Castle Greyhawk - Hackmaster or d20

[rounser]

So 3e is in fact just as versatile as earlier editions and in fact all rulesets, but can be modified while more easily maintaing balance because that baseline is in place.

You are correct, but I'm not sure it's commonly perceived that way, and perceptions matter among gamers. Because the oD&D/AD&D rules were slapdash, they welcomed your own coat of paint or renovations as being just as valid or moreso than the official take, because we all knew that the Emperor didn't have clothes, and there was less codified overall. Now that he does, and he's covering almost all bases, there's less invitation (or need) to houserule, and less house-ruling pretty much by definition means less creativity because more gets left static.

Note that this criticism was levelled at AD&D back in the day for it's encouragement of hand-holding and concept of "official", relative to it's even more slapdash predecessor. To look at the Rules forum in a skewed light, 3E encourages hand-holding to an order of magnitude more than AD&D ever did. Is that bad? No...and yes. Gamers get the solid foundation and baseline. The other side of the blade is that they may be less inclined to deviate from that baseline, which is also a good thing, and a bad thing, rolled into one....depending on how you view it, your gaming style, blah blah blah...

 

[buzz]

Are their hearts in it too, or are they just doing their job, catering to the masses? Does this concern you? Might want to rethink those Adventure Path purchases.

Even if this were the case, I don't see them posting in public forums that the *system* they are designing for is somehow inferior, much less using meritless arguments (which I consider Gygax's to be).

Also, *assuming you are to be believed*, there's nothing saying that while said designers might believe there are products more worthy of their time, they don't still think the products they are working on have merit *as well.*

I do realize that one often has to seprate the artist from their work; I'm not really suggesting anyone "boycott" Gygax's work.

I just find it kind of hypocritical for the "Father of Roleplaying" to engage in the kind of baseless d20-bashing that you see in cesspools like RPG.net, and then turn around and profit from producing products for it (whether he stats out the d20 material or not). If I worked for Paizo, I'd ditch his column, pronto.

If he really hates 3e so much, he should stick by his guns and not support it. Heck, he could probably stick to HackMaster and make tons of money, seeing as what a rabid fanbase it has.

I dunno. Like I said, that the new Castle Greyhawk is most likely going to be a 100% HackMaster product is already a huge strike against it in my book. That the author chooses to act in such a way, and that the book, no matter how filled with nostalgia, is basically just a big dungeon crawl, just sort of "seals the deal" as far as me choosing to spend my money elsewhere.

I am a devoted 3e fan. Ergo, Gygax obviously doesn't have a whole lot of respect for me, ergo, he's not getting my money.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

If I could throw "Castle Greyhack" down on the gaming table and tell the group, "I can run this with basically no modification in 1e" but I'm not going to take the time to do a 3e converstion they would go, "3 what? Gimme 3d6...I want to play a Magic-User...".


Go for it Gary!

 

[rounser]

Also, *assuming you are to be believed*

Fine, try this link. I've built up an impression based on hints from elsewhere as well, but this one's the most concrete.
An excerpt:

The biggest problem is that many Designers don't like what their customers like. For
example, many RPG Designers are pretty tired of creating low level dungeon crawls. They've
been doing it their whole professional lives, and the task doesn't seem very rewarding
anymore. It is very hard to do something wholly original in the dungeon crawl field, and
that means that it is very hard to get recognition as a Designer from other Designers for dungeon crawl work. Unfortunately, customers really like low level dungeon crawls. We ran an experiment at Wizards in '98 and '99, where we actually labeled a handful of products "Dungeon Crawls" - right on the covers! Sales of those products were typically 30% higher than similar adventures with similar prices and similar subject matter! Unfortunately, the
people that an RPG Designer is most likely to interact with directly don't like
dungeon crawls and will try to convince the Designer to do something - anything - besides
another one.

In practice, what often happens is that the longer a game line exists, the further from its
initial premise it drifts. That drift happens because Designers don't like to tread water.
They're like sharks: They have to keep moving forward, or their passion for a project tends
to die. Here's where one of the oddities of the game business kicks in too: The most
active and vocal consumeres of a game are often likely to be those who have been interested in the game since its inception - and they get bored too. They put a lot of pressure on Designers to keep moving forward as well, so the message the Designers hear is often a
message that reinforces their own self-interest. The problem is that for most game lines the bulk of revenue and profits are made by selling core books to new players, and the
longer a player is involved in a game, the less likely that player is to buy products in the
line.

What about designers who genuinely don't like the gaming public? Or, those who don't play the game they write for? What about those who believe they could have done 3E better? What about those who churn out d20 product just for the money? Et tu, Brute?

there's nothing saying that while said designers might believe there are products more worthy of their time, they don't still think the products they are working on have merit *as well.*

Just like there's nothing saying that while G.G. might prefer writing for another system, he probably still thinks that Necropolis d20 has merit *as well*, eh?

 

[MerricB]

Good old Ryan Dancey. One of the people I respect most in the gaming industry.

For Magic: the Gathering, WotC have both a Design group and a Development group. The Design group thinks up all the wacky ideas, the Development group makes sure they're balanced.

I really think that a process like that is needed for some designers out there. The initial stage of the module's creation... ignore the mechanics. Just write down the encounters and suchlike without worrying about mechanics, or balance, or anything like that. (This is what RJK and EGG are probably best at).

The second stage, that of balancing the module and finding the proper rules for each situation, should be handled separately. Possibly by the same designer, but one shouldn't edit it whilst you're still creating. The d20 system requires you to spend longer on this process than in previous editions, but the result is a more balanced piece of work, and more usable out of context.

It's no wonder both RJK and EGG don't like the d20 system - it's not their system. The problem is when they project their dislikes onto everyone who plays RPGs. If a great deal of research is done on the subject, then we will know where we stand.

I've read Ryan Dancey talking about the research commissioned by WotC before they produced 3E, and it's striking. However, he also mentioned that nowhere enough (any?) follow up research has been done recently. It's a great shame.

In any case, because I like a wide variety of systems, I'll get any version of Castle Greyhawk that is released, with the knowledge that I should be able to convert it because Design & Development are different things.

Cheers!

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

If I could throw "Castle Greyhack" down on the gaming table and tell the group, "I can run this with basically no modification in 1e" but I'm not going to take the time to do a 3e converstion they would go, "3 what? Gimme 3d6...I want to play a Magic-User...".


Go for it Gary!

My group, on the other hand, would stage a coup.

Hell, one of them threatened to leave the table once if the giant frog they were fighting ended up having a gem in its stomach.

 

[Voneth]

In reading the Pied Piper thread and having played all the editions, I have my assumptions.

G.G. doesn't like 3E simply because it doesn't reinforce his style of play.

As part of my days of "carefree" 1e. and AD&D, we actualy played something vaugely like 3e, we threw weapon speed and all that out the window. The big difference was that we had different systems for each function that we have with skills and saves today. Heck, in AD&D, I played only thevies since I could customize my character's theif abilites.

On the other hand, we never had strange dwaves until Dark Sun came out. And we used the "custom class" chart a lot.

I am not saying that his style is better than mine, but if I am in a "tactical" mood, I'll stick to a wargame. If I am in a Dugeon crawl mood, I'll boot up my computer. If I want to do crazy cool stuff that a computer and wargame can't handle, I sit down at the table with my friends and roll the dice.

As G.G. claimed could only happen in 1e.

The gargoyle that Robilar tossed over his back and that was then made into a nice liquid from the acid the second black dragon breathed, yes! Robilar fleeing at all haste, the "spittoouie!", and no more gargoyle backplate

Hell, I've had mages fall to the center of the earth (skill checks are great starters for custom magic rules), ice elves that are the only ones who can handle thier ice weapons (a little Ice DR never hurt), and Orc Warlords who had Clan Wepons (thanks to the samuari class)

Opps. I apolgize, but the whole "3e doesn't have the same potential for imagination as XX game" gets me going. Is 3e perfect for every game, nope. But it has a lot of wiggle room.

 

[Mark Plemmons]

Re: Another lost sale

I already don't have a very high opinion of HM/KODT.

Well, being the nosy guy I am, I have to ask "why?"

Feel free to email me if it seems too off-topic for the forum.

Mark Plemmons
mark@kenzerco.com

Kenzer and Company
www.kenzerco.com