So, after the Green Ronin announcement, I am...

[coyote6]

It's funny, because at first I was a bit disappointed at the announcement. I thought GR was announcing a new game, rather than a license.

Have they said what system their DA RPG will use? More to the point, will it be d20 OGL, the system used in SoIaF, or something new?

I might be misremembering, but I had the impression from something Pramas had mentioned in a blog post about the secret project (DA, I presume) that it was a new system.

So I was thinking it's a new licensed IP, with a new system, and an old format (boxed sets).

 

[Mournblade94]

Yeah, count me unimpressed. I kinda figured since Kotaku mentioned something about a Dragon Age P&P; but since I don't have any interest in the video game, it didn't jump at me.

Would have much rather seen a DC or Marvel tie-in with M&M. Oh well.

While I am now excited for Dragon Age, I would of much rather have seen a Marvel RPG for M&M.

No doubt.

My hope at the countdown was:

1: Marvel Tie in
2: Bethesda contract for Morrowind or Oblivion
3: Mass Effect

 

[Greg K]

As I wrote in another thread, I really love Mutants and Masterminds (it's my favorite rpg), really like True20 (one of my favorite rpgs after M&M), and Green Ronin's 3e products make up the majority of my favorite 3e products. I also realize this can be a big opportunity for them. That all said, this license disappointed me, but only in that the license is based on something that interests me.

I do, however, hope it succeeds. Success, hopefully, will lead to more money for M&M support and licenses that I care about (At the present, neither Dragon Age or Wild Cards interests based on the property while A Song of Ice and Fire disnterests me soley based on the mechanics).

Anyway, licenses that I would have liked to have seen (with Steve Kenson in charge of design/development):
1. Marvel for M&M (although, I new this license wouldn't be as there was no countdown on the M&M boards)
2. DC for M&M (Again I new this license wouldn't be as there was no countdown on the M&M boards)
3. Lord of the Rings
4. Star Wars: Not going to happen, but I'd like to see a non- WOTC version as I don't like many of the mechanics for a licensed game (and, some, for rpgs in general)
5. Star Trek
6. Stargate
7. Conan
8. Firefly/Serenity (yes, I know it is, currently, under the Cortex System)
9. Buffy/ Angel (I'd like to see this back in print and I prefer the MM/True 20 Toughness Save Mechanic to life points and MM/True20 narrower skill list to Unisystem's broad skills).
10. Several other non-crpgs/mmorps that were mentioned in various threads

 

[Klaus]

It's funny, because at first I was a bit disappointed at the announcement. I thought GR was announcing a new game, rather than a license.

However, the more I think about it, the more excited I've become. I *love* KOTOR and Baldur's Gate. I can't wait to dive into Mass Effect.

The bigger picture, though, is that if the DA RPG does well that's a very, very good thing for the RPG hobby. If you look at licensed games, the successful ones have served as the primary way for fans to learn more about a setting (MERP and Star Wars during the 80s).

That's what the DA game is poised to do, and if it succeeds maybe we'll see lots of new games and new gamers.

In a way, I think people (and I'd put myself in this category until I thought about it for a bit) look at it as an RPG licensed from a videogame. That's been done before.

A better way to look at it, IMO, is that it's a new fantasy setting that's launching with a tabletop and a digital game. That's really, really exciting for the tabletop hobby.

Nice way to put it, Mike, and you've certainly got me thinking (never a good thing)! If we look at this as Dragon Age launching in parallel as a CMRPG (Cross-Media Roleplaying Game), it offers people the chance to get into the setting from the get-go. Perhaps have things from the PnP side affect sequels or updates of the CRPG side, etc.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Bioware...The WORST game they did was the NWN2 expansion.

Come back when you have at least one clue as to what the hell you're talking about. I know it's customary for Bioware to take credit for good games they didn't make - see also Baldur's Gate series - but at least try to get things right.

Also, Mask of the Betrayer is one of the best written cRPGs in years. Sorry there weren't any ANGSTY ELVES for you to develop horrifying and unhealthy co-dependent relationships with in it.

 

[Uzzy]

While Mournblade was incorrect in saying Bioware made NWN2, it's actually quite a common mistake. Obsidian Entertainment are rather tied in with Bioware in the general awareness (at least, the general awareness that would know of them). And yes, Mask of the Betrayer is a great game (though Storm of Zehir isn't quite as good)

As for your claim that Bioware didn't make Baldur's Gate, that's nonsense. One look at the Credits will show your claim up. For instance, the Producer for Baldur's Gate was none other then Ray Muzyka, CEO of Bioware. The Lead Designer of Baldur's Gate was a man called James Ohlen, who has been at Bioware for ten years, and is currently lead designer for Star Wars: The Old Republic.

Oh, and the worst game Bioware made? Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood. And that still gets 74 on Metacritic.

Either way, Bioware are widely acknowledged as excellent story, world and character designers, and an excellent world is exactly what's needed for a good RPG. I'm looking forward to the Dragon Age PnP game, not only for itself, but in the hope that if it's well received and sells well, Bioware might license out other IP it owns, such as Jade Empire and Mass Effect. Both of which would be excellent settings for a PnP RPG.

 

[Pseudopsyche]

Come back when you have at least one clue as to what the hell you're talking about. I know it's customary for Bioware to take credit for good games they didn't make - see also Baldur's Gate series - but at least try to get things right.

I am not an expert in this industry, but some cursory research reveals that Bioware developed the Baldur's Gate games and that Black Isle / Interplay published them (and developed Planescape: Torment and Icewind Dale). For example, this article "Black Isle Studios: We are not Bioware" quotes the director of Black Isle as saying: "When BioWare was creating the first Baldur's Gate, they pretty much did it all themselves except with some very small things provided by us like a sound engine and a movie processor." He goes on to say: "It all gets kind of convoluted, but the best way to look at it is that almost all of the code that is in the Baldur's Gate series was developed by BioWare with Black Isle contributing some code that we developed for Torment and Icewind Dale."

As I understand it, you're saying that Bioware is taking credit for a game, Baldur's Gate, that you say it didn't create. Can you provide references showing that somebody else created this game? Thanks.

 

[Harr]

Black Isle developed Icewind Dale, Fallout, Planescape: Torment, and the console games from the Baldur's Gate series. They also served as publisher and PR contact for the Baldur's Gate series and contributed some amount of modular code to the game. The Baldur's Gate series itself was developed by Bioware.

They are the fair and just owners and receivers of the credit for that series of games. Trust me, I've been on this Bioware/Black Isle merry-go-round before Though it had been a while since it's come up.

 

[Corinth]

The tabletop RPG not only has to justify its existence vs. just mining the Dragon Age fluff for use in a D&D-powered game, it has to justify its existence vs. its CRPG alter ego; if the TRPG version cannot accomplish both tasks, then the game will be a waste of time and money, which means that the user network required to make any TRPG commercially viable won't be maintained (and that is if it's established at all) and therefore make the product a very pretty doorstop. The marketers have their work cut out for them.

 

[Umbran]

Come back when you have at least one clue as to what the hell you're talking about.

And you may come back when you recognize that you don't get to tell others when and how they may post. Polite reminders to stay civil are admissible, but this is not.