We need a unified optional game system or this hobby's gonna die

[jadrax]

Sure, especially since PF is a year away: How many people will ultimately see PF as a "rehasing [of] 3e," especially since backward compatibility is a priority? Will "GR, Necro and the others" really line-up behind PF, especially those with systems of their own?

I was discussing this a few days ago and I think lining up behind Pathfinder at this stage could be incredibly risky.

Not only are you having to wait around a *year* to do so, there is no knowing of how successful it will be and if the community embraces it.

If you make an assumption that a large number of the Purchasing player base did not move to D&D4 because they where happy with D&D3.5, then you have to ask just how many changers Pathfinder can make before losing to big a slice of the D&D3.5 crowd. Currently I simply do not see how you can predict that at all, which to me means the sensible course is to play it as cautious as you can and keep your 3rd party D&D stuff as general as possible.

In a way this position is actually helped by Pathfinder claiming to be compatible with older stuff, which ironically may turn out to limit its success*.

* if you equate picking up 3pp support as an indication of success, which I am also not sure is actually a valid criteria.

 

[Achan hiArusa]

Thanks for the picture. Despite your dislike of generic games, this made me want to get a look at BRP again. D20 has such promise and it could be made into a generic game with some work, but BRP is way ahead on that track.

If there ever is unified effort among the 3pp I hope they make an ip-free, fantasy game with an implied setting at the most. I dislike licensed games (too much baggage) almost as much as I dislike generic games. I'm fed up with spaceships, swords, and guns in the same picture.

However, maybe Basic is it? Is there a reason Necromancer Games, just to pick one, can't make a few books for Basic?

 

[Chauzu]

WTF?! You say that like it's a bad thing.


To those of you who are new to the game:
1) I bought my Basic Red Box from Toys R Us
2) I bought my Monster Manual from Sport Mart - that's right! Sport Mart. A Corporate Sporting Goods Store.


If WotC was able to get Toys R Us interested in carrying D&D products again then all the power to them. It's far better for children to get involved with roleplaying because it taxes the imagination, something Grognards are short on. If we wait til their teenagers for recruitment it's too late. They won't have the reading skills or imaginative faculties developed enough to handle Roleplaying Games.

Gotta start young. And Toys R Us is a great place to start.

I agree. It was both Hero Quest and Basic D&D that my parents bought me at Toys R Us that got me into gaming!

 

[Shabe]

Hmmm lets see how i was caught up in rpg.
My parents bought me back fantasy books from the library.
I played fighting fantasy books.
I read my big brothers AD&D DMG.
I played heroquest and space crusade.
I played W40k.
I played discworld MuD
I played Angband and variants.
I went to uni and joined the lrp society and am still with that group of friends.
I was asked to play Mage.
Played Baldurs gate and diablo II.
A friend invited me to play a 3e version of Dragonlance.
I ran D&D.
Basically i was steeped in fantasy and sci-fi knowledge, i was also shown that games can be played in those settings, i then wanted to play in them. D&D was such a pervasive brand that i didn't really know of any other system, besides my friend was running it.
I don't think there is a problem with the industry, i know plenty of other groups out there that aren't mine and none of them play D&D, they poke fun at D&D, implying it's an immature game or a generic setting for those without imagination.
The group/s I'm with at the moment will play the game that someone is running, doesn't matter what system, if it doesn't interest them then it will just fold up after a bit. The only campaign that's really stuck was dragonlance which we played to completion, all the others, no matter what system tended to peter out. Our group is getting a little bit fed up with D&D and I've got this idea for a new non D&D game (I was pointed to savage worlds because i asked for a cheap generic system).
So in my experience there is no problem.

 

[carmachu]

Well, I didn't say rehashing -- I was quoting the quote that you quoted. And, yes, I am aware of Clark's announcement. However, he also announced support for 4E.... My only point here is that it is far from clear (IMHO) that PF will be the alternative to D&D and/or that it will be supported by many 3PP.

again, if your aware of teh announcement, he's only going to support 4e if he can get a revised GSL or seperate deal.....

I dont think its that far from clear as you think. I cant see anyone else at this junction starting a seperate game right now. Mongoose? Green Ronin? Even Necromancer?

I think any other alterative is wishful thinking at the moment.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

To get back to the points made in the OP:
I do not believe the hobby is dying, I have been hearing that for the last 25 years and it did not happen yet. When Magic came out I thought they might be right but roleplaying survived Magic the Gathering, Pokemon et al.

Also not everyone joins the hobby via direct induction, some hear about and seek it out. I got into rpg's from computer text based adventures and heard about D&D as the progenitor of them and sought it out.

The hobby will never become mainstream though because it requires too much investment in time. Family boardgames can be played in 2 to 4 hours depending on the game and the 'family' an rpg campaing is of the order of 100 to 300 -400 hours some longer.
Nobody invests that kind of time to a game except people who play rpg, MMO's and some hardcore wargamers.
So if rpg's are to expand they have to recruit from the MMO market.
On the face of it, it should be easy but so far it has not yet happened. The only thing I can think of off hand that might expand the market that way was if Blizzard ran an RPGA like living campaign that offered benefits in the MMO and vis a versa.

 

[carmachu]

I was discussing this a few days ago and I think lining up behind Pathfinder at this stage could be incredibly risky.

Not only are you having to wait around a *year* to do so, there is no knowing of how successful it will be and if the community embraces it.

If you make an assumption that a large number of the Purchasing player base did not move to D&D4 because they where happy with D&D3.5, then you have to ask just how many changers Pathfinder can make before losing to big a slice of the D&D3.5 crowd. Currently I simply do not see how you can predict that at all, which to me means the sensible course is to play it as cautious as you can and keep your 3rd party D&D stuff as general as possible.

So.....let me understand this correctly. Lining up behind Pathfinder at this juncture would be risky, YET we're suppose to think, according to the original poster, the 3PP will line up and create a whole other game system.


ANyone see a disconnect here? You ask how many changes Pathfinder can make before losing a slice, yet if 3PP do what the orginal poster wants, and create a totally different system, why would folks jump to it if it does what 4e has done, and make your shelf of books obsolete?

 

[Dice4Hire]

*cough* PATHFINDER *cough*


Any other questions?

Sooner or later the Pathfinder grognards show up.......



Drakona, really well put. Very nice.

Yes, I noticed that when I started 4E. At first, I cold not contemplate any characterization of 4E, none at all. But I found out that was just because I was so involved in looking at the numbers and learning the rules hat I had no spare brainpower. But now, as I know the rules pretty well, the role-playing is coming back.

I have treid many new systems, and I ahve enjoyed most of them. Lots of good systems out there, but none offer what D&D does.

 

[jadrax]

So.....let me understand this correctly. Lining up behind Pathfinder at this juncture would be risky, YET we're suppose to think, according to the original poster, the 3PP will line up and create a whole other game system.

ANyone see a disconnect here? You ask how many changes Pathfinder can make before losing a slice, yet if 3PP do what the orginal poster wants, and create a totally different system, why would folks jump to it if it does what 4e has done, and make your shelf of books obsolete?

I am not sure why you seem to be assuming I in any way agree with the opinions put forward by the OP.

There is no way in my estimation any new universal system can corner a majority of the market. I do not even think that a sizeable amount of D&D3/D&D3.5's popularity was due to it attempting to be a universal system.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Maybe because, despite gamer elitist claims to the contrary, D&D is actually a fun game to play that satisfies the gaming needs of its users.

That would be my reason anyway. And nobody has the right to tell me that I NEED to spread my RPG "wings."

You don't need to. But still, it can be useful.

I've learned a lot about how to pace high-powered games from running Exalted - and that's something I plan to apply the next time I'm running high-level D&D.