information in front of me to make that call, but something tells me no it isn't. Not as successful as they would like? Probably. The OGL a factor? Yes. There's one way to put an end to that. Release 3.5 again. What would be the point? For one thing, a gesture to that crowd. Release material compatible with 3.5 and 4e. A little more work? Sure. Doable? Yes. Pathfinder may still be a factor after that, but people can go to D&D for 3.5 material now too.
But, let's not stop there. Drop the idea of 5e for now. It's not needed. D&D already has enough competition with itself without adding a new edition. However, if they are as interested in winning over the old schoolers as recent columns from their site would seem to indicate, old editions could be officially released again. This could be done with a limited print edition and Print on Demand or just the latter. D&D Retro, if you will. What this does is show that they really do want everybody back under the D&D umbrella, whatever edition you prefer.
One of the reasons to do this is to attend to the leak of D&D customers buying older versions of the game under different names and bringing some of that money back home. Of more immediate concern is the rift between 3.5 and 4e that led to Pathfinder stepping in. I also favor a new Basic game done with longer playability the way it was done over 20 years ago, but that's a side issue. You handle the loss of old players by giving them what they want, not telling them 4e or nothing. That's what caused this mess.
The problem with the idea of 5e is you continue the cycle, this time pissing off a segment of 4e players and fragmenting the game some more. 5e can wait. If the state of D&D is so bad that a new edition is needed to "save" the brand, than they really are screwed. If they can't then make the greatest RPG ever, the brand is screwed. By restoring 3.5 and supporting both it and 4e, you are mending fences and restoring consumer faith. The Retro D&D idea, even as a POD with occasional new adventure mods, further adds to that effort, though some may say screw those people. With PoD, however, it would be a money maker in the long run.
But, it's all just speculation. I'm just somebody with an opinion like anybody else. Where they go with the game is anybody's guess. I don't see the doom and gloom others may see. The game will go on. Hopefully, if they do go the 5e rout, it will be a uniting factor in the community, and D&D will also make use of technology in a way that ensures a long life for the game. That's what really matters. Plus, we'll always have the older versions no matter what comes in the future, but maybe the future game will offer something everybody can enjoy. Now, there's a nice thought.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
