Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Shemeska" data-source="post: 6495740" data-attributes="member: 11697">While Sailormoon has been a bit overly insistent in some recent threads, I think what was said earlier in this thread is a perfectly reasonable take when it comes to how a given RPG setting IP is handled by designers and developers when publishing a product versus how individual DMs at home handle it. By all means, please tweak, twist, mangle, and make your own of a given setting within your home game - that's part of what makes it fun and personalized. But it's important for the cohesion and continued success of setting IP that those people working on it professionally and being paid for that to be aware of the material at a high level, to retain continuity and cohesion as much as possible (unless you're excising something that was itself a retcon or gaff in a prior product), and to act as a responsible caretaker for the property in question. It's just part of being professional and doing a job at a high level. It's important that you keep continuity to make sure that players are starting off with the same basic assumptions regarding a setting, and then applying whatever changes or house rules in their own campaigns. This isn't including as necessarily bad if you evolve a campaign in a radical direction and move it forward thusly in print - that will always be a matter of taste as to it being successful or not - but doing that doesn't imply breaking continuity when doing so, and if you do break continuity in grand fashion when doing that, something went seriously wrong.Where would you disagree on that and why? I'm curious.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Shemeska, post: 6495740, member: 11697"] While Sailormoon has been a bit overly insistent in some recent threads, I think what was said earlier in this thread is a perfectly reasonable take when it comes to how a given RPG setting IP is handled by designers and developers when publishing a product versus how individual DMs at home handle it. By all means, please tweak, twist, mangle, and make your own of a given setting within your home game - that's part of what makes it fun and personalized. But it's important for the cohesion and continued success of setting IP that those people working on it professionally and being paid for that to be aware of the material at a high level, to retain continuity and cohesion as much as possible (unless you're excising something that was itself a retcon or gaff in a prior product), and to act as a responsible caretaker for the property in question. It's just part of being professional and doing a job at a high level. It's important that you keep continuity to make sure that players are starting off with the same basic assumptions regarding a setting, and then applying whatever changes or house rules in their own campaigns. This isn't including as necessarily bad if you evolve a campaign in a radical direction and move it forward thusly in print - that will always be a matter of taste as to it being successful or not - but doing that doesn't imply breaking continuity when doing so, and if you do break continuity in grand fashion when doing that, something went seriously wrong. Where would you disagree on that and why? I'm curious. [/QUOTE]

Verification