d20 Past contents posted...

[Vigilance]

That means they leave guys like you to do non-FX products.

Notice I didnt say I was upset by their decision to focus on FX

Also, I tend to trust their market research that its more popular than regular historical gaming.

I work in a niche of a niche of a niche

Chuck

 

[takyris]

Stop there for just a moment - why does WotC need a pulp game, a pirate game, a Victorian game, or an Old West game? Why does WotC have to dip its pinky toe into all of these genres at all?

Well, in some ways, that's like asking, "Why does CBS think that they need another procedural crime drama," or "Why does Will Smith need to do another action movie?" They've done their research, and they think that people will pay money for it. Or, less cynically, they think that they have a new cool way to make people happy with this stuff.

Not all of them, but maybe pick two and then try something original with the third? Look for the niche that hasn't been filled and wade around a bit? Flex those creative muscles instead of offering a smidgen of material done more thoroughly by other companies?

That's definitely the ENWorld perspective. The Average Gamer, strange lumbering mythological beastie that he is, probably hasn't seen most of the other things, and will have trouble convincing his gaming group to try something new. But something that's just an extension of d20 Modern, which he sold to them as just an extension of D&D, he can sell them on pretty easily.

And as an end-user, I haven't loved everything WotC's done, but I've liked a lot of it a bunch. If they put something out, I'm usually pretty sure that there's something in there of value for me. That's not the case with a ton of other companies. I trust them well enough to do "The Definitive XXXX" well enough that I can use their book for most of XXXX and use other folks' books for add-ons to XXXX, rather than looking at other companies for the core XXXX book. For example, if Chuck put out "Blood and High-Falutin' Foppery, the d20 Past Guide to Duels of Honor", I'd see that as a great value-add and an excellent purchase, while I, as an end buyer, still tend to be leery of books like OGL Steampunk or other "an entire core system" books. I've been burned once or twice and have since decided that I can reliably get quality by using WotC's core systems with add-ons from other folks (like the fantastic Blood and... systems).

And yeah, it's murky, because the line between add-on and core system is shaky in some places. But that's my opinion as the guy with a few bucks.

One of the luxuries of being the 800-lb. gorilla of market-share is having the resources - staff, material, marketing - to innovate a bit. So offer the pirate game and the pulp game and then try a campaign setting based on the opening of Japan. (Tell me the Japan-o-fan-bois wouldn't be drooling all overthemselves at the thought of matching up a samurai against a Maxim gun a la The Last Samurai...)

Ooooooooh.

And I'm not even a Japan fanboy.

Heck, give me feudal Japan. Give me scheming houses and disgraced houses and bloody campaigns and three different types of ninjae (the peasants fighting against oppression, the disgraced former houses fighting the folks in power, and the rogues using the mystique to strike fear into the hearts of their targets).

Yeah, that would be cool. No argument there. At all. That would be awesome.

 

[jezter6]

I think people are really making some large assumptions on the use and/or portability of a class to other eras based upon the name of the class in a web posted TOC.

Just because it SAYS gangster doesn't mean a level in it means you are automatically a gangster. Likely many criminals would benefit from the gangster class without really being gangsters. Same with shaman...just because the name shaman seems kinda old world doesn't mean your local priest couldn't have a few levels in a shaman class. Names are just ways to identify the grouping of skill points/selections and class progression. Don't get stuck on a name till you see what feats/skills/abilities the class offers.

 

[The Shaman]

I think people are really making some large assumptions on the use and/or portability of a class to other eras based upon the name of the class in a web posted TOC.

I believe I covered that already in my posts, but I'll mention it again - Explorer will probably be applicable to the whole of the time-period that d20 Past set as its objective to cover, while Gangster might, depending on its class abilities. The Scientist? No idea, but my WAG is that it will be pretty setting-specific and in any case may have limited utility for GMs interested in running a fantasy-lite game.

As far as the four FX classes, I imagine any of the four will work across times and genres, but these provide no benefit for gamers interested in a non-FX game - my issue with the FX classes is that it's an XS of FX, IMHO, for such a small book on such a large topic.

 

[arscott]

And on the same note, remember that there are twelve perfectly good non FX AdCs in the core book that you can use in your gold rush/shogunate/florentine renaissance campaign. The only one that would be seriously out of place in a non-modern setting would be the techie. And the Pulp scientist ,which I've been waiting for since I first got the game, should provide an adequate replacement.

(Incidentally, I think that "Blood and High-Falutin' Foppery" is the first time I've ever seen a title that will get me to buy the book without bothering to find out what's inside.)

 

[ragboy]

One of the luxuries of being the 800-lb. gorilla of market-share is having the resources - staff, material, marketing - to innovate a bit. So offer the pirate game and the pulp game and then try a campaign setting based on the opening of Japan. (Tell me the Japan-o-fan-bois wouldn't be drooling all overthemselves at the thought of matching up a samurai against a Maxim gun a la The Last Samurai...)

But the reason they are the 800lb gorilla is precisely the reason you'll not see these specific campaign settings coming out of Hasbro/WotC. They offer the books/resources that appeal to the widest audience to get the most buck for the bang. We're actually kinda lucky that WotC did Future/Past books, at all. Look at the number of posters in ENWorld's D&D threads and the number in the d20 threads, alone. That difference should tell you why they aren't going to branch d20 Modern further. And why they've dropped support for Star Wars d20 (at the moment). D&D sells books and d20 Modern isn't even close to that volume. And the more you specialize, the less sales volume you get. How many people do you really think would buy a Napolean-era campaign book? Or even a WWII specific book?

I prefer specific settings from someone like RPG Objects, Bad Axe or Green Ronin, anyway. Let WoTC build the foundation and someone small, nimble and passionate build the house. Like M&M. Like Testament. Like Grim Tales. Like Blood & Guts.

 

[The Shaman]

And on the same note, remember that there are twelve perfectly good non FX AdCs in the core book that you can use in your gold rush/shogunate/florentine renaissance campaign.

Which of these classes would you use for a Napoleonic hussar? Which would you use for a pirate coxswain?

The only one that would be seriously out of place in a non-modern setting would be the techie. And the Pulp scientist ,which I've been waiting for since I first got the game, should provide an adequate replacement.

The Gunslinger's Lightning Shot feat is wasted in a world of matchlocks. The Daredevil requires six ranks in Drive which is an utterly useless skill without the Surface Vehicle Operation feat as well. That's what comes to mind without cracking the cover of the core rules.

Yes, I can make adjustments to these and any other anachronistic skills, feats, or abilities that crop-up, none of which changes the fact that (a) finding workarounds adds to my GM workload and (b) doesn't explain why so many new AdCs were "needed" for d20 Future. Dreadnought? Strong/Tough in heavy armor. Dogfighter? Fast/Tough/Daredevil. You can make the argument work however you like.

Again, I think Sidewinder: Recoiled gets historical AdCs right, both in terms of the period and the relationship to the base classes.

But the reason they are the 800lb gorilla is precisely the reason you'll not see these specific campaign settings coming out of Hasbro/WotC....And the more you specialize, the less sales volume you get. How many people do you really think would buy a Napolean-era campaign book? Or even a WWII specific book?

I agree - WotC represents the epitome of conservative (some might say staid and unimaginative) business planning.

The assumption here is that the best way to make money is to give people what they want. That's not the only approach to a successful business plan, however - innovators and entrepreneurs create demand for products, and when you own the company that produces the World's Most Popular Roleplaying Game, you have a unique set of tools available to do exactly that.

There was no "demand" for D&D when it first appeared - TSR created it. How many post-apocalypse RPGs were on the market before Gamma World or Metamorphosis Alpha? They created the niche.

Look at Eberron - a brand-new setting built from the floor up preserving only the necessary conceits to make the game compatible with the core rules. This was a fairly innovative step for WotC - I think it's telling that they went outside the company for the inspiration, but that's a separate topic for another time. They used their marketing and production power to create demand for a new setting. Why couldn't they do the same thing with just one Modern or Past setting?

I agree that D&D dominates the market, but in a poll here on the ENWorld the next most popular game after D&D was d20 Modern. If I'm running a company like WotC, I'm looking to capitalize on my strengths but I'm also looking for new places to expand as well - that's what keeps a leader out in front, not resting on one's laurels.

 

[JPL]

You had me at "coxswain," Shaman.

You had me at "coxswain."

 

[The Shaman]

You had me at "coxswain," Shaman.

You had me at "coxswain."

 

[ragboy]

Which of these classes would you use for a Napoleonic hussar? Which would you use for a pirate coxswain?

[\QUOTE]

For all my devil's advocating, I'm running into the same problem. I had this wild hair after reading a recent story about the Hope Diamond and wanted to construct a set of linked adventures through the history, from 1640 to 1984 of a mythic 'cursed' gem of similar origin. So, I was all well and good, had my research done, had a basic skeleton of a story constructed for each time period, then went to build some historically accurate NPC's for the 1640's and got blindsided by a handful of adjustments I'd have to make due to skills, class features, and whatnot.. Oh, I remember the big one: Archaic Weapon Proficiency... grrr.. So, yeah, some 'template' advanced classes by time period, or even a supplement that contains some optional modifications to the current advanced class set to make them more useful in given time periods, would be a joy.

I agree that D&D dominates the market, but in a poll here on the ENWorld the next most popular game after D&D was d20 Modern. If I'm running a company like WotC, I'm looking to capitalize on my strengths but I'm also looking for new places to expand as well - that's what keeps a leader out in front, not resting on one's laurels.

I don't know. I'm of the opinion that 7 books in 3 years is a lot. And they're focus on Arcana is to bridge those D&D dollars a little easier, IMHO.