Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Difference From 10 Years Ago?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6175387" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>For as long as I can remember, Dragon Magazine had adds for setting/story material in it (eg bucketloads of MERP adds back in the 80s), and the racks of FLGSs were full of story material for sale - modules, setting-based games (eg L5R). Back in the 80s ICE was one of the biggest RPG companies after TSR, selling MERP. Another big company was Chaosium, selling Gloranthan material for RQ, and of course CoC.</p><p></p><p>And D&D players would compare notes on classic modules like the D-series, Keep on the Borderlands, etc.</p><p></p><p>When I was at university in the early through mid-90s, people played games set in FR, or used modules, or played Vampire games with the story elements taken from the White Wolf sourcebooks. I ran a Rolemaster campaign using a mix of Greyhawk material, ShadowWorld material (an RM campaign world) and my own material. For 10-ish years from the late 90s I ran a Rolemaster campaign using a mix of TSR Oriental Adventures material (both pre-and post-FRisation of Kara Tur), Bushido materials, 3E D&D material, and my own stuff.</p><p></p><p>Your experience, and your description of it, is wildly different from mine, and different from what I saw on Usenet back in 2000, or messageboards in the years after that (RPGnet, WotC, ENworld), where the idea of paying RPG companies for story elements has been pretty well understood as unexceptional, and even typical.</p><p></p><p>As to the issue of "ownership" - I don't agree. If I decide to run a game with elves, dwarves etc - an idea borrowed from Tolkien - and/or with knights and castles - an idea borrowed from fairytales and romances - am I forfeting ownership by looking to a game designer to give me mechanical models of elves, dwarves, knights, etc? Or if I read a module - say, Bastion of Broken Souls for 3E - and see some interesting ideas in it - say, a Night Hag dream traveller oracle, or an angel who is a living gate for a pocket plane where a god has been exiled - am I forfeiting ownership by incorporating those ideas into my game? When I used those ideas I had to mechanically translate them from 3E to RM; and I also had to ignore some silly advice from the module writer around framing and NPC motivations and possible actions - but I don't generally buy modules for those sorts of details - I am looking for cool ideas, and for nice maps and locations.</p><p></p><p>I see plenty of 4e people talking about what they do in their own games - me, [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION], [MENTION=305]Storminator[/MENTION], [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION], [MENTION=59411]Pour[/MENTION], [MENTION=21556]Jester[/MENTION] and others (though some have left the boards due to being fed up with edition-warrior dogpiling).</p><p></p><p>But different games foster different sorts of techniques, and so different sorts of discussions about them. In a system in which mechanics are conceived of as gameworld physics engines (RM, RQ, most of 3E, good chunks of AD&D's action resolution mechanics) then discussions of techniques naturally drift towards new physics models (falling damage used to be a popular one; hit points and wounding is another perennial; two weapon fighting seems to come up quite a bit too).</p><p></p><p>In a system in which mechanics are in the first instance conceived of as metagame - ie for resolving a scene or a conflict of narrational authority - then once someone has chosen a system (be it 4e, or HeroWars/Quest, or whatever) then there's probably going to be less discussin of varying the basic mechanic - you'd just change games for that - and more discussion of framing and resolution of conflicts within those mechanics. Among 4e players, this comes out in discussions of how to frame combat encounters, how to use different monsters for different sorts of mechanical or thematic effects, how to frame and narrate skill challenges, etc (I'm thinking of discussions around things like the gorge as a response to the failed riding check, or the rainstorm as a response to the dwarven fighter's failed Diplomacy check when meeting the mayor outdoors). Those conversations have died down a bit since the separate 4e board was shut down, but they still happen.</p><p></p><p>They may not be conversations that you are personally interested in, given they are relevant for categories of RPGs that (as far as I can tell) you don't play (with the exception of MHRP? In which case discussions about 4e techniques for framing and resolution would be highly applicable). But they are happening.</p><p></p><p>Probably unsurprisingly, I have my own views on the attitude of ENworld posters to diversity of play and techniques in RPGing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6175387, member: 42582"] For as long as I can remember, Dragon Magazine had adds for setting/story material in it (eg bucketloads of MERP adds back in the 80s), and the racks of FLGSs were full of story material for sale - modules, setting-based games (eg L5R). Back in the 80s ICE was one of the biggest RPG companies after TSR, selling MERP. Another big company was Chaosium, selling Gloranthan material for RQ, and of course CoC. And D&D players would compare notes on classic modules like the D-series, Keep on the Borderlands, etc. When I was at university in the early through mid-90s, people played games set in FR, or used modules, or played Vampire games with the story elements taken from the White Wolf sourcebooks. I ran a Rolemaster campaign using a mix of Greyhawk material, ShadowWorld material (an RM campaign world) and my own material. For 10-ish years from the late 90s I ran a Rolemaster campaign using a mix of TSR Oriental Adventures material (both pre-and post-FRisation of Kara Tur), Bushido materials, 3E D&D material, and my own stuff. Your experience, and your description of it, is wildly different from mine, and different from what I saw on Usenet back in 2000, or messageboards in the years after that (RPGnet, WotC, ENworld), where the idea of paying RPG companies for story elements has been pretty well understood as unexceptional, and even typical. As to the issue of "ownership" - I don't agree. If I decide to run a game with elves, dwarves etc - an idea borrowed from Tolkien - and/or with knights and castles - an idea borrowed from fairytales and romances - am I forfeting ownership by looking to a game designer to give me mechanical models of elves, dwarves, knights, etc? Or if I read a module - say, Bastion of Broken Souls for 3E - and see some interesting ideas in it - say, a Night Hag dream traveller oracle, or an angel who is a living gate for a pocket plane where a god has been exiled - am I forfeiting ownership by incorporating those ideas into my game? When I used those ideas I had to mechanically translate them from 3E to RM; and I also had to ignore some silly advice from the module writer around framing and NPC motivations and possible actions - but I don't generally buy modules for those sorts of details - I am looking for cool ideas, and for nice maps and locations. I see plenty of 4e people talking about what they do in their own games - me, [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION], [MENTION=305]Storminator[/MENTION], [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION], [MENTION=59411]Pour[/MENTION], [MENTION=21556]Jester[/MENTION] and others (though some have left the boards due to being fed up with edition-warrior dogpiling). But different games foster different sorts of techniques, and so different sorts of discussions about them. In a system in which mechanics are conceived of as gameworld physics engines (RM, RQ, most of 3E, good chunks of AD&D's action resolution mechanics) then discussions of techniques naturally drift towards new physics models (falling damage used to be a popular one; hit points and wounding is another perennial; two weapon fighting seems to come up quite a bit too). In a system in which mechanics are in the first instance conceived of as metagame - ie for resolving a scene or a conflict of narrational authority - then once someone has chosen a system (be it 4e, or HeroWars/Quest, or whatever) then there's probably going to be less discussin of varying the basic mechanic - you'd just change games for that - and more discussion of framing and resolution of conflicts within those mechanics. Among 4e players, this comes out in discussions of how to frame combat encounters, how to use different monsters for different sorts of mechanical or thematic effects, how to frame and narrate skill challenges, etc (I'm thinking of discussions around things like the gorge as a response to the failed riding check, or the rainstorm as a response to the dwarven fighter's failed Diplomacy check when meeting the mayor outdoors). Those conversations have died down a bit since the separate 4e board was shut down, but they still happen. They may not be conversations that you are personally interested in, given they are relevant for categories of RPGs that (as far as I can tell) you don't play (with the exception of MHRP? In which case discussions about 4e techniques for framing and resolution would be highly applicable). But they are happening. Probably unsurprisingly, I have my own views on the attitude of ENworld posters to diversity of play and techniques in RPGing. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Difference From 10 Years Ago?
Top