WotC WotC needs an Elon Musk

[Ruin Explorer]

Not a comic fan as such ( and we have established not one that care about lore overmuch) but have not the comics already invalidated their past or is that DC only?

Marvel doesn't obliterate its past like DC does. DC has done it what, three times I can think of off the top of my head, but I think it's more (not a huge DC guy), most recent being the New 52.

Marvel takes a "it's okay if you just change continuity" approach, by and large, where it's more like every comic, or every interlinked set of comics is kind of allowed to have its own continuity. Characters who should be 60 return to being 25 even though they were 40 a few months ago, because a new comic book involving them started with a new title.

Sometimes threads of continuity run for decades, sometimes for weeks.

It's just how Marvel does it, and honestly I've never known a Marvel fan to have a big problem with it, and even as a kid when I first noticed it, I was like "Oh, it's like the Greek myths..." i.e. where characters sometimes live at the same time as others and sometimes have been gone for thousands of years, and sometimes are at very different life stages and so on. Where one story has a characters as a child of Zeus, but the next has them as not a demigod at all and so on.

What tends to remain constant in Marvel is personalities and to some extent power sets. But mostly personalities. Characters can experience growth and change but often tend to remain fundamentally like this or like that.

I was not really referring to the comic continuity. The MCU is in the phase where the weight of lore is beginning to become a barrier to new comers.
Aside from that the lore density is approaching the point where someone will break continuity in a controversial way.

I don't believe the latter will happen.

The former might, but I don't really see signs of it yet. The MCU has issues, but they're more to do with a lot of the current characters being kinda "meh" than anything else.

The MCU is an adaptation that in no way invalidates 70+ years of comics history. That, to me, is the difference.

To be fair Marvel just doesn't do continuity unless it feels like it, so it'd be quite hard for it to "invalidate" anything. I mean, if Banner Hulk suddenly vanished and Amadeus Cho was Hulk instead whilst it might surprise some people, I don't think anyone would see it as "invalidating comics history". Similarly Miles Morales replacing Peter Parker wouldn't be a huge deal - hell some would cheer for it (I like both myself). Whereas if we had a non-Bruce Wayne Batman, a lot of DC fans would absolutely riot, even though it has happened a number of times in the comics.

 

[Staffan]

The former might, but I don't really see signs of it yet. The MCU has issues, but they're more to do with a lot of the current characters being kinda "meh" than anything else.

Yeah, it kind of feels like they're treading water a bit before they can get the X-Men and FF integrated. I feel it's something like this:

When the MCU started, Marvel didn't have the movie rights to its biggest names: The X-Men, Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four (and also Daredevil, I think). At the time, the Avengers were considered second-stringers – particularly as individuals. There was some power to the Avengers name, but not that much to Iron Man, Captain America, or Thor as solo comics (I mean, they were doing OK, but not great). But Marvel showed that they could make damn fine movies based on these second-stringers, and at the same time promote them more in the actual comics to raise their profile that way. So they built a really strong cinematic universe with these characters as the foundation, incorporated more characters along the way, with a hugely satisfying resolution in Endgame.

But now two of those three have left, and the third had a fairly questionable latest movie. So they need to repeat the same feat again, only this time using characters ranked even lower. Now, they've done some fine movies, but to some degree they're victims of their own success. Something like the Eternals or Shang-Chi would have astounded movie-goers before the MCU, but now we just go "Yeah yeah, another big CGI fight."

And even if they've recovered the rights to some of their star characters, it's going to take some time to figure out how those fit into the MCU. Like, if we now have the X-Men, where have the mutants been? The answer might be Multiverse-based, but it remains to be seen.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Marvel doesn't obliterate its past like DC does. DC has done it what, three times I can think of off the top of my head, but I think it's more (not a huge DC guy), most recent being the New 52.

Marvel takes a "it's okay if you just change continuity" approach, by and large, where it's more like every comic, or every interlinked set of comics is kind of allowed to have its own continuity. Characters who should be 60 return to being 25 even though they were 40 a few months ago, because a new comic book involving them started with a new title.

Sometimes threads of continuity run for decades, sometimes for weeks.

It's just how Marvel does it, and honestly I've never known a Marvel fan to have a big problem with it, and even as a kid when I first noticed it, I was like "Oh, it's like the Greek myths..." i.e. where characters sometimes live at the same time as others and sometimes have been gone for thousands of years, and sometimes are at very different life stages and so on. Where one story has a characters as a child of Zeus, but the next has them as not a demigod at all and so on.

What tends to remain constant in Marvel is personalities and to some extent power sets. But mostly personalities. Characters can experience growth and change but often tend to remain fundamentally like this or like that.

I don't believe the latter will happen.

The former might, but I don't really see signs of it yet. The MCU has issues, but they're more to do with a lot of the current characters being kinda "meh" than anything else.

To be fair Marvel just doesn't do continuity unless it feels like it, so it'd be quite hard for it to "invalidate" anything. I mean, if Banner Hulk suddenly vanished and Amadeus Cho was Hulk instead whilst it might surprise some people, I don't think anyone would see it as "invalidating comics history". Similarly Miles Morales replacing Peter Parker wouldn't be a huge deal - hell some would cheer for it (I like both myself). Whereas if we had a non-Bruce Wayne Batman, a lot of DC fans would absolutely riot, even though it has happened a number of times in the comics.

It doesn't invalidate comics history because it doesn't change comics history. Banner was Hulk, then Cho, then maybe Banner again, or someone else. Doesnt change what already happened.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Remember: people were pretending the MCU was dying in 2010.

 

[humble minion]

Remember: people were pretending the MCU was dying in 2010.

I think it probably reached a high-water mark around Infinity War and Endgame and probably won’t achieve that sort of cultural universality again, but regardless, it ain’t going away any time soon and will continue to make Disney truckloads of money for many years yet.

 

[Oofta]

I would like it if WotC spent some effort showcasing playstyles other than the current most popular. Making better alternate rules in the DMG could do that. A worldbuilding guide could do that. As the 800lb gorilla, WotC's new fanbase probably has little exposure to the RPG world as a whole outside of 5e, so WotC is in the best position to shine light on alternative playstyles.

I swear I'm not trying to yuck anyone's yum. What I am trying to do is suggest that the current legal owners of "the world's most popular fantasy role-playing game" could do more for gamers that fall through the cracks of their monument to popularity, and I think they should.

You guys want me to be more constructive. I'm working on it.

I don't know how much WOTC can or should push different styles, but I do hope they put more emphasis on world building. An entire book would be great, but they don't seem to be doing DM facing books, which is odd if DMs buy most of the books anyway.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I would like it if WotC spent some effort showcasing playstyles other than the current most popular. Making better alternate rules in the DMG could do that. A worldbuilding guide could do that. As the 800lb gorilla, WotC's new fanbase probably has little exposure to the RPG world as a whole outside of 5e, so WotC is in the best position to shine light on alternative playstyles.

I swear I'm not trying to yuck anyone's yum. What I am trying to do is suggest that the current legal owners of "the world's most popular fantasy role-playing game" could do more for gamers that fall through the cracks of their monument to popularity, and I think they should.

You guys want me to be more constructive. I'm working on it.

I'm fully with you on the DMG having better alternative rules, though I would add potentially going in both directions. I'm also not against a worldbuilding guide, though I think it would do better as just another part of the DMG rather than trying to sell such a niche product.

And I appreciate you trying to be more constructive. Where I was pushing back was this idea that the health of the hobby may rely on WoTC supporting a single, specific other playstyle. It would be what you want, but that doesn't mean the health of the TTRPG space is relying on it.

Not that I don't agree that WoTC is in a nearly unique place as a gateway to other playstyles and forms of TTRPG's, they very much are.

You have a very odd understanding of current Star Wars projects, to my mind.

shrug

Everyone who has watched Mandalorian or Andor has seemed to really like it. Anyone who watched any of the last three big movies seemed to hate them. Solo was panned, but Rogue One which didn't deal with any of the existing canon but instead filled out a section of the world left unspoken is generally decently regarded. Though it does get lamented for changing and disrupting canon characters.

It just doesn't seem to be a ringing endorsement of canon as much as a note of the value of good world-building.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It interesting you mention 10 years. I think a decade is the limit of canon before it becomes a problem.

Sounds right, but I'll add a caveat of it depends on the format and the style.

Long-Form stuff like comics and TV shows with multiple writers and a rapid release rate? Definitely seems to be the limit.
Stuff like novels where they might get a single installment a year and has only a single creative input? Can handle it much better. Still gets rough after 10 years, but someone skilled enough and with a long-term enough vision can weather it.

 

[RealAlHazred]

Watch for my next thread "The MCU Needs an Elon Musk".

 

[Chaosmancer]

The people who didn't like that aren't comics fans.

The comics fans were fine with it, because that's just "Oh Wanda, what are you like!". Comics Wanda has been way worse than that.

The MCU-only people didn't like because they still think of Wanda as the relative innocent girl from Age of Ultron and so on, whereas all the old Marvel hands were like "Uh oh it's Scarlet Witch, someone about to have a very bad day".

The Thor movie was just a bad movie, and again, it was MCU-only people who were the primary haters.

Just using this to pop-off, but I think you hit this exactly on the head.

The people who are upset were the people MOST invested in the MCU-Canon. Comic fans didn't care about the MCU canon, because it was already different from the comic's canon from movie number 1. Heck, from moment 1. Tony Stark in the comics was captured by a guy named Wong-Chu after his accident, in the MCU it was the Ten Rings led by Raza. The Ten Rings were working with Obadiah Stane, The Iron Monger.... who doesn't show up in Iron Man comics until Iron Man #163 and doesn't get his armor until Iron Man #200. And was never connected to Wong-Chu

So anyone who was heavily invested in Marvel and Marvel Continuity wrote off the MCU continuity from the first movie. However, those who were MCU-Only saw this as their one true canon. They didn't read the comics, but they also probably didn't particularly care about the comics because they liked the movies. And THEY are the people who are upset by the most recent movies and how they are treating MCU Canon. Meanwhile, the Marvel comic fans are just shrugging, because the movies were never accurate to canon anyways, so they don't care as much.